JFK | | Cast : | Kevin Costner, Jack Lemmon, Gary Oldman, Sissy Spacek | | Director : | Oliver Stone | | Studio : | Warner Home Video | | Format : | Color, Closed-captioned, Dolby, Surround Sound, Widescreen, Director's Cut | | Released Date : | December 20, 1991 | | DVD Released Date : | November 11, 2003 | | Language : | English (Dubbed), English (Original Language), French (Original Language), French (Subtitled), English (Subtitled), Spanish (Subtitled) | | Audience Rating : | R (Restricted) | | | BUY THIS DVD FROM AMAZON |
Customer Reviews
| Rating |  | | Date | August 06, 2005 | | Summary | No Magic Bullets | Content
 | First off I will start by saying that I thought this was a great film. I truly loved it and bought into the conspiracy theories. The acting is truly superb and despite the length of the movie it is never boring. The characters are very compelling and it is a true ensemble cast with a lot of great cameo performances.
So why the 3 star rating? Shortly before I left for Thailand I saw a documentary on either the Discovery channel, A&E, or the History channel sorry I can't remember which. This documentary was basically done in a myth busters fashion going point for point over all of the conspiracy theories regarding JFK's assassination. They use all of the material Stone and the cosnpiracy theorists used and nothing new. They expose where facts were misrepresented and also where they were fabricated.
It was truly outstanding. They recreated the shooting. Showing LHO would have had a couple extra seconds to fire and most likely fired the first shot before the tree rather than after it. A couple of shooters were also brought in and shot within the original time frame and the new time frame. Only one person fell slightly outside the original time frame and that is because his rifle jammed. He recovered and fired quickly.
They show the actual balistics of the firing and use real experts to do this. There was no magic bullet of any sort. No extra shooters from the grassy knoll. One shooter could have easily and most likely have done all of the firing.
The escape down the stairway was not only accomplished it was accomplished rather easily. In fact one could have done it twice in the allotted time. The people doing this were only in fair shape and were not winded at all.
The escape from the boarding house was also discredited. If you look at the witness statements none clearly saw LHO walk the established route. Stone uses testimony from a very old and near sighted lady as his concrete evidence. If you take the more plausible routes that LHO would have taken then he would have made it with plenty of time.
Why was Jack Ruby there to shoot LHO? Jack Ruby was well known to always carry a pistol. He was at the same place paying off a fine of some sort and decided to take his place in history. He was there for a reason and not to kill LHO.
The documentary was awesome and changed my mind completely on the events surrounding JFK's assassination. I highly recommend watching it. I just wish I could remember its name. The movie is still fun to watch to get a feel for all the speculation that went into the assasination. Just keep in mind that most of the conspiracy theorists have twisted the facts to fit their needs. |
| Rating | | | Date | July 24, 2005 | | Summary | MONTREAL CONNECTION | Content
| JFK is a overwelming film based on two books "On the trail of the Assassins" & "Crossfire". The assassination seems to have been a huge plot. Dallas Police Officers, CIA, FBI, Jack Ruby amongst others were all militantly oppossed to Kennedy's policies and were all working together like a grapevine to get rid of him. Officer J.D. Tippit was killed to draw attention away from Dealey Plaza because a number of men had been arrested there, including The 3 Tramps who were really CIA Agents David Lemar Christ, Howard Hunt & Frank Sturgis. It seems that Lee Harvey Oswald was a mere spectater in Dealey Plaza. There have also been rumours over the years of a Montreal connection to the J.F.K Assassination. |
| Rating | | | Date | July 10, 2005 | | Summary | Enormously Engrossing And Brilliantly Made | Content
| Oliver Stone is one of fildom's quirkier directors, and most of his films will leave viewers devided in their opinion of it. But few can argue that Stone's 1991 depiction of Louisianna District Attorney Jim Garrison's obsessive search for the truth of JFK's 1963 assassination is a masterpiece and offers an interesting and thought-provoking look at one of the most significant and tragic events in American history.
New Orleans District Attorney Jim Garrison (brilliantly played by Jim Garrison) is just one of the millions of people affected by the assassination of John F. Kennedy. He also becomes fixated on Kennedy's alleged assassin, Lee Harvey Oswald (Gary Oldman) and whether his involvement in the assassination is actually true. With the help of his partners, he delves deeper into the case, in which he encounters a number of shady characters, including a man simply known as X and crooked businessman Clay Bertrand, Garrison will stop at nothing to expose the truth behind one of the worst moments in American history.
