Home
Artists
Search Recent Random
Posts
Search DMs Popular Hash Lookup Tags Random
Importer
Import FAQ
Account
Register
Partychan Matrix ThePornDude
Home Artists Posts Import Register

JFK (1991) - Full Reaction (Patreon)

Published:
2025-03-23 21:44:55
Edited:
2025-03-23 21:50:26
Imported:
2025-03
Tags:

Content

Ok I am reeling after this, one- because it does make you question a lot of things and yes, i know it is not fact and a lot of theories and myths rolled into one but also two- I thought it was incredibly well done. So many great cameos and monologues and storytelling and editing. I don’t think anyone but a select few will ever know the real real truth but I do think it’s good to ask questions. I also really wonder what Kevin Costner thinks...

This is the 3h8m version, which I think is the theatrical version!

(I did have to split this one up and watch it in 2 parts, but it won't affect your sync)

Direct link.

Find your own copy.

Download this reaction.

Files

[Full Reaction] JFK (1991)

Comments

JPDotCom23

Yaaaaaay, finally

Rick Rodriguez

And let the debating begin...

Jonathan Hintz

A much better film on the topic is 1973s Executive Action with Burt Lancaster and Robert Ryan

Cliff Stephenson

The Mr. X sequence with Donald Sutherland is one of the best edited/most compelling moments in cinema from the past 35 years.

Michael Lynch
>>168698511

I’ll tell you what’s finally. Next month when we finally get collateral.

Shad Kanyak

Two parts? I assume this is the theatrical cut. Director’s Cut may have made you watch in three parts. “Back, and to the left. Back, and to the left.”

Brian's Dog
>>168698599

It's gotta be the Theatrical, her video ends at 3:03 and the Theatrical is 3:07 total. The Director's cut is 3:25 total.

Bill Maurer

Besides the known controversies of this movie. Some great performances by Costner, Tommie Lee Jones (great job), Oldman (obviously), Sutherland and Michael Rooker. Also, great music by none other than John Williams. Great directing by Stone and editing by Joe Hutshing and Pietro Scalia

Jay Davis

Back-to-back bangers... that's what the kids say. Ain't it?

nick bell

Controversial or not, it's a great film. So quotable.

Sean Kay

Here we go

nick bell

You should probably watch Seinfeld now.

MatthewBrown74m

That's a hundred percent fair Cassie although this is my top ten favorite movie it's not a very fact and true story, but a very well made story. I love this movie even though i'm against conspiracy theories

Rose

Cassie - if you’re interested the JFK files are available at https://www.archives.gov/research/jfk/release-2025

Bert Towle

Remember "Dave"? Remember the cameo by Oliver Stone? Now you know why. Looking forward to watching tonight.

Blake Evans

Been waiting on this one. I have no problem with this film not being one hundred percent factual ( as of the making we didn't know what we know now, and possibly more in the near future). This isn't a documentary, but an amalgam of so many theories. Two of my favorite films of all time, Braveheart and Gladiator, are complete and utter hogwash historically, but that doesn't take away my enjoyment of them. And it also took me way too long to realize that was Gary Oldman as LHO.

Ricardo Alanis

Just got my 4K copy. Psyched to watch along!

Brandon

Was hoping this would be out tonight

Above Average Dave

Great filmmaking! Thank you, Cassie! Before my time but I’m 95% that the CIA did him. You cannot convince me otherwise,

Patrick Flanagan

Like I have said before I think this is a monumental achievement just in terms of filmmaking, and it still works even if you think there was no conspiracy and Garrison was totally paranoid. But the editing, cinematography, acting is first rate and watching this in theaters was an experience I'll never forget.

Patrick Flanagan

What I particularly loved was how Stone deceitfully edited actual footage together with recreations to fool us all with his crazy theories. That was the highlight of the film for me.

Dan M

You’re right Cassie. I think that’s what Oliver Stone’s mission was when he directed this movie…”I want to make the audience think”. I’m not one to follow conspiracy theories. I just enjoyed how well this movie was made, the acting was superb, and I was totally engrossed. P.S. - so happy this is in two parts! I’m not sure I can sit through the entire movie tonight. I’ve been on the go all day.

Above Average Dave
>>168699561

Some friends of mine and me were going to do a deep dive on this, but work intervened in the last week for me, Lady Rose. I hear more will come in the next week. I hope that tranche will include the still never-seen-by-the-public second home video that was reportedly shot by a bystander watching the motorcade (i.e. not the Zapruder film). Reportedly has a clear view of the limo, the Grassy Knoll and parts of the railyard all at the time of the shooting.

Larry Darrell

It’s been a long while since I’ve sat down and watched this. I was under the impression that a lot was completely fabricated and real life characters were composited into fictional characters. I even thought Clay Shaw and David Ferrie weren’t real. I was wrong. I was very surprised to find out most of the film was comprised of what was known at the time about the Assassination, via eyewitness testimony and uncovered documents. Scenes and lines in the film were sometimes taken directly from actual testimonies by real eye witnesses. There is a documentary series that originally aired in 1988, and features interviews with eye witnesses filmed in the 70s and 80s. Much of what is in the JFK film is taken directly from the testimonies featured in this documentary series. The final 3 episodes were added in the late 90s to early 2000s. I will post links, but I will preface, not everything reported in this series is accurate. Some evidence took journalists down the wrong path, and we know today that some things were wrong. (Such as the segment on French assassins.) But just because a few things are wrong, does not make everything wrong. All evidence must be considered. All testimonies must be heard. Any semi-intelligent person should be able to determine when a piece of evidence, or most importantly, an eye witness testimony, is telling the truth. They can’t all be lying. - The Men Who Killed Kennedy 9 part documentary series (1988)… Part 1 - The Coup d’Etat https://youtu.be/Xh6YWxAz0xY?si=bPJ6E7QgxKUaUQ-u Part 2 - The Forces of Darkness https://youtu.be/GOVwZeAD-Aw?si=8TlbNEQP6RikCGc- Part 3 - The Cover-Up https://youtu.be/Cp2qrR5HdMI?si=rMETj_EU-ZmlHf0D Part 4 - The Patsy https://youtu.be/DZqsIJL74qo?si=h6fEFxxpHlIjj49E Part 5 - The Witnesses https://youtu.be/3aS-OcZ3c5c?si=X2GXRYylCtup1rs0 Part 6 - The Truth Shall Make You Free https://youtu.be/TUFwWJp7Hcs?si=tzJ65siLTrrFyvuN Part 7 - The Smoking Guns https://youtu.be/3caagpD8Zdo?si=poKmC5oIHoLQV19k Part 8 - The Love Affair https://youtu.be/RsvrdcMarGE?si=KsC8OyY5OIU04N_R Part 9 - The Guilty Men https://youtu.be/RSLWsojOL4A?si=J51g-UNjieBZ336g

Patrick Flanagan
>>168700512

I've gone from being absolutely convinced a conspiracy killed him, to thinking maybe a conspiracy killed him but a conspiracy definitely existed to conceal knowledge of Oswald's activities. The government sure as hell ACTED like a guilty party.

Nathan Swapp

IF, and I do mean IF I was to believe in a conspiracy to the JFK assassination, I like the theory that the Secret Service accidentally shot at JFK and that's the additional shot heard and the weird cover up actions by the Secret Service. Oswald acted alone and killed the President. No mobs, no kgb, no grassy knoll. Just panicky SS with an unfamiliar new rifle and a situation that they haven't been in before. But this is still a conspiracy theory.

Larry Darrell
>>168699561

The Babushka Lady video. I’m sure that video has definitely been destroyed by now.

LittleGalaxyBoy

Not about the film, but JFK-themed. As someone from Ireland, I loved that Jacqueline Kennedy requested Irish Army cadets from the 37th Cadet Class to form a guard of honor at President John F. Kennedy's funeral. 26 cadets traveled to Washington, D.C., where they performed the Queen Anne Drill at President Kennedy's graveside during the burial service at Arlington National Cemetery. From my understanding, this is one of the only times foreign military units participated in a U.S. state funeral. Their commands were also given in Irish, which, along with their uniforms, made them stand out from everyone else. All because President Kennedy had visited Ireland in June 1963 and was impressed by the drill performed by the 36th Cadet Class at Arbour Hill. So Jacqueline felt it was only right to request these cadets to honor Kennedy at his funeral. I found footage on YouTube with audio (not the best) covering the funeral. Began the video at the 8-minute mark, you can see the 37th Cadet Class of the Irish Army performing the 'Rifle Drill' ceremony behind the coffin. Link: https://youtu.be/pCwLl4JeSHI?t=477

Henry Graham

Regardless of what people think about the validity of Stone's paranoid speculating (and God bless him for cashing all his chips to get Warner Brothers to commit $40m to such a wild and contentious project), this is one of the most extraordinary pieces of filmmaking I've ever seen. It's a masterclass in editing, with Stone's use of montage comparable to the likes of Eisenstein, Pudovkin and Vertov. So much of this film is a barrage of information being blasted at the audience, but through the masterful editing and knockout performances it remains utterly exhilarating. Just look at Donald Sutherland's cameo, which is the greatest exposition dump in history. The climactic courtroom scene is Costner's finest hour as an actor, with the moment when he looks directly at the jury/the audience and says "It's up to you" cutting right to the heart of Stone's call for more openness and transparency from those who govern us.

