Top Stories

Katie Holmes to Reprise Her Role as Jackie O in New 'Kennedys' Miniseries!

Katie Holmes to Reprise Her Role as Jackie O in New 'Kennedys' Miniseries!

Katie Holmes will once again put on that iconic pillbox hat for her role as Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis in the follow up for 2011′s The Kennedys, The Kennedys: After Camelot.

The 35-year-old actress starred alongside Greg Kinnear, Barry Pepper and Tom Wilkinson in the original miniseries, which was supposed to air on the History channel, but made the jump to Reelz after some controversy.

Katie will serve as executive producer and will direct one of the four episodes, THR reports. The show will premiere in 2016.

Katie elegantly portrayed Jackie Kennedy in the first miniseries and now will continue the role as Jackie grows into the Jackie O that the world knows best,” Reelz CEO Stan E. Hubbard said in a statement. “Katie is brave, committed and perfect for this role. She is a strong, talented woman who understands how special and respected Jackie Kennedy, and then Jackie Onassis was, as an international icon.”

Also pictured inside: Katie at the farmer’s market in Calabasas, Calif. on Saturday (October 11).

Just Jared on Facebook
katie holmes will play jackie o again 01
katie holmes will play jackie o again 02
katie holmes will play jackie o again 03
katie holmes will play jackie o again 04
katie holmes will play jackie o again 05

Photos: AKM-GSI, Wenn
Posted to: Katie Holmes

JJ Links Around The Web

Getty
  • Ricky Martin and fiance Jwan Yosef go shirtless in Mexico - TMZ
  • Justin Bieber is not moving to Amsterdam - Gossip Cop
  • Austin Butler shows off his buff biceps while leaving the gym - Just Jared Jr
  • Teen Mom's Amber Portwood slams MTV for editing of reunion show fight - Radar
  • Matt Damon speaks out against allegations of his new film being "whitewashed" - Lainey Gossip
  • Jennifer Lopez just added tons of new dates to her Vegas residency - The Hollywood Reporter
  • Too Funny

    On the Reelz channel.
    Her career is doing so well, NOT.
    Last indie made 8,000. Yes, 8 Thousand Dollars only and was at zero on RT.
    Next Stop the Reelz network.
    Makes sense.

  • sari

    You have got to be kidding! She was so awful the first time round. Of course she is an executive producer which means she put money into this thing…can’t believe she got any support for it after the mini-series bombed big time. Viewership dropped hugely from the first to the last episode and even a moron can tell this is not good.

  • Ava

    She looks kind of rough in those candids. Rosamund Pike is 35 too, isn’t she? Just saw her in Gone Girl. What a beauty.
    @Sari
    Someone has to fund those low end movies on those sort of channels. It probably doesn’t cost much but they fill space in air time. I don’t see how she can view this as a step forward.

  • Nathan

    I loved Katie as Jackie Kennedy I’ve seen other actresses play the part and Katie is by far the best. She will be great.

  • Free at Last

    What happens to her hands? They looked very manly, rough, dark and hairy, particularly when Suri had her hand hanged by KHo’s wrist.
    You can see them in DM’s pix.
    Reminds me a while back when she did an episode for Eli Stone, she had to wear gloves in and out of the studio.
    And yes, she sucked playing Jackie Kennedy.
    And yes, she looked terrible, very rough and plain in those invited pap shots.

  • Jen

    Too bad her ABC drama was cancelled before it even aired. Well, back to the bottom of the barrel

  • Joan Rivers

    “Did you see her try and play John F. Kennedy’s wife? She was so bad he shot himself in it.”

  • forrest gump

    so we will meet some day?

  • Rose

    I wish someone would adapt Mrs. Kennedy and Me into a movie. Katie Holmes almost pulls off the Jackie O. look, but she made her sound too cartoony. Jackie’s voice was very specific, if you can’t do it then sit down…

  • germ

    Is her daughter already 21? lol

  • sari

    @Nathan: Nathan, I know you love and adore Katie, but you must have very low standards when it comes to acting. Tripplehorn, Bisset, Brown and even Jacqlyn Smith’s lame portrayal were better than Katie’s.