This film is a sweeping epic from start to finish. It is especially noted for including actual footage of the Zapruder film, unseen for many years. The acting is brilliant, mostly thanks to a brilliant cast that includes Costner, Tommy Lee Jones (as Bertrand), Oldman, Kevin Bacon, Sissy Spacek, John Candy, Lemar Burton (Newman from "Seinfeld"), Jack Lemmon, Sally Kirkland, Laurie Metcalf, Edward Asner, Walter Matthou, Donald Sutherland (as X) and Joe Pesci. It is also worth noting that the real Jim Garrison has a small cameo as an interrigator as well.
This is definitely a must have movie that belongs in any film collection. Thought provoking and controversial, this remains Stone's best film next to "Platoon" and one of the most important movies in American cinena. |
| Rating | | | Date | June 08, 2005 | | Summary | A remarkable work | Content
| A fantastic movie, a great job from a director which is no more as great as he was for JFK.
The demonstration of the plot is really good. The reenactment impressive.
We all know that the USA had problems during the 60's. The Cold War permitted the rise of the mob, military and political extremists.
But if nobody can deny that the USA was the protector of the free world and that it gave hope for humanity (I'm European), every American have to admit that this balance of power seduced bad people who used it for their own purposes instead of those of the country.
We all have our dark side. I'm not a fan of Oliver Stone anyway, I don't really like some of his summarizes in JFK, especially about Vietnam (Stone argued about the military lobby, forgetting that USSR existed with nuclear power and that the US national security was in the balance) but I cannot deny what he concluded about JFK's assassination.
To anyone, see the Zapruder's movie again, in JFK or anywhere else. See the limo driver seeing back to JFK bleeding, turning the head straight on the road, calmly, turning back a second time, seeing JFK's head exploding and then beginning to hurry the car...! Amazing and disgusting.
Evidences are overhelming. You cannot deny it is something really wrong, or you have bad faith.
JFK's affair is really bad, but we have to admit it. It is a lesson for every democracy. Stone's work is a good example to the world that the USA, the best democracy in the world, has the courage to allow a production that gives real critics on its government.
As a stranger, I know a lot of antidemocratic affairs that happenned or are happening in Europa without such denounciating works, without this search of seeking the truth, without this freedom of expression.
Stone's work gives US democracy a manner to accept his previous, and grave, mistakes, and build a new, honest era. You are on the right way. |
| Rating | | | Date | June 06, 2005 | | Summary | Great Movie-Making .... But The "Patsy" Plot Is Just Idiotic | Content
| In his landmark 1991 film about the assassination of President Kennedy -- "JFK" -- Oliver Stone has just about everybody east of the Rocky Mountains involved in one way or another in the elaborate "plot" to assassinate John Kennedy. This film is a veritable "Melting Pot of Plots".
A logical question to ask would be: How could so many different people, agencies, and organizations possibly ALL be involved in such a massive assassination plot and never have anybody from any of these agencies leak any information? Such widespread theorizing is utter nonsense, IMHO. I guess Mr. Stone just wanted to touch every possible base, and throw in the kitchen sink, to boot. :-)
There's a point in the film which has Jim Garrison (Kevin Costner) and his staff, while eating dinner in a restaurant, coming up with conspiracy theories seemingly out of thin air and off the tops of their heads. Mr. Garrison seems to be taking assassin Lee Harvey Oswald at his word when Oswald shouted "I'm just a patsy!" to the waiting press in the hallways of Dallas Police headquarters. Of course, just exactly WHY this known liar (Mr. Oswald) -- who told one falsehood after another to both the police and the anxious press at the police station -- would suddenly be looked upon as a TRUTHFUL person by the conspiracy theorists, who believe he was telling the truth when he uttered his famous "Patsy" declaration after his arrest, is a mystery to me. Most curious indeed.
This movie might very well make some people think twice about what really happened in Dallas on November 22, 1963, but I'd ask those same people to consider the rationale and logic that would have been exhibited by any "plotters" who were attempting to "frame" their lone "Patsy" (Oswald) PRIOR to the assassination.