Zachary (Verified Swiftie)

First off I have to share, that these two videos should only be watched after watching Cassie's/PIB's reaction. I realize that I am just a insignificant viewer who retired from this forum long ago. I am no different than any other viewer. I am just a child of the 1960's. Popcorn In Bed her/ their reaction is the only thing that matters So after you watch her reaction to JFK you may or may not find these two videos from ABC news interesting. I took two 7 minute samples exposing the Stone film. These were made in 2003 with Peter Jennings. This is called Beyond Conspiracy the JFK Assassination. Which he talks about facts. Something you can't dispute The Truth is one of the most important aspects we have in this life. I am really just against movies or mini-series that take a real life event and twist it so badly it becomes unrecognizable. I don't want to go against anyone's beliefs. I am just sharing 14 minutes of a two hour long special. It's up to you to determine the truth. Your welcome to watch the entire two hours to learn more. I am learning to be a lot more humble thanks to my adorable little Mayan girl ( someone who I agreed to marry one day in the future) who is sharing with me and telling me that honestly I don't know everything. Which is...... mostly/probably true. So WATCH CASSIE'S REACTION first. Now it's time for me to go back into the ocean of retirement from which I came. I apologize for not responding to comments but certain promises have to be kept. In the words of Paul Harvey I bid you Good Day! First Video: (Garrison) https://photos.app.goo.gl/V197qTsrvgeckc3k6 2nd Video: ( Stone film wrong) DO NOT WATCH UNTIL AFTER YOU WATCH CASSIE'S REACTION https://photos.app.goo.gl/nHUD8HXFuj2y61AT9

Stick Figure Studios
>>168701686

My dad was an expert on the assassination. He had every book, documentary and movie about it. He took me to see JFK when I was an adolescent and we both loved it. He knew every name, date, time and detail surrounding the event. My dad was not at all a conspiracy nut (he believed in the moon landing, that Shakespeare wrote his plays, etc) but he believed -- and still does -- that Kennedy's death was the result of a conspiracy. I am not as convinced as he is, but neither am I as convinced that there is not truth to it. Ironically, I'm the one who ended up moving from Oregon to Dallas after I got married and who works only a few blocks away from Dealey Plaza.

Patrick Flanagan

For anyone who has seen 2019's THE IRISHMAN, there is a tiny little in-joke. Joe Pesci's character here, David Ferrie, also shows up in that movie, played by another actor, and Pesci, playing a mobster, makes note of Ferrie's very odd appearance.

Bill Maurer

It was Jim Garrison himself who portrayed Supreme Court justice Earl Warren in the movie. The movie was based on Garrison's book "On the Trail of the Assassins" that this movie was made from

Stick Figure Studios
>>168701066

It's a phenomenal film and Stone's self-proclaimed intent to create a "counter-myth" to the "fictional myth" of the Warren report (if that is indeed what he was doing) is an idea not without merit.

Clay F

This movie is the greatest lie Hollywood ever told.

Chris Thom

It's such a well-made film. And Oliver Stone is such a distinct director and voice, and I respect his style a lot, even if I don't always agree with him. And this captures the paranoia surrounding the event so well and how truly heartbroken many were about the assassination. And there's enough real information here to compel the viewer to really look at American society and how it works, which can be a good thing. Or at least interesting. And a solid exercise for the mind. But I also very much agree with Clay in that unfounded conspiracy theories and rumors can and do, do a lot of harm. We should always question things, but not be so cynical to the point of toxicity, where we become convinced that nothing positive can ever be achieved collectively. Because that's very far from the truth. Choosing to trust in one another can be a powerful motivator as well.

Chris Thom
>>168700593

Agree. You don't have to totally believe Garrison's conclusions to sympathize with his plight. Or his wife's points about living a normal life. It's all fascinating and makes you think.

Larry Darrell

Eyewitness interviews filmed just a few years after the assassination, after the Warren Report was released, for a book and documentary by attorney Mark Lane… Rush to Judgment J.C. Price https://youtu.be/h52fmSg91qI?si=sZ_vNd6aytA9hwIT James Leon Simmons https://youtu.be/EIG8xjMTYjo?si=dG_yxoJ9RcjWyk8S Charles Brehm https://youtu.be/PEs1dWLeb0U?si=9F_IzwU-Fx9aNmpm Orville Nix https://youtu.be/t9-Kp9hnfso?si=rUOeRFN_VCMiqO_L Lee Bowers https://youtu.be/K7YgdBHXYRE?si=1NM_Yg6NG5NDKO6e James Tague https://youtu.be/fVnYTgZzWCk?si=6K84EAnsGwNXDgih Sam Holland https://youtu.be/iaCwrmoa3sQ?si=NCtBd_hODjFf0s5X Richard Dodd https://youtu.be/Oq8tV5lr7cw?si=EFq07ZrKqjUaDZ_0 Are they all Lying? Much more interesting videos and interviews on this YouTube page. Most from not long after the assassination. People knew from the very beginning that strange things were happening.

Chris Thom
>>168698598

I'd completely forgot this was the movie that made me a fan of Sutherland.

Chris Thom
>>168701686

I'm curious what people thought in the immediate aftermath. As in the first week or so. Did they think it was the Russians? Or Cuba?

Chris Thom
>>168701764

Would think they've been told over and over again not to point their weapons at the president?

MAV293 (MARK)

This is a very polarizing film. Oliver Stone mixed real actual facts from the Warren Report, documented information, and unedited video from that time with theory of how it could have happen. In the case that Jim Garrison put together, something was going on but it was almost impossible to prove even if he was right. The way this was filmed and edited with actual footage was painstakingly and brilliantly done. This is one of my favorite films of All Time mixed with a subject that has been part of me and my family since it happen on November 22nd 1963. The man at the beginning of the film in the bar that is applauding JFK's death is a man named Perry Russo that was part of Jim Garrison's case and lived in the town that I live in for a short time and stayed in the New Orleans area his whole life. I live in Houma, Louisiana which is right in the middle of the area where Operation Mongoose was taking place and is mentioned in the film.I can go on and on about how I feel it is a Masterpiece of Film making and the film always gets criticized for being conspiracy theory propaganda. The one question I always ask, is it a conspiracy theory when we are obviously not being told the truth. The releasing of the documents means nothing if the very government releasing those documents is hiding the truth.

Clay F
>>168703199

I am. If anything could get to me rewatch this movie, it was be a Cassie reaction -- but even that is not enough.

Larry Darrell
>>168704218

The mistrust of the American Government began on November 22, 1963. Then when the Warren Report was released on September 24, 1964, this Mistrust was forever solidified in the minds of many Americans. The deletion of evidence, the manipulation of evidence and documents, and the refusal to hear all eye witness testimonies, by the members of the Warren Commission, has made it impossible to truly believe anything they tell us anymore.

JL_83

I cannot even begin to tell you how long I was eagerly awaiting this reaction - The Untouchables, Field of Dreams, Dances with Wolves, Bull Durham, Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves, The Bodyguard, For Love of the Game, Tin Cup, Open Range, Thirteen Days, Silverado, No Way Out...after so many previous Kevin Costner reactions I knew it was only a matter of time before you finally got to this one! SENSATIONAL!!! That would be my one-word reaction to this movie, and really you couldn't ask for a more outstanding cast of actors across the board

Nathan Swapp
>>168701764

You'd think so but trying to pull a rifle out while running along next to the limo is a bit like patting your head while rubbing your belly and jumping on one leg. And it's not like you can get experience in presidential assassinations without a presidential assassination. Once you're in it, you're a bit along for the ride until it's over.

Timothy Fisher

Here is a link to all the factual errors in this film listed on IMDB. Hopefully this will ease your suspicion. https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0102138/goofs/?tab=gf&ref_=tt_dyk_gf

Patrick Flanagan
>>168701686

Here's a site claiming that the general population had healthy skepticism about the official story going all the way back to the 1960s https://ropercenter.cornell.edu/sites/default/files/kennedy-assassination.jpg

Mike Lemon
>>168705568

Now she just needs Mr. Brooks (2007) and The Guardian (2006). I also like The Postman (1997) but not many else do apparently.

Clay F
>>168703199

Not complaining. Just stating the truth. I will have some more truths to comment on the movie. Would you watch a movie (having great filmmaking) about how the holocaust didn't happen?

djKENTO

noticed about 40 minutes in that it was out of sync for me. I know I’m watching the right version ,but the visuals don’t line up anymore. I don’t get it.

Mike Lemon

Some other Oliver Stone involved movies you might want to watch- Indictment: The McMartin Trial (1995). Oh, and Conan the Barbarian (1982), but you probably want that after Indictment.

Larry Darrell
>>168701686

@ Chris - The public did suspect Russia or Cuba. Efforts in the government, through the media, tried to quell as much information about the connections of Oswald with Russia and Cuba. They hammered in the lone gunman idea and tried to make him seem as crazy as possible. There was a fear that if the public believed that Russia was behind the assassination, then war with Russia would become very likely. And no one wanted that. Especially the possible, but likely people on the inside who were responsible. They had their eyes on Vietnam. They didn’t want another World War. There were actual connections between Oswald and Russia and Cuba, so there was definitely cover-ups happening there.

Mike Lemon
>>168707581

If yours is fast, and it is the same version, try playing your copy at 96% speed.

djKENTO
>>168707581

Can’t change the speed of a blu-ray homie. And Larry I’m watching the 3 hour and 8 minute version.

Shad Kanyak
>>168707581

I lost sync a couple times. No more than a second of so. I’m wondering if it’s just conflicting frame rates over a super long movie.

Larry Darrell
>>168704218

Ok. How you doing Clay? Feeling alright tonight? Who did you reply to, by the way?

Clay F
>>168703624

Attorney Mark Lane = zero credibility. A known liar and reeked of being unethical. Manipulated and arm-twisted witnesses. Lane espoused conspiratorial narrative in the weeks and months after Kennedy’s death. Lane was the first, and most persistent, author of the theory that Oswald was innocent and had been framed by a sinister deep state. The idea that right-wing elements had conspired to kill Kennedy and frame a man (Oswald) of the left made the event red meat for someone like Mark Lane.