  • miapocca

    thats why suri has been away from the cameras for so long…she got some gems for giving cruise more time with his daughter…still hopeless

  • miapocca

    @Joan Rivers: lol;….oh Joan..I am still laughing with you..lol

  • Nathan

    @sari:

    Sari, I talked with someone on here about this earlier this morning in the last thread and I think Katie is great as Jackie Kennedy for two reasons First Katie looks more like Jackie Kennedy than any other actress and second she totally got the accent down.

    Here’s a youtube video of Jackie Kennedy talking to Dr. Spock

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UbUdlB0_rTc

    the way Jackie talks is very strange but Katie got it down perfectly. I think that’s the problem people say Katie messed up the accent but she didn’t I think people that say Katie messed up the accent never heard the real Jackie Kennedy talk on tv or in a youtube video.

    When i was watching “The Kennedys” I didn’t see Katie Holmes at all because katie became Jackie Kennedy. Katie is a great actress she totally nailed the part. :)

  • Get Reelz

    Get Reelz folks LOL.
    But seriously Get REAL. This is where her “career” is taking her?
    What happen to Harvey? Is he giving up on her too?
    Banished to unheard of tv channels doing the 1millionth version of a Kennedy made for tv story?

  • danielle

    @Nathan: Nathan I am old enough to remember the Kennedys and Mrs. Onassis. And believe me, Katie Holmes is NO Jackie Kennedy!

  • Nathan

    :lol: well you got me there I’m only 33 but did you watch the video ? Because the way Jackie talks in the video is the way Katie talked in the mini-series.

  • USA Today- Big Mistake
  • miapocca

    When did looking like someone automatically make you a good actress…even the folks at saturday night live can do a better jackie impersonation without looking like her…frankly its time jackie and her mysteries were put to rest.

  • Just a Comment

    I don’t see this as being successful. I saw about 10 minues of The Kennedys and did not think she did a good job. Maybe she got to keep the clothes and want to get the full benefit of wearing them. Just one more tibbit to stay in the news. Good luck.

  • annie

    I liked her in The Kennedys, it aired here, and overseas. Whatever you people say, she got good reviews for Days and Nights, and Miss Meadows. And I agree with Nathan about how Jackie spoke, also about the Tom era as well. I think Katie has matured a lot in her acting, and knows exactly what she wants to achieve, and how to go about it. Also she seem to have support from people involved in the industry, behind the scenes support I think.
    One review for Days and Nights had her as one of the best things in the movie, regardless whether it was a success or not, and that in itself is a good thing.

    I also believe she’s becoming exc producer on things, so that she can pick and choose what she wants to do, like ”All we Had”. I have put an order in for the book, sounds so good.

    Let me share a little interesting snippet with you. This was in the beginning of 2013, a little bit astrology…….besides a few other things that the astrologer wrote in her piece about Katie, she wrote that Katie should try her hand in ”directing” and should always be the one in control of her projects.
    I’m going to say it again, Katie is going to be very successful in the things she does.
    Can’t wait for Miss Meadows, the trailer is awesome!

  • DTBH

    @Nathan: #14 – Jackie’s voice was creepy. Even The Kennedy women described it as airy fairy. No wonder Jack slept around. And Re: Rosamund Pike. I hear her live in and father of her 2 children is an ex heroin addict. Looks creepy. Goes to show you that sometimes things just don’t add up=:?0. Or just you think you’ve got it figured out, that’s when u don’t:(

  • Ava

    @22
    Rosamund is a beauty and a good actress but I don’t think I mentioned her personal life.

  • DTBH

    @Ava: # 22 – no u didn’t but I was doing what everyone else does on these sites. Pick the actors apart. When u mentioned her name, I figured she was fair game. My point: Just when you think you’ve got it figured out, that’s when you don’t.

