Natalie Portman has been in Toronto for the past few days for the opening of TIFF. On Wednesday night, she sat down for a conversation about her life and career, and then on Thursday night, she premiered her passion project, A Tale of Love and Darkness. For the conversation on Wednesday, Portman wore the sparkly Dior dress with sleeves. For the premiere, she wore a pale blushy beige Lanvin gown with a big star-brooch on one side.
I’m not incredibly fond of either look, to be honest. A lot of people criticized Natalie’s Cannes Film Festival fashions, but it seemed like she was having more fun then. Natalie has the coloring to really pull off some beautiful, rich colors, so I don’t know why she chose the Lanvin gown in particular – it really washes her out. The Dior look, while twee as hell, at least flatters her coloring and it’s an interesting design.
You can read some highlights from Portman’s TIFF conversation here. She talked about working on Garden State and how she realizes now that she was playing the Manic Pixie Dream Girl trope. That part was interesting:
She’s also had some hindsight about becoming part of the Manic Pixie Dream Girl phenomenon. At the time she signed on for Garden State, she said, all she was thinking about was how the character of Sam, an adorable pathological liar with epilepsy, was unlike anything she’d ever been offered.
“When I read it I was like, ‘Oh, this is a character that’s wacky and interesting, and no one’s ever given me a chance to play something like this. It’s this sort of unusual girl,’” Portman said. “So that was my incentive to make it. But of course I see that trope and I think it’s a good thing to recognize the way those female characters are used. I mean, I appreciate that people are writing characters that are interesting and unusual, rather than some bland female character as the girlfriend in a movie, but when the point of the character in this movie is to, like, help the guy have his arc, that’s sort of the problem, and that’s why it’s good that they’re talking about it, because it certainly is a troubling trope.”
I actually don’t think of Natalie when I think of the Manic Pixie Dream Girl. I think about actresses like Zooey Deschanel. I also think the Cool Girl has overtaken the MPDG, and when I think of Cool Girls, I think of Emily Ratajkowski, Cameron Diaz, Kate Hudson and the like. Portman is right – the MPDG is a troubling trope, as is the Cool Girl.
Photos courtesy of WENN, Fame/Flynet.
Why does she look so uncomfortable smiling. It looks painful.
There are better pictures of her smiling yesterday, tbh.
She’s been messing with her face in recent years. It looks pulled back. I think botox.
Both the Cool Girl and MPDG are male fantasies.
It’s her eyes, there’s a lot more eyelid than normal. I think she got whatever Renee Zellweger had.
That is not the same person in the purple and nude dresses. It can’t be.
It is no way the same person.
Yes, she looks very ‘toxy. Or shes had some actual work done. Either way, something is looking off with her.
She looks like she’s lost weight. She’s always been slim, but her thinness seems a little strange-looking on her now. Did Black Swan affect her view of her weight?
I thought it was her being too thin and having a baby (babies tend to change a woman’s face, not for worse or anything, just change it in a way I can’t explain), however, her change happened before the baby and thinness….I just think she got old, not that 30 something is old, but you do tend to lose the youthful face.
Did she get a nose job? The two last pics don’t even look like her.
Even though she’s really pretty, she tends to look a bit disgruntled, but I don’t know why.
Someone mentioned ultherapy being the culprit for producing a certain look (Uma Thurman, Rene Z, etc) and that’s what looks like happened here. After that mention, I googled Uma and Ultherapy, as recommended by the poster, and came across a website of someone who went through the same thing and this is the look as she exactly describes: face angles flattened, a dead look in the eyes, smaller eyes, tighter look around the eyes, and a loss of that special something/spark in the overall appearance.
Maybe another nose job? Maybe eye work? Definitely big new veneers. Most definitely.
The brooch on her shoulder is too big for her frame. It makes her look like a toddler playing dress up in her grandma’s jewelry box.
The whole dress is too much for her frame. I actually like it but it’s a dress for someone statuesque and not a tiny petite person like Natalie.
Veronica, agree. Looks like she hit Loehman’s discount rack for petites circa 1995. Please enough of this Polanski pedo supporter!
I dislike her. She seems like a pretentious snob.
From her interviews I always walk away thinking she is either an incredible snob or she is very introverted and uncomfortable while being interviewed. Either way, I don’t find her likable at all.
Did she get another nose job? That barely looks like her.
I was wondering the same thing. Something is different, but I can’t figure out what.
She looks like Susan Lucci and Jennifer Beals had a 35 year old humorless baby.
And her movie has had good reception, nothing espetacular, but a great start for her.
I remember Garden State, and while I sort of see her point, it was fine. Her character was three-dimensional, and less dream girl than she was manic and interesting. I mean, ALL of the characters are there in service for the main character’s arc in a story, are they not? Sometimes it seems like everything women do in entertainment gets picked apart. I get that we are in a kind of renaissance of ethical standards and behavior right now, but I’m getting a bit tired of every. single. thing being dissected.