Clay F
>>168704218

Yep, the movie is definitely conspiracy theory propaganda that unfortunately has influenced people.

Mike Lemon
>>168707581

Then change the speed of the reaction by 1.04X. @Shad- The frame rate is what I am thinking too. Playing the fast one at 96% (or the slow one at the inverse of that) is usually the solution.

Clay F
>>168703199

Ha. Yeah, the opening "THIS IS A TRUE STORY. " in Fargo.

Doc Larry

When the actual events happen, I was in school and they dismissed classes. I remember waiting in the assistant principal‘s office because my mother was a teacher in the school. she had to make sure her students got home safely with their parents. Before she could get me and take me home I also remember watching my mother hug her colleagues and crying. As a movie, I found it interesting and entertaining, mixing fact and fiction with some speculation. The acting was good some parts a little disjointed the overall movie was worth watching. Like any good movie that is somewhat based on reality it makes you want to delve into the actual events a little more. As always, it’s a joy to see this movie through someone else’s eyes an individual who really enjoys watching movies. Keep up the good work, Cassie.

Chris Thom
>>168710197

My mom was living in Vegas at the time, and she said it was the first time she'd ever seen them turn off all the neon lights out of respect.

Steve Holton

My family loved the Kennedys. My Grandfather worked on Kennedy’s campaign in California and every year we visited Alisal Ranch in Solvang California because President Kennedy and Jackie spent part of their honeymoon there. A photographer once remarked about taking pictures of President Kennedy, “He seems to be in a different dimension than everyone else in the picture.” The camera just loved him, and as a genuine war hero (Awarded the Navy and Marine Corps Medal) he was built for the public stage. Indeed, as a senator visiting California, Kennedy’s driver for the day was a young Leonard Nimoy, “Spock” from Star Trek. Kennedy quipped to Nimoy “We are both aspiring actors” Sadly, Kennedy received “Last Rites” (Prayers and blessing for one who is dying) 5 times in his life. Once as an infant, 3 times as an adult 1947, 1951, and 1954 and then after this. He suffered many painful ailments during his life. I remember my mother calling me in tears after the accidental death of John Jr., the little boy saluting his fallen father at the beginning of this film. Another very sad day. 😔

MikeLL

The highlight of the film for me was the performance of Gary Oldman as Lee Harvey Oswald. He just disappeared into that character and the actor became another person.

deskmerc

At one point there appears to be concern that someone would "We went to Houston for the ice skating". This is indeed the case, in the 60's there was a rather nice place called Winterland, it was an honest to god ice skating rink, and there really weren't a lot of those anywhere in the South, so someone deciding to go ice skating in Houston from Louisiana would not be unheard of...but unusual. It would have been a multiple day expedition, the interstate highways of I-45 and I-10 did not yet exist, so it's not relatively simple path from NO to Houston to Galveston it is today. Take Highway 90 and its the same path Pesci's character would have had to drive, long and slow about 7-8 hours from NO to Houston, longer if the weather is bad. Its about an hour or so from Houston to Galveston on Highway 75, so the timeline presented is possible but...it doesn't leave a lot of time for ice skating that day unless you left NO early that morning.

Shad Kanyak
>>168707581

I downloaded the YT reaction. It plays at a frame rate of 59.94. The movie would be 23.98, so there would for sure be slight lag over 3+ hours.

cfb0453 (Chris)

Hi Cassie, I just finished watching your full reaction to "JFK", and first of all I would like to apologise! I was one of the advocates pushing for this movie and I fear that the very innocence that makes your channel so great and so watchable has been permanently damaged. Having said that, I think you nailed the intentions of Oliver Stone in your outro. The film was never meant to be "the truth", or someone's enforced ideology but a counter myth. A rebuttal to the official Warren Commission report. We should all ask questions of our government, it's everyone's civic duty. Whether the film or the official version of events is true or not is irrelevant. The government certainly has unlimited resources and as fanciful as the movie may appear to be, I think we can all agree that if they wanted to commit a coup d'état, they certainly could. At the end of the day, everyone can squabble over details like who stood where and when for how long. But it's the simplest things that demand further investigation, things like how Oswald was able to get down 3 flights of stairs, passing 2 witnesses without ever being seen, in 90 seconds. Common sense is the key!!! If you are interested in further info, there is an excellent mini series called "JFK - Destiny Betrayed" which goes even further down the rabbit hole - and one of the books that the movie is based on, called "Crossfire: The Plot that Killed Kennedy" by Jim Marrs, which goes even further again. Any way, I know the rules so I won't engage in politics. Excellent reaction, I thoroughly enjoyed it and I hope you can forgive us. 😬😬😬

ITMacPro

If you ever get the time to read the book "JFK and the Unspeakable: Why He Died and Why It Matters" by James W. Douglass; Oliver Stone called it "the best account I have read of this tragedy and its significance".

Donald Fleming

According to my mom, my family is related to both Jim Garrison & John Kennedy on my mom's side of the family, so seeing this movie was kind of a necessity for me.

🚩
>>168714518

Yeah, we dont want to mar Cassie's innocence.

Mark Vaderr
>>168705568

You're leaving out "Message In A Bottle"? That movie will make Cassie swoon.

🚩
>>168702444

I've never seen this movie and most likely never will

Bill Maurer

"Parkland" is a movie that should be watched after watching "JFK". Tells the story after the shooting and the scenes afterwards

TheSingulatarian

The actual Jim Garrison on the Johny Carson Tonight Show. I'm not sure in that was in Cassies version. I watched the extended Director's cut. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XSLv_YRqCWc

TheSingulatarian

Earl Warren by several accounts was mobbed up and worked with the mob to steal Japanese Americans property during WWII. There were several other shady characters on the "Warren Commission" George Takei who was interred during WWII as a child has less than kind things to say about Earl Warren. https://lifeofrefinement.com/2012/09/15/earl-warren-and-japanese-internment/

Jason Dolan

When I read she was reeling after this I went to Instagram thinking she was doing a recounting on reels 😹

Uncle Phoenix

Isn’t it interesting that George H.W. Bush is never mentioned in any of these JFK movies. He was a naval officer during WW2. He was Skull and Bones at Yale. He was a public figure in Harris County Texas in 1963, the largest county in Texas. He was 39 years old in 1963, and then 13 years later in 1976 he is appointed to be the Director of Central Intelligence. And wouldn’t his son, the former President, be in a position to keep things under wraps? Just the sort of biography for a "Mythical figure".

Larry Darrell
>>168703624

Are you saying Mark Lane convinced all of the people in these interviews to lie about what they saw? Any proof of that?

Damien beatty

There is an excellent video on youtube by LEMMINO on the subject based solely on the Book Depository. Also, The 6 hour version of the NBC news coverage on that day is one of the great videos on youtube as well it is called as it happened the jfk assassination.

Larry Darrell
>>168707581

Just finished. The 3hr 8 is the correct one. Cassie’s was at a different frame rate than my Blu-ray. I had to quickly pause and un-pause about every 15 - 20 minutes. Only minor inconvenience in my opinion. If this were a horror film or comedy film, having jump scares or laughs be out of sync would be more annoying, but wasn’t an issue here. IMO.

Chris Retzlaff

A young Rooker saying yall in this immediately makes me think of Gaurdians of the galaxy 2..... Im Mary Poppins Ya'lll

Larry Darrell
>>168720524

How about Charles P. Cabell and Earle Cabell. Charles P. Cabell - US Air Force General & Deputy Director of the CIA. General Cabell was fired from the CIA along with Allen Dulles, the Head Director of the CIA, after the Bay of Pigs incident. General Charles Cabell was the #2 man in the CIA before the firing. Earle Cabell - Charles’ brother and Mayor of Dallas, TX from 1961 - 1964. Allen Dulles was appointed to the Warren Commission. Here is a scene removed from the theatrical cut of the JFK film, but is in the Director’s Cut. Jim Garrison and Lou Ivon are on the 6th floor of the Book Depository… Lou: "Main Street's over there. Original parade route on the way to the Trade Mart is too far, right?" Jim confirms: "Too far." Lou: "Impossible shot, so they change the parade route. Bring him down here. Moving at a normal 25 mph. They knew the motorcade would have to slow down to about 10 mph to make that turn there. And that's where they got him." Jim: "Who do you think changed the parade route?" Lou: "Beats me. Secret Service, city officials, Dallas Police." Jim: "You know who was the mayor at the time?" Lou: "Earle Cabell." Jim: "Guess who his brother is?" Lou: "Who?" Jim: "General Charles Cabell. Deputy director of the CIA. Kennedy fired him in '61 because of the Bay of Pigs fiasco. Moved back to the Pentagon and called Kennedy a traitor. When he came to New Orleans to address the Foreign Policy Association, know who introduced him? Our friend, Clay Shaw." Lou: "Didn't the Warren Commission call him?" Jim: "His boss was the one on the Warren Commission who handled the leads in the intelligence community." Lou: "Allen Dulles?" Jim: "Head of the CIA since '53. Kennedy fired them both. Cabell was his Deputy for nine years. Talk about the fox investigating the chicken coop. Now, we'll have to subpoena them both." Footage of all 3 men are shown when their names are mentioned.

Chris Thom
>>168717665

That one scene with the shadowy figure in the operating room was interesting.

Chris Thom
>>168720524

Been reading articles all day and watching videos since Cassie's video released, and it is a bit strange that his name keeps popping up.

Larry Darrell
>>168719617

That scene is in the Director’s Cut. The name of the show was changed to The Jerry Johnson Show, and Jerry was played by John Larroquette.