  • Danelle

    @USA Today- Big Mistake:

    I agree with Andrea Mandel, BIG MISTAKE.

    With so many negative reviews from her first attempt, any effort she tries to make into the directorial sphere will be overshadowed by similar reviews and her limited range.

    I think this will backfire BIG in her attempt to carve out a legitimate (non AOL short) directorial career.

    I mean compare Natalie Portman’s directorial attempt, she waited until establishing herself as a versatile actress, who is able to carry a film.

    Same with Angelina Jolie (after her Oscar) and Drew Barrymore (after Charlie’s Angels).

    I can’t think of too many others right now, but I am pretty sure their original field (acting) was already solid (established, acknowledged, recognized) before venturing into directing …. I mean according to wiki a film director –

    “controls a film’s artistic and dramatic aspects, and visualizes the script while guiding the technical crew and actors in the fulfillment of that vision.”

    “gives direction to the cast and crew and create an overall vision through which a film eventually becomes realized.”

    Katie seems to have a difficult time managing herself and Suri, and she needs help – family and paid – with that. Let alone managing the creative and visual direction of a film, to include cast and crew.

    Because it is only one episode it may just be like an internship, a way for her to get more experience and tips (from the other director) prior to her “All We Had” film directorial.

  • Blind Items

    So for about the past 6 months CDAN is running the same blinds with slightly different details and everyone there says it points to Katie Holmes. Lots of the hints point to her and pretty much spell it out. It’s about an actress having an affair with a married director. Idk what to think so not saying it’s true or not but I just thought it interesting that it’s director and now Katie is talking about directing two projects. Maybe a coincidence.

  • Sean 123

    So that was Mrs Kennedy, if someone spoke like her today, she would be be the but of some mean jokes, maybe Kate did a better job than folks give her credit. Much more interesting than the original Jackie and prettier judging by the video clip. Here’s hoping Barry Pepper reprises his role as Bobby. The actor who played the father was brilliant. Good mini series, too bad the Kennedys stuck their noses into it.

  • @Sean 123

    @Sean 123:
    She got flack for more then just the voice part of her role.

  • Danelle

    Internet sources state that ‘The Kennedy’s’ production cost was between $25-30 million and that Reelz paid an estimated $7 million for the broadcast rights and spending an additional $10 million in advertising.

    Reelz doesn’t charge a subscriber fee, so a lot will be riding on advertising interest.

    Who will be sponsoring “After Camelot’?

  • american

    Oh do shut up Danelle you have become boring as hell!! Holmes doesn’t look like she and her daughter are struggling to me. You on the other hand need some kind of intervention cause you are struggling in the head.!

  • Missy

    yeah I wasn’t gonna comment on this thread as I’ve gotten tired of the back and forth with the critics, but this comment has to be one of the most ridiculous things I’ve read on one Katie’s threads, which is saying a lot.

    “Katie seems to have a difficult time managing herself and Suri, and she needs help – family and paid – with that.”

    Uh Newsflash! She’s a working mother. All working parents have help of some sort-whether it’s daycare, family, or nannies. How strange to imply that she is incompetent because she has help.

    Good for Katie for reprising her role as Jackie O. I hope Barry Pepper returns as Bobby Kennedy.

  • @30 and 31

    I disagree. I get what Danelle was saying.
    Katie often looks like she has a hard time managing Suri. She wasn’t saying it was wrong to have help but saying she doesn’t look like the kind of person who can lead and give direction. It’s true.
    Still think it’s funny watching her fans try and turn this bottom feeder project into a victory lap.

  • Cari

    Whether you like Katie or not, from an economical sense –well this doesn’t make sense at all. The first one bombed big time. Critical reviews were bad for the actors, including Holmes portrayal of Jackie, and the movie itself. The series lost money and viewers as the week went on. So why would you make a part two? Especially with an inexperienced director such as Katie?