In other words -- In order to accept the idea that Lee Harvey Oswald WAS, indeed, the "Patsy" he said he was, and in order to buy into Oliver Stone's 3-Gunmen, 6-Shot "Triangulation of Crossfire" conspiracy theory that is the central "shooting plot" as depicted in this motion picture, anyone who accepts this film's proposed shooting scenario as "fact" MUST, therefore, also be of the opinion that these "conspirators"/"plotters" had no hesitation whatsoever to green-light and proceed full-tilt with a "Patsy" plan that would involve the POTENTIAL final results of having the one and only target (John F. Kennedy) being hit with UP TO SIX SEPARATE BULLETS fired from the guns of THREE different snipers (one of which was firing from the front, the exact OPPOSITE direction from where the ONE "Patsy" was supposedly firing in the Texas School Book Depository Building, which was located to the REAR of the President's car).
Even in a 'perfect conspiracy world', how in the heck could these covert "plotters" possibly have thought (on November 21st, the day before such a nutty plan would be taking place) that it was a GOOD idea to utilize three different assassins, who would ALL be drilling JFK's body (potentially) with many bullets in just a short 6-to-8-second time period -- with several of these missiles coming from OBVIOUS non-Oswald (non-"Patsy") locations?
Were these conspirators of the opinion (somehow) that JFK would be pronounced "dead" right there in the limousine, right there in Dealey Plaza, and would then be driven IMMEDIATELY to some "Conspiracy Morgue" someplace where ALL the wounds that have just been inflicted upon the President would be "controlled" by the same evil plotters who conceived of this plot?
Did the people who dreamed up this impossible-to-pull-off "Frame-The-Lone-Patsy" plot really NOT consider the possibility of ALL six shots striking President Kennedy (or all six shots hitting SOMEBODY in Dealey Plaza)? And did they really NOT consider the likelihood that many, many doctors and nurses, et al, at Parkland Hospital would be NOTICING the many NON-OSWALD wounds to the President's body?
And: Did these plotters really NOT consider the potential eyewitness accounts of the literally hundreds of witnesses who were scattered throughout Dealey Plaza to watch the President pass by? Did the plotters just GET LUCKY when not one single witness saw ANY assassin other than the killer located in the "Oswald window" in the Depository? Did they just get lucky that the vast majority of earwitnesses heard ONLY THREE SHOTS (the EXACT number that Oswald could have fired in the allotted assassination timeframe)?
And: Did the conspirators also just "luck out" when very, very few witnesses (less than 5% total) said that they heard shots coming FROM MORE THAN ONE DIRECTION? (And the vast majority of these witnesses heard shots from BEHIND the President's car, from the direction of the School Book Depository.)
And: Didn't ANY of these crackerjack conspirators who were weaving this unbelievable "Patsy" scheme also take into account the possibility that a few of those HUNDREDS of Dealey Plaza witnesses just MIGHT have had cameras in their hands and just might have snapped pictures and even MOVIES of the assassination -- photos and moving pictures that might very well PROVE A CONSPIRACY EXISTED ON NOVEMBER 22, 1963?
Didn't ANY of these things go through the heads of these assassination-planning operatives? If these potential "problems" with their screwball plan didn't enter their brains, these guys weren't earning their covert dollars, that's for sure.
From a PRE-November 22nd POV, any "Patsy Plot" that involves multiple gunmen firing AT THE VERY SAME TARGET from a variety of different directions is a plot that only a crazy person(s) would consider carrying out. Because there is virtually NO chance of such a moronic plan succeeding (unless the shooters being employed were so rotten that all of the gunmen being used on 11/22, EXCEPT the "Oswald Look-alike" in the Depository's "Sniper's Nest", miraculously MISSED the target {JFK} and also missed everybody else in the car and in Dealey Plaza).
Shouldn't just a small bit of common sense and practicality have crept into the minds of these people (whoever they were supposed to be) who were "orchestrating" this now-widely-believed and accepted-as-FACT (LOL!) "Oswald Was Just A Patsy" conspiracy scheme?
Shouldn't at least ONE of these "plotters" have spoken up and said on 11-21-63: "Gee, fellas ... this plan seems a tad bit loony. We're asking three different killers to all fire at JFK at virtually an identical point in time and yet somehow also expect ALL the trace evidence to, somehow, some way, IMMEDIATELY lead back to Oswald's window and only Oswald's rifle. Hmmm.....maybe we ought to re-think the probability of this plan succeeding. Ya think?"
But -- Per CTers, I guess nobody on the "JFK Assassination Plot" payroll made any such logical statement, and, therefore, the bound-to-collapse "Three-Gun, Frame-The-Single-Patsy" plot was allowed to proceed, as planned.