Larry Darrell
>>168714518

Common Sense is definitely the key. Just look at the evidence. All the evidence. So many Red Flags will be popping up that Scarlett O’Hara will have to change her name. ;-)

Larry Darrell
>>168712370

There is a woman named Judyth Vary Baker that gives another reason for David Ferrie going to Houston. Her incredible story, which can be seen in episode 8 of The Men Who Killed Kennedy documentary series, has yet to be proven true or false. It’s one hell of a story though, that fills in a lot of gaps.

Larry Darrell
>>168712360

Gary Oldman has stated, Lee Harvey Oswald is one of his favorite roles that he has done.

Larry Darrell
>>168720524

Especially, Allen Dulles. Once you look into his history, then knowing he was on the Warren Commission. Now that is scary. Look up the name Patrice Lumumba.

Zeroarmor7

It's gotta be tough to watch a movie like this and react to it without missing an important line of dialogue somewhere

Larry Darrell
>>168705568

Fandango (1985) A Perfect World (1993) The Postman (1997) These I’m waiting for.

Sean Kay

Anyone wanna join me in the discord and talk the reaction?

Sean Kay

She is a badass for giving us this upload. I'm around to discuss it...

Sean Kay

Does noone voice chat in the discord channel here?...I guess I'm too newbie and misunderstood...

Larry Darrell
>>168703201

As long as all evidence is considered. Even what seems to be coming out of left or right field. Because that’s all we have. The moment Lee Harvey Oswald died, any chance of ever proving what happened on November 22, 1964, for certain, was lost. Cassie is absolutely correct on one thing. There is nothing on any piece of paper, anywhere, that will tell us the truth of that day. All we can do is prove that there was a conspiracy and there is definitely enough evidence to do that. Every piece of evidence we look at or listen to, adds one more piece to the puzzle. One day someone will be able to stand back, look at all the pieces, and see which ones go together. One day there will be a very clear picture… hopefully.

Clay F

No bombshells on the JFK assassination in the latest release of JFK files. A "nothingburger" on the assassination. Nothing to support the wild conspiracy theory of a second gunman.

Clay F
>>168714518

The intent of Oliver Stone was to make people believe his personal ideology. Common sense dictates that we question these wild conspiracy theories.

zynjams

Im just glad we are one step closer to the Rain Maker

Nathan Swapp
>>168701764

A picture is worth a thousand words. https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Hickey-ar-15_jfk.jpg#mw-jump-to-license

Mark Pitta
>>168707581

I was watching with the Director’s Cut so I had to find the sync point about 4 times. Worth it though.

Lamar Smith

Absolutely enjoy the drama of this movie, Dearest Cassie. Enjoy Kevin and the rest’s performance. Please don’t forget, though, that this is Oliver Stone’s take on these events. There are things that Stone gets absolutely right. If you put the four seats in the back of the Presidential limo that held the President, First Lady, Texas Governor John Connelly and his wife level with each other and directly facing each other, then absolutely the bullet that tore through Kennedy’s body, lodging in Connelly’s wrist would have to dance through the air, defying all known Physics. Absolutely 100%. The problem is the backwards facing seats occupied by the Governor and First Lady of Texas were both closer together and higher so as not to interfere with the vehicle’s drivetrain. The very dramatic court presentation of the bullet’s path becomes far less ‘magical.’ We do have records that on one recorded qualification shooting during his time in service, Lee Harvey Oswald did, essentially, fail as a marksman. What isn’t mentioned that those records also indicate Oswald shot expert more than once. The cadence of the three shots is replicable by anyone with even a minimum of firearms training: two relatively lesser aimed shots in close succession, followed by a third, much better aimed shot within 7 seconds. It really isn’t an example of superhuman shooting. In other instances Stone wholly invented facts about these events. Jim Garrison didn’t deliver the impassioned closing arguments depicted in the film. We know this because Jim Garrison was in neither the courtroom nor the City of New Orleans when closing arguments were heard. Do I know that Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone? Nope, no way to know that with 100% certainty. However, taking this film as any kind of proof that some over-arching conspiracy existed to assassinate the President is an incredibly dicey prospect. The one thing we do know for certain is that day in Dallas is the last time a US President traveled in an open-top car.

SeanATX

Love the movie. And a tricky reaction considering the dense and lengthy dialogue. But thanks Cassie, as always. Personally, I am not a believer in the conspiracies of this case but can understand why so many are. So I will just add the following...: A JFK conspiracy theorist dies and arrives in heaven, where God is there to receive him. “Welcome,” God said. “You are allowed to ask me one question, and I will answer honestly.” Without hesitating, the conspiracy theorist asks, “Who really shot Kennedy?” God replies, “Lee Harvey Oswald shot him from the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository. There were no accomplices. He acted alone.” The conspiracy theorist pauses, thinks for a moment and says, “Shit… this goes higher up than I thought.”

Larry Darrell (edited)

Comment edits

2025-03-24 05:49:24 November 24, 1963… The day Jack Ruby murdered Lee Harvey Oswald, before he could stand trial in a court of law. Oswald had always claimed his innocence. All evidence and information gathered, investigated and reported would forever be tainted, after this day. Nothing would ever be certain. All Trust was lost. All anyone can do now, is watch all the documentaries, read all the books, study all the reports, listen to all the eye witness testimonies, look at all the evidence… and then decide for yourself. Just remember… it can’t all be lies. It can’t all be made up. It’s not hard to figure out what is obviously fake and what is obviously true. PS: I posted video links of eyewitness testimonies earlier, of the people that were near the shooting and saw and heard shots come from the grassy knoll. Many of them were represented in the film JFK. One of them was Lee Bowers… https://youtu.be/K7YgdBHXYRE?si=1NM_Yg6NG5NDKO6e Cassie asked in the reaction video if he really died. The answer is yes. He did Die. Shortly after filming the testimony in this video. He was in a car crash on an empty road. I think it’s interesting to note, he had the most to say about the individuals that were near the fence on the grassy knoll, he saw a flash of light near those individuals and he noticed the 2nd and 3rd shots were really close together… “almost on top of each other.” PSS: I also posted links, earlier down below, of the 9 part documentary series, The Men Who Killed Kennedy. I say again, much of what you see in Oliver Stone’s film, JFK, can be found in this series. Most of what’s in the film, was based on the evidence and testimonies, known at the time of filmmaking. I also recommend Oliver Stone’s miniseries… JFK: Destiny Betrayed (2021). Stone revisited the investigation and catches you up on many new developments and digs deeper into points made in the (1991) film.
2025-03-24 05:44:09 November 24, 1963… The day Jack Ruby murdered Lee Harvey Oswald, before he could stand trial in a court of law. Oswald had always claimed his innocence. All evidence and information gathered, investigated and reported would forever be tainted, after this day. Nothing would ever be certain. All Trust was lost. All anyone can do now, is watch all the documentaries, read all the books, study all the reports, listen to all the eye witness testimonies, look at all the evidence… and then decide for yourself. Just remember… it can’t all be lies. It can’t all be made up. It’s not hard to figure out what is obviously fake, what is obviously true, and what can’t be proven, but seems very likely. I admit too, that it’s very likely… that Nothing will ever be proven. But, that doesn’t mean we should stop investigating. Let Justice be done though the Heavens fall. & “To sin by silence, when when we should protest, makes cowards out of men” - Ella Wheeler Wilcox — PS: I posted video links of eyewitness testimonies earlier, of the people that were near the shooting and saw and heard shots come from the grassy knoll. Many of them were represented in the film JFK. One of them was Lee Bowers… https://youtu.be/K7YgdBHXYRE?si=1NM_Yg6NG5NDKO6e Cassie asked in the reaction video if he really died. The answer is yes. He did Die. Shortly after filming the testimony in this video. He was in a car crash on an empty road. I think it’s interesting to note, he had the most to say about the individuals that were near the fence on the grassy knoll, he saw a flash of light near those individuals and he noticed the 2nd and 3rd shots were really close together… “almost on top of each other.” PSS: I also posted links, earlier down below, of the 9 part documentary series, The Men Who Killed Kennedy. I say again, much of what you see in Oliver Stone’s film, JFK, can be found in this series. Most of what’s in the film, was based on the evidence and testimonies, known at the time of filmmaking. I also recommend Oliver Stone’s miniseries… JFK: Destiny Betrayed (2021). Stone revisited the investigation and catches you up on many new developments and digs deeper into points made in the (1991) film.

November 24, 1963… The day Jack Ruby murdered Lee Harvey Oswald, before he could stand trial in a court of law. Oswald had always claimed his innocence. All evidence and information gathered, investigated and reported would forever be tainted, after this day. Nothing would ever be certain. All Trust was lost. All anyone can do now, is watch all the documentaries, read all the books, study all the reports, listen to all the eye witness testimonies, look at all the evidence… and then decide for yourself. Just remember… it can’t all be lies. It can’t all be made up. It’s not hard to figure out what is obviously fake, what is obviously true, and what can’t be proven, but seems very likely. I admit too, that it’s very likely… that Nothing will ever be proven. But, that doesn’t mean we should stop investigating. Let Justice be done though the Heavens fall. & “To sin by silence, when when we should protest, makes cowards out of men” - Ella Wheeler Wilcox — PS: I posted video links of eyewitness testimonies earlier, of the people that were near the shooting and saw and heard shots come from the grassy knoll. Many of them were represented in the film JFK. One of them was Lee Bowers… https://youtu.be/K7YgdBHXYRE?si=1NM_Yg6NG5NDKO6e Cassie asked in the reaction video if he really died. The answer is yes. He did Die. Shortly after filming the testimony in this video. He was in a car crash on an empty road. I think it’s interesting to note, he had the most to say about the individuals that were near the fence on the grassy knoll, he saw a flash of light near those individuals and he noticed the 2nd and 3rd shots were really close together… “almost on top of each other.” PSS: I also posted links, earlier down below, of the 9 part documentary series, The Men Who Killed Kennedy. I say again, much of what you see in Oliver Stone’s film, JFK, can be found in this series. Most of what’s in the film, was based on the evidence and testimonies, known at the time of filmmaking. I also recommend Oliver Stone’s miniseries… JFK: Destiny Betrayed (2021). Stone revisited the investigation and catches you up on many new developments and digs deeper into points made in the (1991) film.