  • Nathan

    Katie Holmes mentors and advises up-and-coming directors

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fuNTLRhIvac

    This is a cool little video i love hearing Katie’s thoughts on making movies.

  • Just a Comment

    Nathan – You are a devoted fan. I’ll give you that.

  • Just a Comment

    #33 – I agree with you. This project for Katie makes no sense. But I’ll tell you that if the upcoming Miss Meadows movie bombs badly we will see less tibbits of Katie on The Hollywood Report, etc. and only on her pubicity thread, Just Jared.

  • Nathan

    Katie Holmes at a breakfast to celebrate her role as Olay skin care brand’s first ambassador.

    http://instagram.com/p/uIphmjhYha/?modal=true

    Katie looks great. :) I hope there will be more pictures later.

  • Jackie O hates it

    I think Miss Meadows might be pretty good for a Holmes project but the real question is can it do anything to boost her career in the long run.
    Who is going to see it? Enough to make a difference? I agree with your overall point though if she doesn’t have a hit or something noteworthy soon then only sites that are interested in keeping up with “Suri’s mom” (jj and dm) will feature her much longer.

    As for directing, was it Kflop who mentioned the idea of a “ghost director”. I don’t believe for one minute she really wants to do a remake of this character again but rather it’s all she can get at this point. No one can possibly view this as a good career move.

  • sabrina

    @Jackie O hates it: Well as executive producer I believe that means she has put money into the project. The blind gossip site CDan has as #26 mentioned had a half a dozen blinds about a B list with A+ name recognition (who has kid/s and just moved) having an affair with a married producer. If this is true (and who knows on CDan) then maybe he is “ghost” producing and financing. Unless Katie got a huge settlement from Tom that we don’t know about–I don’t believe she has enough money of her own to produce this (don’t know how many other executive producers there are) and quite honestly I don’t see any venture capitalists, banks or production houses wanting to throw money at a project that so badly flopped in the first place. “Tis a mystery that is for sure!

  • Jackie O hates it

    The bottom line for me is all press releases are only what they want you to know or believe. Not all truth and not all the facts.
    So you have to dig for the real details and sometimes you don’t find out until much later.
    It might mean she put some money into but certainly not all. Not only does she not have that sort of money but I give her a little more credit for not being totally dense to throw it all into a project like this if she had it.

  • Missy

    I think it’s funny that some folks are calling this a “bottom feeder” role and implying that it’s not a good move. And yet if Katie wasn’t reprising her role, I bet the very same people would insist that she was “dumped”, “dropped’ “replaced” rather than saying that she dodged a bullet.
    The first mini-series received 10 emmy nods and pretty good ratings for a small network. I’d hardly call it a failure. And yes, critics were hard on Katie but I’ve seen a lot of comments from regular folks who liked her performance. I have a feeling she’ll get a better reception this time around, but we’ll see.

  • @41

    Regardless if she gets a few good reviews when it’s all said it done it’s still not a good career move and it does not look good at all.
    After 18 years in the business for a supposed great actress all she can get is indie flicks and rehash of the Kennedy story on Reelz channel.
    As one of the reviews on the last thread said :”But the sad truth is, if either (katie or greg)had the charisma or star wattage needed to capture JFK and Jackie, neither would be available for a miniseries that started on History and ended up on Reelz.” That is truth.
    Katie’s dance card is not full of actual movies that people go to see. That is why she is available to do round 2 of Jackie on the Reelz channel.

  • sabrina

    @Missy: Missy, it has nothing to do with liking or disliking her–she is investing as are others in something that was a total bomb. Look at the stats:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Kennedys_%28miniseries%29
    And yes it won some awards, but if you look at the number of viewers it was a total bomb and the critics were split as were the folks that watched it. If I was say Bill Gates or Mark Zuckenberg and had billions I still wouldn’t throw my money down the drain on this!