Did these plotters just automatically ASSUME that all of the 'frontal-shot' evidence that would invariably blow the "Patsy Plot" to bits just minutes after the gunfire had ceased in Dealey Plaza wouldn't be noticed by ANY Parkland personnel -- and that ZERO of these many bullets that would be potentially entering the body of John F. Kennedy (or any other victims who might be accidentally hit) would ALL simply "get lost" on their own or wouldn't be seen by ANY non-plotters? Or was it the conspirators' belief that all of these bullets would immediately be collected by some additional conspirators within the hospital?
Or did the plotters just feel it wouldn't make any difference how many bullets had pelted JFK's body, and that any 'Non-Oswald' bullet wounds would simply be "taken care of" by other "after-the-shooting" conspirators who were in charge of the "Cover-Up" operation? Kind of a reckless plan and a very large risk to take -- don't you think?
In fact, from a PRE-assassination standpoint, a plan of that nature would have been just plain suicide for the conspiracy team, IMO. Which is the main reason why no such plan would have been implemented on 11-22-63; nor would such a foolish plot have even been considered in the first place, given the many obvious hazards and complications that such a "Patsy" operation would have presented.
It's hilariously absurd from every given angle! Hard to believe ANY reasonable-thinking person can actually believe such "Oswald Was Merely A Patsy" nonsense.
I think it's kind of interesting that Director Stone decided NOT to accept Robert Groden's complete version of the assassination. In his book ("The Killing Of A President"), Groden, who served as a technical adviser on the film "JFK", tells his readers of his conspiracy theory which involves a MINIMUM of 8 shots (and possibly even more)! And, incredibly, Mr. Groden claims that NONE of these eight bullets likely came from the Oswald window in the TSBD. .... Please note that even Mr. Stone didn't "buy" that silliness.
But, as far as Oliver Stone's "JFK" filmmaking is concerned -- I think it's quite good. Very authentic-looking 1963-era "re-creations" were filmed of Dealey Plaza and the motorcade (with an appropriate amount of old-time "graininess" added to the new imagery), which have been intercut with actual news and amateur footage throughout the film. At times, it is difficult to discern between the re-creations and actual archival footage (although JFK assassination "experts" will have no trouble spying the differences). The editing of this picture is on a level way above anything else you're likely to see anywhere. And the John Williams music score is also superb.
I have the 2-Disc Widescreen DVD edition of "JFK: Special Edition Director's Cut" (in the "Snapper" type case) that was released by Warner Home Video on February 6, 2001, which does not include the feature-length 90-minute documentary that's available on the newer (2003) 2-Disc SE.
This 2001 edition, though, does sport a beautiful anamorphic (16x9-enhanced) DVD transfer (in the nice, wide "scope" aspect ratio of 2.35:1). That fabulous music of John Williams shines brightly, too, via the disc's rich-sounding Dolby Digital 5.1 audio track. This DVD might own the record for most "Chapter Breaks", too (88 of 'em)!
The bonus features on this (2001) 2-Disc DVD set aren't really that much to write home about, IMO. There's an Audio Commentary Track by Oliver Stone and some "Deleted/Extended Scenes" (which I did enjoy seeing) -- but the totality of the extras on this older DVD edition seem to be a tad on the weak side. (Especially the feature on Disc 2 called "Multimedia Essays" -- This stuff is dry as dust, IMHO. Of course, I say this as a staunch "LNer" who believes in Lee Oswald's lone guilt in the JFK and J.D. Tippit murders; so {possibly} that's part of the reason I failed to see a whole bunch of redeeming qualities in these conspiracy-slanted "Essays" that are presented here.)
------------------
A Final "JFK" Word.......
I enjoy watching Mr. Stone's "JFK" -- but from the standpoint of "fictional drama" only; and certainly not from any kind of "historically accurate" POV at all. The "CT-created drama", along with the music score and the outstanding editing together of re-constructed scenes with real 11-22-63 film footage are all things that are noteworthy in the movie. But I'll stick with my own (and Vincent Bugliosi's) version of assassination events (i.e.: Oswald was guilty as sin and had no helpers), rather than take a huge leap off the conspiracy diving board, where every theory being discussed is as cloudy and murky as the "Badge Man" image in Mary Moorman's famous Polaroid photograph.
So, I'd say -- Watch this slickly-presented piece of motion-picture entertainment by all means. But watch it with a good-sized grain of salt at your side. (Better make it the WHOLE Morton Salt Company manufacturing plant at your side, in fact.) |
|