Mark Pitta
>>168728859

“No one ever questioned the guy at the airport who upgraded Kennedy to a convertible.” -Comedian Ken Ober

Mark Pitta

I was against Cassie watching JFK because once you see the Zapruder film it will never leave you. “Back and to the left.” For those interested, Rob Reiner did a podcast very meticulous that tells the story with a CNN reporter and it’s fascinating. He actually gives you the names of the assassins by the end. No joke.

Larry Darrell
>>168728859

You know… I’d have to question him too. He gave too much information. If he had just said, Lee Harvey Oswald (period). I might have believed him. But he was hammering in those “facts” that the Warren Commission and media has been trying pass off as concrete proof. So nope. Too suspicious for me. :-)

Mark Pitta
>>168727262

There’s 63,000 pages. Scholars are going through it meticulously, too soon to make that claim

Clay F

"The dishonesty of the movie is breathtaking. By ignoring uncongenial information, elevating rumor to fact, mixing real and fake footage, Stone would have us believe that Lee Harvey Oswald was an innocent patsy and that the assassination was a coup d’etat involving the Mafia, Cuban exiles, the military-industrial complex, the intelligence agencies and Lyndon Johnson as an accessory after the fact.” The film distorts historical facts. Stone tampered with the historical record including misrepresenting events. The film presents a twisted misleading view of the events surrounding the Kennedy assassination, including the actions of key figures. Key figures portrayed in a way that is inconsistent w/historical evidence. https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/article/oliver-stones-paranoid-propaganda/ https://www.theguardian.com/film/2011/apr/28/jfk-oliver-stone-john-f-kennedy A comparison of scenes to accuracy and Stone's agenda. https://web.archive.org/web/20070509095227/http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/jfkmovie.htm Details 100 egregious errors in JFK (1991). https://www.jfk-online.com/jfk100menu.html

Larry Darrell
>>168727262

After they read all 63,000 pages and find nothing that says “the second shooter’s name is (blank)…” Then they have to go through all 63,000 pages AGAIN… but this time rub them all in lemon juice in order to reveal the hidden ink. ;-) No definitive “proof” will ever be found in the JFK files. But there will most likely be new leads and more evidence of a Cover-Up. That’s all anyone is looking for.

JPDotCom23

This is such a brilliant movie, and I'm glad you were finally able to see it. Jim Garrison's real life was affected by it, he and his wife actually separated. I don't know if anyone mentioned but the real Garrison was in this movie, he played Chief Justice Earl Warren. Perry Russo, mentioned in his final oratory, was the annoying guy in the bar at the beginning, he was celebrating Kennedy's death. Russo was part of a composite of characters that Kevin Bacon played. And the X character was added to this movie to give context, Garrison never actually met anyone in Washington, but Oliver Stone did introduce Garrison to L. Fletcher Prouty, after the movie came out, Prouty was the inspiration for the X character.

Clay F

2 examples of the 100 from https://www.jfk-online.com/jfk100menu.html Stone Lie: Rose Cherami depicted as trying to sound the alarm about the forthcoming assassination. Facts: In accounts given by Frugé and Weiss to the N.O. DA's Office in 1967, no indication that Cherami made any statements about the assassination prior to the assassination. The DA Jim Garrison's couldn't come up with a single first-hand witness who heard Rose Cherami speak of the assassination before it occurred. Stone Lie: Implies that David Ferrie (Joe Pesci) became a suspect in Garrison’s investigation because of a series of leads linking Ferrie to Oswald (“Oswald was seen with him several times last summer”) and the assassination. Facts: Nothing could be further from the truth. Completely untrue. Following the assassination, not a single person claimed to have seen Oswald and Ferrie together that summer in New Orleans. Rather, it was the drunken ravings of Jack S. Martin -- "a liar who hates Ferrie," as Jim Garrison once called him -- that were responsible for the official interest in David Ferrie as a suspect. It was Martin who began spreading rumors about Ferrie the day after the assassination, none of which were true and all of which Martin recanted when questioned by authorities. Suspicions about Ferrie were not the result of factual eyewitness reports; they originated in the personal vendetta of one man: Jack Martin.

Clay F
>>168730511

You are the one on the wrong side of history. What other wild conspiracy theories do you believe?

Mike the Ginger
>>168731444

The older I get, the more I can believe it was Oswald. The kid was a wacky leftist wannabe communist that wanted fame. Nevertheless, this is one of my favorite films.

Clay F
>>168730511

Surely you agree that Stone integrated actual real footage deceptively with manufactured images.

cfb0453 (Chris)
>>168730511

You always make the same argument! That all conspiracy theories are connected with conspiracy theorists. What's up with that? Is that the only argument you have?

Clay F

Stone integrated actual real footage deceptively with manufactured images. JFK (1991) is not an appeal to think, to consider a story from all sides. Oliver Stone with JFK (1991) was not to provoke people to think for themselves but instead was to make people think his way. He put his ideology ahead of the truth and knowingly made a movie with misleading facts and lies.

Philip Alan

Cassie, I'm just proud of you that you followed along that INFO dump of a movie! I'm glad to see that you enjoyed it like a lot of us. Great reaction!

Art Vandalaay
>>168726727

I occasionally hang out in the voice chat, usually while gaming. So far no one has joined but you never know. I guess time differences, work and family commitments etc, affect when people are likely to be free. I’m in the UK for example and responding to this at 7am Monday morning, just getting ready for work.

Philip Alan
>>168725935

Cassie did a FANTASTIC job finding those little breaks and pauses to talk and react. I was impressed.

Philip Alan
>>168711475

@Steve that's I can think about when watching JFK & his wife! Jealous of anyone getting their photos. They're both just so striking. I believe that photographer.

Clay F
>>168730511

You need to work on your reading comprehension with respect to what I have commented. I noticed you didn't answer the question of what other wild conspiracy theories do you believe. This is the Wikipedia "List of conspiracy theories" having a paragraph on the John F. Kennedy assassination. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_conspiracy_theories This is the Wikipedia main article "John F. Kennedy assassination conspiracy theories" that lists "Allegations of multiple gunmen." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_F._Kennedy_assassination_conspiracy_theories

Philip Alan
>>168707581

Interesting. I find it hard to play my discs along with her reactions, so I just watched from VUDU/FANDANGO and it worked perfectly.

Philip Alan
>>168701686

I was in Dealey Plaza not too long ago. Wow, what a moment for me. I love that they kept everything relatively the same. I stood at every corner of that plaza and took a shizload of photos. Heading back to Dallas in a few months.

Philip Alan
>>168698598

@Cassie I still love that you call Gary Oldman, Gary Oldham. Haha!!

Clay F
>>168730511

You answer a question with a question. Interesting how you dodge. I am merely curious if you are (1) a normal person who doesn't believe wild conspiracy theories but influenced by JFK conspiracy theories, or (2) you are one of those weird conspiracy theorist types who believe in multiple wild conspiracy theories.

Clay F

The movie depicts that New Orleans prosecutor Garrison (Costner) shows the film to a jury as definitive proof of a second gunman. He describes the motion of Kennedy's head ..."back, and to the left" ... as evidence that shots had been fired by someone other than Oswald. But that was a fabrication. Stone mixed historical footage with new footage he shot himself (creating confusion about what the Zapruder film actually showed) to support his embellished courtroom scenes. "What Physics Reveals About the JFK Assassination" A more recent study (of many studies) that support that "the 'grassy knoll' JFK assassination theory is bogus." The study by research scientist Nicholas Nalli. https://www.history.com/news/jfk-assassination-grassy-knoll-theory-debunked Paul Chambers – the scientist conspiracy theorist – criticized the study. But was projection. Paul Chambers is infamous for starting with the end in mind. Chambers' general JFK work "studied each point in isolation and then cherry-picked the details that fit his own thesis.”

Mike the Ginger

I wasn't born when Kennedy or Reagan were shot. I was a teenager on 9/11, and remember the surrealness and unbelievable feeling of shock. I had a glimpse of that similar feeling of doom when the President was shot last year. Those historical events really come randomly and you never forget where you were. I am glad Cassie has the maturity and the intellectual aptitude to give us a wonderful reaction to a movie like this. I should note, I was very impressed by her Thirteen Days reaction last year, as well.

Clay F
>>168727262

The conspiracy theorists will never be satisfied, no matter if the files after extensive review show no bombshell on the JFK assassination.

Bert Towle

Cassie's '2 documentaries' comment was quite relevant. In every trial the prosecution presents a tale and the defense presents another. Our Constitution recognized that, in such conflicts, innocence is assumed until guilt is recognized beyond that reasonable doubt. The reasonability test is what should protect the innocent, but what's reasonable depends on the tales presented by the opponents. Tales can be tainted or targeted at emotions, and find human beliefs that may feel reasonable though unable to be proven. Realizing that human vulnerability is part of the responsibility of a good juror.