I agree that all of the characters are there to serve the main character. The problems are more that there are too few female main characters in films and that Manic Pixie Dream Girls, Cool Girls and Generic Love Inserts are often there to be trophies for the male character and that they frequently do not have subplots and interactions with other characters. But the tropes themselves are not always bad if they are handled well so a MPDG in a film it is not automatically troubling.
She was specifically asked about it in the context of MPDG too. I thought it was pretty funny when she talked about Broad City making fun of Garden State.
I’m just going to say it. I liked Garden State. It wasn’t epic filmmaking, but it was a nice little story.
I like the dress in the first picture.
The second dress is pretty too but washes her out.
Me too, I like them both.
The first dress is really fun and I think the muted tones work with all the detailing.
I agree she can carry a bolder color better but given the second dress is lace, I am glad it is not a bold color – but that is just a personal thing for me. It does wash her out a bit but yes, I can live with it.
What’s the word on her movie? I thought it sounded interesting–a Jewish folklore (or its incorporated)? I’ve been hearing great to mixed reviews??? I think she’ll be a better director than actress, mainly because I just find her SO flat as an actress. Like laughably bad. Even in Leon the Professional when she was supposed to be ahmazing!
Her movie received bad to mixed reviews. It seems that she’s a bland and boring director as well.
I never got the big whoop about her performance in The Professional either. I thought I was the only one. Maybe it was better than her other performances, I guess, but I didn’t get why she was hailed as something of a child prodigy. Some lines said sounded recited and robotic (even the line where she said something about “rats” to Leon).
Wait what I love the Professional they said she was ahmazing in that really? As many times as I watch that movie I’ve never came to that conclusion.
That’s what she’s been coasting on…..Leon the Professional. I only ever saw her in Thor and the Star Wars movies….I didn’t think she was anything but okay/a plant in either of those films. And I kept hearing that she was SO amazing in Leon the Professional. I finally watched it. NO. She was just as bad as she always is–except this time she was a cute little girl with a potty mouth and an attitude.
I love love love the short dress. It’s gorgeous and look beautiful on her.
“Sam, an adorable pathological liar with epilepsy”
I lol’d irl. I wasn’t ready.
Only a semi douchey “sad” hipster boy could come up with that.
I bet he thought his little indie movie was so deep, they are all the same these guys, yet they think they are soooo original and profound.
Did she do something to her face?
I hope it is lightning and make up but her nose looks unnatural.
I was at the A Tale of Love and Darkness screening yesterday; she spoke before the film started and (I hate coming off like a Grammar Nazi, I am turning out like my mom grrrrrr) she as very “um-y” and stumbled over her words. I chalked it up to nerves, and I could tell she was very passionate about the film. God knows I’ve flubbed when public speaking!
Her nose job is really apparent in these photos. Never noticed that before.
Agreed with the other poster, she seems insufferably pretentious and I’ve never liked her. Kiera Knoghtley used to be her twin (Star Wars) and I find her much more likable.
I think the difference in her face might just be age and Botox. Natalie has always seemed so untouchablly perfect to me, that it’s shocking to see her age. Obviously, there is nothing surprising about aging In itself, just that even *she* will one day look middle aged! Apparently aging isn’t just for us peasants….
Yep. Accept I think it’s age and makeup and a bit of Botox.
Lol, I think she looks the same. A little shiny and skinny, but the same.
I’m glad that other people noticed, because the first thing I thought when I saw these pics was that she’s had work done. I thought it may be just me since she does not seem like the type, but she really looks like she’s had botox or some sort of eye thing.
She’s always looked a bit soft. Now she looks somewhat hard. But still pretty. I still couldn’t say she’s unattractive, even though her personality sometimes gets on my nerves.
Am I reading this wrong, or just blind? IMO the short lavender dress washes her out completely and looks hella frumpy, while the peach one is really flattering on her coloring (the first picture looks great, while the second seems to be a clear case of too much flash).
The article is saying the opposite, right?
I too can’t figure out which dress is supposed to be ok, a which one not, imo, both are borderline hideous and not for her frame. I think Angelina wore something similar to the pink one. But the shoes are really unfortunate, they look so 90s. Vegan companies should invest in some designers. Age is catching up with her face, if she does not mess with it she could be the poster lady for aging gracefully. As for her likeable character, I cannot stand her public persona, but just yesterday I saw that romcom about ‘friends with benefits’ and she carried herself quite ok in what was a mess of a movie. Even though I liked the similar Mila Kunis film better, I liked Natalie’s performance more.
I always knew her ugliness would creep out with age
Not even that nose job can save her
Natalie Portman is one of the original MPDGs, next to Kirsten Dunst in Elizabethtown those two are most often cited. I’ve always wondered what she thought of it since she’s this progressive feminist, so I’m glad she’s not defending it and instead acknowledging it.