Having now seen all of the likely 2016 Best Actress contenders, it pains me to say that I just don’t believe that this is going to be Stone’s year. I honestly hope that I’m wrong, and welcome any arguments to persuade me to change my prediction back to her. But in the meantime, here are five reasons why I believe that Natalie Portman has the Best Actress Oscar all sewn up for “Jackie.”
Quote:
1. She portrays a real person.
Quote:
2. She undergoes a major onscreen transformation.
Quote:
3. She plays the “damsel in distress.”
Quote:
4. “Jackie” is likely to be nominated in other categories
I just saw Christine and Rebecca Hall was snubbed at pretty much every major award She was fantastic in that role, honestly better than most of the actual nominees
Laughably off-key and relentlessly dull, “Jackie” offers a postmodern vision of Jacqueline Kennedy, in which the tall, elegant first lady is depicted as a small, be-wigged nervous wreck. It is a mess of a film, botched but also misconceived, with a central performance by Natalie Portman that evokes nothing about Jackie Kennedy beyond the stylish clothes and the secret smoking.
Quote:
Then take a look at footage from that actual tour. The problem isn’t merely that Portman’s portrayal isn’t factually accurate but that she and her director, Pablo Larrain, have no conception of the woman they’re portraying. The real Jackie was steeped in culture, and if she had any diffidence, it was the diffidence of someone careful not to seem too rich or too sure of herself.
Emma is obviously winning Sag. All the actors will vote for her. She won't be the most deserving winner but her movie helps her, It makes her seem the best. Natalie's performance seems more demanding and complex, but her film seems to not help her. If they vote for her it's just because of her acting, unlike in Emma's case.
Emma is obviously winning Sag. All the actors will vote for her. She won't be the most deserving winner but her movie helps her, It makes her seem the best. Natalie's performance seems more demanding and complex, but her film seems to not help her. If they vote for her it's just because of her acting, unlike in Emma's case.
But that's what ATRL all about
I can see Isabelle get it. Otherwise Emma deserves it
I honestly can't believe you are pressed enough to go looking for an irrelevant article that was posted one month ago. Especially considering how that person is in the minority and most people see Natalie Portman as transcendent in this role. Don't be a sore winner, are you a Trumpeteer or whatever they are called, cause you sure act like one?
I honestly can't believe you are pressed enough to go looking for an irrelevant article that was posted one month ago. Especially considering how that person is in the minority and most people see Natalie Portman as transcendent in this role. Don't be a sore winner, are you a Trumpeteer or whatever they are called, cause you sure act like one?
I would be here for a Huppert win, but sadly Oscar voters are so closed off to foreign films they likely won't even watch Elle when voting
It's not too far off the mark, especially since Marion Cotillard won Best Actress for La Vie En Rose in 2008 (French language film) and Roberto Bengini won Best Actor for Life Is Beautiful in 1998 (Italian language film).
I would be here for a Huppert win, but sadly Oscar voters are so closed off to foreign films they likely won't even watch Elle when voting
I don't think those ****tards would vote for Huppert especially after they watch the movie. This way she has way more chance of winning than if the voters actually bothered to watch.
She was fantastic in that role, honestly better than most of the actual nominees 