Gray

Those of us in the UK already know who killed JFK from a TV show called Red Dwarf, when JFK himself travelled from an alternate mob ruled future reality and positioned himself on the grassy knoll to shoot himself and protect his legacy. I mean it's the only logical explanation. lol

Clay F
>>168703624

I am not saying all of them are lying. Doesn't matter. Also, what about the unedited versions (full transcripts) of the interviews? Plus, Mark Lane was definitely known for coaching witnesses and pushing them too say what he wanted them to say.

Clay F
>>168714518

Scene: Oswald, running down the stairs after the shooting, runs past Victoria Adams and Sandra Styles. Accuracy: Both women actually descended the stairs several minutes after Oswald. Stone's Agenda: Argue that Oswald would have been seen had he retreated from the Sniper's Nest to the second floor lunchroom.

🚩

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uKxqxKHAabA It just gives me a rather satisfying feeling :P

Björn Karlsson

..... but who shot the swedish prime minister on my 18th birthday????? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olof_Palme 🤔🤔🤔🤔

Clay F (edited)

Comment edits

2025-03-24 09:44:35 Examples from https://web.archive.org/web/20070509095227/http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/jfkmovie.htm Scene: Parkland doctors testify at trial Accuracy: Never happened Stone’s Agenda: Allows Stone to push conspiracy view of medical evidence Scene: Oswald, running down stairs after the shooting, runs past Victoria Adams and Sandra Styles. Accuracy: Both women descended stairs several minutes after Oswald. Stone's Agenda: Argue that Oswald would have been seen had he retreated from the Sniper's Nest to the second floor lunchroom. Scene: Ferrie arrested at CIA training camp for Cuban refugees. Accuracy: Never happened. Stone’s Agenda: Exaggerate Ferrie's ties with anti-Castro Cubans. Scene: David Ferrie's "confession" in Fountainbleu Hotel Accuracy: Never happened. Stone’s Agenda: Provide "confession" from a plotter Scene: Bill Newman says shots came from "fence up on the Knoll" Accuracy: Bill/Gail Newman believed shots came from directly behind them — the "mall" Stone’s Agenda: Push idea of Grassy Knoll shooter Scene: Lou Ivon claims "Zapruder film established three shots in 5.6 seconds" Accuracy: Film is perfectly consistent w/3 shots in 8-9 seconds Stone’s Agenda: Portray Oswald's shooting "feat" as impossible Scene: Laying of new floor on 6th floor of Depository allowed "unknown workmen in the building" Accuracy: Flooring was done by Depository employees, and no "unknown workmen" were seen by Depository employees Stone’s Agenda: Evade serious problem w/Stone's scenario, the issue of who did fire the shots if Oswald didn't Scene: Garrison describes 3 cartridges lying "neatly side by side in Sniper's Nest" Accuracy: Cartridges were not neatly side by side, but scattered Stone’s Agenda: Imply plot to frame Oswald with planted evidence
2025-03-24 09:20:14 Scene: Parkland doctors testify at trial. Accuracy: Never happened. Stone’s Agenda: Allows Stone to push conspiracy view of medical evidence. Scene: Oswald, running down stairs after the shooting, runs past Victoria Adams and Sandra Styles. Accuracy: Both women descended stairs several minutes after Oswald. Stone's Agenda: Argue that Oswald would have been seen had he retreated from the Sniper's Nest to the second floor lunchroom. Scene: Ferrie arrested at CIA training camp for Cuban refugees. Accuracy: Never happened. Stone’s Agenda: Exaggerate Ferrie's ties with anti-Castro Cubans. Scene: David Ferrie's "confession" in Fountainbleu Hotel. Accuracy: Never happened. Stone’s Agenda: Provide "confession" from a plotter. Scene: Bill Newman says shots came from "fence up on the Knoll". Accuracy: Bill/Gail Newman believed shots came from directly behind them — the "mall". Stone’s Agenda: Push idea of Grassy Knoll shooter. Scene: Lou Ivon claims "Zapruder film established three shots in 5.6 seconds" Accuracy: Film is perfectly consistent w/3 shots in 8 to 9 seconds. Stone’s Agenda: Portray Oswald's shooting "feat" as impossible. Scene: Laying of new floor on 6th floor of Depository allowed "unknown workmen in the building". Accuracy: Flooring was done by Depository employees, and no "unknown workmen" were seen by Depository employees. Stone’s Agenda: Evade serious problem w/Stone's scenario, the issue of who did fire the shots if Oswald didn't. Scene: Garrison describes 3 cartridges lying "neatly side by side in Sniper's Nest" Accuracy: Cartridges were not neatly side by side, but scattered. Stone’s Agenda: Imply plot to frame Oswald with planted evidence. These are examples from https://web.archive.org/web/20070509095227/http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/jfkmovie.htm

Scene: Parkland doctors testify at trial. Accuracy: Never happened. Stone’s Agenda: Allows Stone to push conspiracy view of medical evidence. Scene: Oswald, running down stairs after the shooting, runs past Victoria Adams and Sandra Styles. Accuracy: Both women descended stairs several minutes after Oswald. Stone's Agenda: Argue that Oswald would have been seen had he retreated from the Sniper's Nest to the second floor lunchroom. Scene: Ferrie arrested at CIA training camp for Cuban refugees. Accuracy: Never happened. Stone’s Agenda: Exaggerate Ferrie's ties with anti-Castro Cubans. Scene: David Ferrie's "confession" in Fountainbleu Hotel. Accuracy: Never happened. Stone’s Agenda: Provide "confession" from a plotter. Scene: Bill Newman says shots came from "fence up on the Knoll". Accuracy: Bill/Gail Newman believed shots came from directly behind them — the "mall". Stone’s Agenda: Push idea of Grassy Knoll shooter. Scene: Lou Ivon claims "Zapruder film established three shots in 5.6 seconds" Accuracy: Film is perfectly consistent w/3 shots in 8 to 9 seconds. Stone’s Agenda: Portray Oswald's shooting "feat" as impossible. Scene: Laying of new floor on 6th floor of Depository allowed "unknown workmen in the building". Accuracy: Flooring was done by Depository employees, and no "unknown workmen" were seen by Depository employees. Stone’s Agenda: Evade serious problem w/Stone's scenario, the issue of who did fire the shots if Oswald didn't. Scene: Garrison describes 3 cartridges lying "neatly side by side in Sniper's Nest" Accuracy: Cartridges were not neatly side by side, but scattered. Stone’s Agenda: Imply plot to frame Oswald with planted evidence. These are examples from https://web.archive.org/web/20070509095227/http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/jfkmovie.htm

Clay F (edited)

Comment edits

2025-03-24 09:44:35 Scene: Garrison says Domingo Benevides "refused to identify" Oswald as shooter Accuracy: Benevides first said he didn't see the shooter well enough for an identification, but then later identified Oswald Stone’s Agenda: Imply that Benevides believes the shooter to be someone besides Oswald Scene: Garrison claims Oswald was "interrogated for 12 hours and nobody made a record of it.” Accuracy: Reports from each of Oswald's interrogators can be found in the Warren Commission Report Stone’s Agenda: Imply that law enforcement officers were engaged in a plot Scene: Garrison claims that Oswald's statements while in custody would be inadmissible in court Accuracy: They would in fact have been admissible Stone’s Agenda: Portray Oswald a victim who didn't receive due process Scene: In melee at Texas Theatre, Oswald tries to sock Officer McDonald. Accuracy: Oswald drew his gun and tried to shoot McDonald Stone’s Agenda: Conceal Oswald's violent behavior Scene: Lafayette Square was a "strange place for a communist to spend his spare time" Accuracy: Lafayette Square was a block from Oswald's place of work Stone’s Agenda: Imply intelligence connections for Oswald Scene: Marina "has no problems" getting out of U.S.S.R. Accuracy: Marina and Lee endured an extensive bureaucratic hassle to get Marina out of the country Stone’s Agenda: Imply some sinister intelligence connections Scene: "Mr. X" claims entire DC phone system out for hour following assassination Accuracy: System was overloaded, but most calls went through Stone’s Agenda: Imply high-level plot Scene: Death of Lee Bowers ("strange shock") Accuracy: No evidence of foul play; occurred 2 years after Warren Commission testimony Stone’s Agenda: Imply "Cleanup Squad" of plotters killing witnesses Scene: Goons murder David Ferrie by forcing pills down his throat Accuracy: Ferrie died of Berry Aneurysm, with no evidence of violence Stone’s Agenda: Imply that Ferrie was "silenced."
2025-03-24 09:23:56 Scene: Garrison says D. Benevides "refused to identify" Oswald as shooter. Accuracy: Benevides first said he didn't see the shooter well enough for an identification, but then later identified Oswald. Stone’s Agenda: Imply that Benevides believes the shooter to be someone besides Oswald. Scene: Garrison claims Oswald was "interrogated for 12 hours and nobody made a record of it.” Accuracy: Reports from each of Oswald's interrogators can be found in the Warren Commission Report. Stone’s Agenda: Imply that law enforcement officers were engaged in a plot. Scene: Garrison claims that Oswald's statements while in custody would be inadmissible in court. Accuracy: They would in fact have been admissible. Stone’s Agenda: Portray Oswald a victim who didn't receive due process. Scene: In melee at Texas Theatre, Oswald tries to sock Officer McDonald. Accuracy: Oswald drew his gun and tried to shoot McDonald. Stone’s Agenda: Conceal Oswald's violent behavior. Scene: Lafayette Square "strange place for a communist to spend his spare time" Accuracy: Lafayette Square was a block from Oswald's place of work. Stone’s Agenda: Imply intelligence connections for Oswald. Scene: Marina "has no problems" getting out of U.S.S.R. Accuracy: Marina and Lee endured an extensive bureaucratic hassle to get Marina out of the country. Stone’s Agenda: Imply some sinister intelligence connections. Scene: "Mr. X" claims entire DC phone system out for hour after assassination. Accuracy: System was overloaded, but most calls went through. Stone’s Agenda: Imply high-level plot. Scene: Death of Lee Bowers ("strange shock"). Accuracy: No evidence foul play; occurred 2 years after Warren Comm testimony. Stone’s Agenda: Imply "Cleanup Squad" of plotters killing witnesses. Scene: Goons murder David Ferrie by forcing pills down his throat. Accuracy: Ferrie died of Berry Aneurysm, with no evidence of violence. Stone’s Agenda: Imply that Ferrie was "silenced."

