Review of JFK (1991) by Robert B — 23 Jan 2010

I remember the 1st time I saw this film it really made me feel disillsioned that despite all the differences people had politically surely an American would never conspire to kill an American President.

Yes, I was naive, but whether I believed the film or not it was unimportant as it got me interested in learning more about the gov't and flow of money and power. That's what makes great movie making, sirring the collective conscious into asking questions.

It also provided a great skit to comedy show Seinfeld. The film did blur the lines between reality, fact and cinematic license. Anyone watching this film as a "documentary" on JFK's shooting is fooling themselves as much as anyone who believes Fox News reports actual facts without an agenda.

Both are great examples of propganda. It's obvious that JFK meant a great deal to Stone and his generation and he's not satisfied with the investigation and the "official" conclusions from said investigaion.

He does make some compelling arguements but again everything can't be taken verbatim like the Magic Bullet theory which to Stone and many others makes the case for a 2nd shooter on the Grassy Knowl.

The History Channel did a recent special where they analyized the bullets trajectory and again it seems like a "magic bullet" until you move the 2nd person in the car that got hit into a different position.

Then the bullet ravels in a straight line as to be expected. Why 40 some years earlier the investigators figure that iut I don't know. And that's if you believe the History Channels' investigation.

Either way even if you do believe the History Channel as oppossed to the Magic Bullet theory it doesn't answer a lot of other questions raised in the film. If you're interested in this subject I suggest you watch both.

Cinematic wise, the film is some of Stone's best work. Solid acting, pacing and editing. And most of all it's a film tha engages the emotions and intellect of the viewer.