  • @Sabrina

    @sabrina:
    Sabrina
    what do you think of Michelle Monaghan. I just noticed a new thread posted with her promoting a new movie. Checked her imdb and she is 38 and has done a lot of movies the last few years. Not all hits but she is in movies that play at the theatre. Why can’t Katie get movies if people like her and Keri Russell can? MM is no household name. Why is she getting all these parts?

  • Missy

    @@41:
    She’s playing an icon in a sequel to an award-winning mini-series. Not sure why this is a bad move. I also love that she is starting to work behind the scenes. We need more female producers and directors. Who cares if it’s a small network? With all the internet streaming sites you can reach a wide audience even on a small network. Maybe I could understand the ire if this was a trashy network like Lifetime or something, but Reelz is a perfectly respectable, albeit small network.
    i still stand by my comment that if she wasn’t reprising her role, her critics would spin it as a failure. i.e She wasn’t asked back. But, because she is reprising her role, that’s spun as a failure as well.

    Whatevs, it gets tiresome having the same argument over and over. It’s obvious that some folks only care about money, fame, and status. While others just want to see her take on interesting, complex characters.
    Looking forward to seeing her play Jackie O again.

  • Missy

    @@Sabrina:
    I’m pretty sure Katie was in wide-release movie 2 months ago. It was called The Giver. Did you forget? And yes it was a supporting role, but so are most of Michelle’s. I think she has a lead role in the new Nicholas Sparks film but that’s not the norm for her. She also does a lot of indies that play in limited release/VOD, like her current film Fort Bliss. It’s funny that you mention Michelle Monaghan, as I actually feel that her and Katie’s careers are pretty similar. Both mostly do indies, supporting roles in bigger films, and tv. I’ll concede that Michelle has probably had more success over the past few years, but I think will easily reach her level over the next couple of years. We’ll see.

  • @46

    Michelle has had a lot more success over the last years. …and a lot more actual movies and on tv too.
    The giver was KH first role in years and it did not do well.
    I think you are deceiving yourself if you think KH wants to be doing the things she is doing and does not want staring roles. Jackie is a role that has been done to death it’s not some new great role to play this “icon”.

  • Missy

    Alright then. Like I said, not going to get into this debate again. I think it’s been debated to death. But you made it sound like Katie hadn’t been in any mainstream movies recently, so I was simply pointing out that she was just in one. And I think it did reasonably well at the B.O. considering its budget and the competition it faced. ( but that’s another debate)
    BTW, there are a lot of iconic characters that have been played many times. Jane Austen and Charlotte Bronte’s novels have been adapted a million times, but I think it’s still a great honor for a young actress to get to play Jane Eyre or Elizabeth Bennet, for example.

  • toria

    @Missy: Missy I don’t think anyone is saying she hasn’t been working etc., just questioning why she would put money into a sequel to a series that cost $30 million to make and then lost money hand-over-foot. If she is indeed the executive producer (they tend to finance with the most cash vs. a producer etc) then she must be putting money into this and it must be sizable enough to allow her to direct an episode. Plus we’ve not had any word on whether any of the other players are going to be back in their roles. Let’s face it–Katie is in bad need of a hit and some critical acclaim if she wants to have a career that allows her to pick and choose her parts. If she wants to have a high profile career. And quite honestly I think she does. I think she is as hungry as any other actress for fame and acclaim. Plus I think she wants to do something award worthy so she can basically thumb her nose at Tom. I think she is nice on the surface, but underneath I think there is a ruthless core of steel like any other actor wanting fame and glory, and she’ll do what it takes to get it. Just my opinion obviously.

  • Missy

    @toria:
    first of all, there are multiple discussions going on with multiple posters. Some like you might simply be focusing on the financial aspect of the series, but that’s not what the people whom I was responding to were saying.

    Being an exec producer doesn’t mean that she is investing her own money into it. Exec producers can use their clout to raise money from other sources.

A Member of Townsquare Entertainment News | Advertise here