Scene: Garrison says D. Benevides "refused to identify" Oswald as shooter. Accuracy: Benevides first said he didn't see the shooter well enough for an identification, but then later identified Oswald. Stone’s Agenda: Imply that Benevides believes the shooter to be someone besides Oswald. Scene: Garrison claims Oswald was "interrogated for 12 hours and nobody made a record of it.” Accuracy: Reports from each of Oswald's interrogators can be found in the Warren Commission Report. Stone’s Agenda: Imply that law enforcement officers were engaged in a plot. Scene: Garrison claims that Oswald's statements while in custody would be inadmissible in court. Accuracy: They would in fact have been admissible. Stone’s Agenda: Portray Oswald a victim who didn't receive due process. Scene: In melee at Texas Theatre, Oswald tries to sock Officer McDonald. Accuracy: Oswald drew his gun and tried to shoot McDonald. Stone’s Agenda: Conceal Oswald's violent behavior. Scene: Lafayette Square "strange place for a communist to spend his spare time" Accuracy: Lafayette Square was a block from Oswald's place of work. Stone’s Agenda: Imply intelligence connections for Oswald. Scene: Marina "has no problems" getting out of U.S.S.R. Accuracy: Marina and Lee endured an extensive bureaucratic hassle to get Marina out of the country. Stone’s Agenda: Imply some sinister intelligence connections. Scene: "Mr. X" claims entire DC phone system out for hour after assassination. Accuracy: System was overloaded, but most calls went through. Stone’s Agenda: Imply high-level plot. Scene: Death of Lee Bowers ("strange shock"). Accuracy: No evidence foul play; occurred 2 years after Warren Comm testimony. Stone’s Agenda: Imply "Cleanup Squad" of plotters killing witnesses. Scene: Goons murder David Ferrie by forcing pills down his throat. Accuracy: Ferrie died of Berry Aneurysm, with no evidence of violence. Stone’s Agenda: Imply that Ferrie was "silenced."

Chris Thom
>>168728859

Isn't it God that sets all conspiracies into motion when you think about it?

Chris Thom
>>168720425

Ugh I really need to get with the times. I don't know what Reels or Discord is.

Chris Thom
>>168712360

Crazy how many roles he does where you barely recognize him. Plus he's definitely not afraid of a good death scene. lol

Andrew Taylor

Stone did a documentary follow up a couple of years ago for the true sickos

Chris Thom
>>168702444

SAME. Definitely made me curious about what other cinematic talent was out there. Showed me how seriously some in the industry took filmmaking.

Chris Thom
>>168698511

I've been surprised how much passion there is in the comments here for Collateral. I thought it had mostly been forgotten. Makes me want to see it again. I think I have a burned copy somewhere.

Chris Thom
>>168700512

I do wonder. I could see how WW2 and the Cold War could've seriously warped their thinking.

Chris Thom
>>168701686

Makes me wonder what a city or state or federal government should do in a location like that. Memorialize it? Raze it? Collectively ignore it as much as possible? Similar thoughts about the mass shooting site in Vegas.

Wirenfeldt Jr

typo in the file name..

Clay F
>>168737262

The canned reply from conspiracy theorists when faced with the truth.

Gábor Árki

I have mixed feelings about this movie. On one hand, it is incredibly well-crafted as a film. Very well written, edited, directed, and acted. It pulls you in completely, leading you deeper and deeper into its narrative, making everything it shows you seem utterly convincing. In that sense, it is worth watching because it is an amazing example and experience how effortlessly one can be drawn into a web of conspiracy theories when having only a superficial knowledge about the events. On the other hand, it is a very dishonest film, because it never makes it clear that what you are seeing is largely a work of fiction, telling you half-truths, cherry-picking what fits into its narrative, omitting contradictory evidence, and even fabricating elements to enforce its narrative. Without taking the time to research afterward, most viewers will accept what the film presents at face value because it gives the illusion of truth. When in reality, it is highly speculative and just an amalgamation of various conspiracy theories rather than a retelling of the factual events. So, at the end, instead of serving as a cautionary tale about how easily one can be misled by conspiracy theories, the film ultimately becomes one itself. When I first saw it in the early 2000s, without much knowledge of the events beyond the fact of the assassination, it fully convinced me that it was a massive government conspiracy framing Oswald as a patsy. But the more I read and watched about the topic over the years, the less convinced I became. Today, being far from having expert knowledge on the topic, I do find the lone gunman theory the most plausible, because this is the only one supported by hard evidence. Although there is circumstantial evidence that there may have been multiple shooters present, there is no hard evidence available to support this. Most of it is based on eye witness testimonies, which are the least reliable sources. I think the main reason the event is surrounded by so many conspiracy theories is twofold: 1. People struggle to accept that a lone gunman could change history so profoundly 2. The government’s secrecy, the closed-door investigation and classified documents, and lack of transparency in general has fueled distrust Looking forward to though what Cassie will make of it in her reaction. PS: Cassie, an somewhat adjacent miniseries recommendation if you haven't seen it yet. 11.22.63 (2016) with James Franco, based on a Stephen King novel.

Björn Karlsson
>>168735723

Noo.... It's a mystery. Lots of ideas, books etc. Most likely it was Stig Engström, but he died in 2000 🤔🤔🤔

AdrianF

Dunno which version this is, but it's definitely not the theatrical and doesn't match the recent 4K release director's cut either. Does anyone know specifically which she's watching, i.e. where.

Gábor Árki
>>168742203

Based on the length, the theatrical. But afaik the Blu-ray contains the movie running at 23.976 fps, while the UHD disc has it running at 24.000 fps causing a slight discrepancy between the two. Edit: seems the 4K release contains the theatrical only on BD, so in this case I don't know. But based on the length, it can only be the theatrical cut. Edit #2: looking around a bit more, seems like the TC has both a 23.976 and a 24.000 rip circulating in the "Caribbean" bays, so this is most likely the cause of the discrepancy. But I don't know yet which version was reacted to.

AdrianF
>>168742203

Edit: the Region A BD seems to match, but unless I'm losing it, it broke sync badly around the scene with the interview of Kevin Bacon and never recovered when I first tried it earlier. Thanks for the effort. The discrepancy is too big for it to be the FPS. The thing is, at the start Cassie says it's 3 & 1/2 hours long, which would point to the DC, but the reaction is only 3 & 1/4, so I assumed without credits she was watching DC. The only TC I have is the one that came with the 4K from Shout Select last year. iTunes only has DC. I've got it lined back up again, so I will give it a try with the BD again. Thanks!

Larry Darrell
>>168701686

A big white “X” can usually be found painted on Elm Street in the location Kennedy was shot. They have also turned the 6th floor of the School Book Depository into a museum.

Henry Graham

I really feel that the pedantic policing of facts by some commenters here is missing the point of a film like JFK. It is a film about Jim Garrison's personal search for truth - a search that sees him stubbornly ignoring more temperate voices - and the film ends in his failure to make his allegations stick, yet people here seem to think that we're supposed to take all of this as gospel? Beyond the facts of the case, JFK is an attack on institutional secrecy and overreach and the influence of the military industrial complex, which is still a relevant question today, with US military spending dwarfing every other country by a ridiculous degree. Oliver Stone did not make a documentary and never claimed he was doing so. Dramatists have every right to bend facts or even lie outright if it is in pursuit of a larger truth, and personally I think that is a justifiable defence of JFK, whereas getting bogged down in the minutiae of facts is failing to see the wood for the trees. Anyway, in this spirit, I wanted to share an excerpt from the great Werner Herzog's memoir Every Man for Himself and God Against All. ...... From early on in my work, I was confronted by facts. You have to take them seriously because they have a normative force, but making purely factual films has never interested me. Truth does not necessarily have to agree with facts. Otherwise, the Manhattan phone book would be The Book of Books. Four million entries, all factually correct, all subject to confirmation. But that doesn’t tell us anything about one of the dozens of James Millers in there. His number and address are indeed correct. But why does he cry into his pillow every night? It takes poetry; it takes the poetic imagination to make visible a deeper layer of truth. I coined the phrase “ecstatic truth.” To explain that fully would take another book, so I’ll just sketch out a few lines of it here. It’s on this question that I have sought public conflict with the proponents of the so-called cinema verité who claim for themselves the truth of the whole genre of documentary films. As the auteur of a film, you are not allowed to exist, or not more than a fly on the wall anyway. That creed would make the CCTV cameras in banks the ultimate form of filmmaking. But I don’t want to be a fly; I’d rather be a hornet. Cinema verité was an idea from the 1960s; its representatives nowadays I call the “bookkeepers of the truth.” That got me furious attacks. My answer was “Happy New Year, losers.”

Mojo One Thousand

Yeah Cassie, everyone is in this. It is basically the ground zero for the 6 degrees of Kevin Bacon game, e.g. the cast of "Cool Runnings" are only one movie away from Kevin Bacon. I was surprised you had to look up to figure out Donald Sutherland an Gary Oldman - but to be fair the latter is super young in this. I liked hearing perhaps the most cheerful sounding "Hello, Newman" I have ever heard... and Wayne Knight's character's name was "Numa", but it was funny you thought they were calling him "Newman". The showgirl you thought looked familiar is Lolita Davidovich, you just saw her as "Sam's" (Gaby Hoffman/Demi Moore) swinging mum in "Now and then"... and I get to shoehorn in "Mystery, Alaska" again as a movie she is also in. It's well made, and people with think what they want to think about the substance.

Omar

Enjoyed the watch along. Nothing more to say other than a couple of things I always see asked about the film. The first showing in the Courtroom scene of the Zapruder film was absolutely the actual real footage. After that, It was a mix of produced footage mixed in with Zapruder footage. The autopsy scenes were a mix of produced footage and some actual photos of the autopsy. And while a lot of the characters did not always look like their real life counterparts, John Candy actually looked a lot like the actual Dean Andrews, and gosh darn it if he didn’t steal every scene with that Cajun performance, holds up even today 😂😂

My_Cousin_Mose
>>168727262

Well Clay when you spend 60 years hiding the details people start to suspect you are lying. You are right that there is practically nothing the government can do to convince me of their innocence. There have been too many lies in the last 10 years to ever trust them again.

Steve Holton
>>168711475

Everyone should check out the brilliant photography of gifted artist and fellow PIB member @Philip Alan

Darren Harrison

Such a controversial movie. I have no trouble believing there were multiple shooters, but I don’t think we will ever know for sure. It was hoped that the recent release of CIA documents would shed some light, but aside from the fact Oswald and his killer Jack Ruby were known to be associates there was not much there. A Gallup poll conducted on the 60th anniversary of the assassination found that two-thirds of Americans believe there was a conspiracy. Regardless, it is a well made, well acted movie that is enjoyable on a purely entertainment level

Chris Thom
>>168750502

I always thought his character had to be fictional or some weird amalgamation of real people. Just larger than life. That role must've been so fun for Candy.

Odd Thomas

Arguably Oliver Stone's best film, but I also love NBK (Cassie wouldn't though, lol)

Bill Maurer
>>168737262

"Scene: Marina "has no problems" getting out of U.S.S.R. Accuracy: Marina and Lee endured an extensive bureaucratic hassle to get Marina out of the country. Stone’s Agenda: Imply some sinister intelligence connections." Where do you get the "extensive bureaucratic hassle to get Marina out of ..." ??? From what I gather they met in 1961 and left the USSR in 1962. Why was he not prosecuted for defecting to the USSR ?

Chris Thom
>>168767538

Wild movies, both of them. I think Nixon might be my personal favorite.

Gábor Árki
>>168741892

Haha, okay, should have watched at least the intro before commenting and recommending 11.22.63. :D

Kevin Charley
>>168737262

Canned reply from someone obsessed with something and won't shut the fuck up about it. Go pretend your family loves you.

Mark Pitta

I was friends with trailblazing comedian, Mort Sahl who lived to the ripe age of 94. Mort was friends with Jim Garrison and helped him depose witnesses for this case. It hurt his career and got him black-balled from The Tonight Show Starring Johnny Carson when he encouraged Johnny to have Garrison on. He did and when Johnny asked Garrison “Who shot JFK?” Garrison said, “why don’t you ask your friend LBJ?” Then Johnny said, “‘we’ll be right back” and Garrison wasn’t.

Mark Pitta

Here’s the link to an article about Rob Reiner’s podcast where he names the shooters! https://www.woodtv.com/news/nexstar-media-wire/in-new-podcast-rob-reiner-says-he-has-proof-4-men-involved-in-jfk-killing/

Odd Thomas

Jackie with Natalie Portman is a great movie to watch after this, showing Jackie Kennedy in the days after the assassination.

Brett Richey

Someone here needs to go outside and touch a grassy knoll. Holy motorcade!

Jeff

Just to dispel some of the Stone-attackers here, in an early interview shortly before the movie was released, Stone said that this movie was a compilation of ALL the conspiracies rolled into one, and not his specific view of what happened, even though, yes, he believes there was a conspiracy. With that in mind, I think it's a brilliant movie! (He also said the same thing after the release but neither conspiracy theorists nor conspiracy nay-sayers seemed to care, so he stopped.) Also, even if everything movie-Garrison said in court was absolutely true and proven, nothing he said proved that Clay Shaw was involved, so legally speaking, yeah, ugh, within the context of the movie, it was right that the jury found Shaw not-guilty.

Clay F
>>168737262

Bill, see this from the National Archives. https://www.archives.gov/research/jfk/warren-commission-report/appendix-15.html

Clay F

JFK: Clay Shaw’s alias was “Clay Bertrand”? Reality: Contrary to JFK, the officer claiming this was contradicted by other witnesses and declared as non-credible by a judge. Also, Garrison and his teamed combed the French Quarter of New Orleans and failed to find any evidence of “Bertrand” ever existing as Shaw. JFK: Clay Shaw was a Texas businessman? Reality: He was a man of Louisiana all his life. JFK: Clay Shaw the Grassy Knoll shooter only acquitted on a technicality? Reality: The jury at Clay Shaw’s trial thought Garrison’s case against him was so full of shit they acquitted him in record time. No evidence that he and David Ferrie knew each other, belonged to black ops, planned a presidential assassination, or even pranced around with Kevin Bacon dressed as Mozart. Clay Shaw was just this respected New Orleans businessman, decorated war hero, philanthropist, and friend of Tennessee Williams. Plus, there was no Grassy Knoll shooter. JFK: Clay Shaw got off on a technicality that he didn’t have adequate legal representation while being booked? Reality: Shaw was a wealthy businessman so he could afford the best legal representation around. Still, his trial should never have happened since he was a completely innocent man.

Larry Darrell
>>168790277

As far as the movie goes, I feel like Garrison knew he didn’t have a case. All he had was a few witnesses that said they knew Shaw as Bertrand. All the time he presented evidence, he never tried to connect Shaw to the conspiracy, because there was no connection. The name Bertrand in the Warren Commission was the only connection. Without the alias name being added as evidence, Dean Andrews perjuring himself and Clay Shaw obviously lying on the stand. There was no case. But Garrison still has something he could accomplish. He exposed the conspiracy on a grand stage and now everyone was aware of it. Like the Juror being interviewed in the last seen, said, “We believe there was a conspiracy, but whether Clay Shaw was a part of it is another kettle of fish.” It was still a win.

Above Average Dave
>>168737137

ASK NOT WHAT CLAY CAN DO FOR YOU... 😁 I know you're passionate on this, Clay, and it's always an interesting conversation. But Gavrilo Princip it is decidedly not. Too many holes right down to bending the laws of physics to fit a report's outcome. And given what we've seen and heard about over the last 10 years, I am no longer of any belief that the government tells us the truth on large events going all the way back to the U.S.S. Maine in Havana harbor to present day, if not well before that.

Jeff
>>168790277

Okay. I never said it wasn't. Legally speaking though -- and I openly admit that I never read the actual transcripts -- the case would've been thrown out the moment it was clear that Garrison couldn't connect Bertand to Clay. Clay's lawyer would've asked for a dismissal, and any proper judge would've granted it. Also, Kostner's whole speech at the end (which was great in terms of writing, acting, and directing) would've been inadmissible because it's argument not evidence. Unless it was his closing argument, but in that case, the Zapruder film would've been shown long before and explained by an expert witness, not the attorney, because it's argument, which lawyers can't make until their closing. That said, most courthouse movies aren't realistic either . . . and I loved this one, despite its inaccuracies. Maybe even because of them!

Larry Darrell
>>168765966

Yeah, I think all anyone is looking for in the JFK files is new leads and more evidence of a Cover-Up. Agree we will never no anything for sure. Unless the Babushka Lady’s video ever surfaces, but that’s pretty much a pipe dream.

Larry Darrell
>>168750502

John Candy was a very underrated actor. He could do it all. When he worked with Maureen O’Hara in Only the Lonely (1991), she remarked that he reminded her of Charles Laughton. Now that’s a heluva comment right there.

Clay F

DA Garrison = crackpot Kennedy assassination conspiracy theorist. Yet, Oliver Stone in the epic craptatrophic disasterpiece JFK (1991) treats practically everything Garrison says in this movie as true. Everything that Garrison formulates is treated as fact in the film, when his investigation on the Kennedy assassination was a flimsy case conducted on dubious methods. Yet, despite the historical bullshit in JFK, many people tend to believe Oliver Stone’s retelling of such events compelling them to dismiss actual facts as fiction. JFK: Garrison’s theory on Kennedy assassination was backed by evidence. Reality: Contrary to JFK, according to investigator Pershing Gervais, “Garrison inverted the criminal investigatory process. You should begin by assembling the facts and from the facts you may deduce a theory of the crime ... Garrison did the opposite. He started with a theory and then assembled some facts to support it. Those facts that fit the theory, he accepted. Those that did not, he either ignored or rejected as CIA misinformation.” A lone wolf model of integrity, Garrison was not. Oswald was completely innocent of killing John F. Kennedy and was arrested as only a victim of circumstance? = part of Stone’s ridiculous premise in JFK. JFK: If Lee Harvey Oswald was guilty, then he would’ve had to make a headshot at the range of 88 yards through heavy foliage? Reality: Contrary to JFK, the path between the Sniper’s Nest and JFK’s limo was clear so Oswald would’ve had no trouble shooting Kennedy from 88 yards. JFK: Lee Harvey Oswald didn’t order a rifle through the mail -- was made by others to frame him? Reality: Sorry, Jim Garrison in JFK, but the rifle in the Kennedy assassination was mailed to a guy named A. Hidell = Oswald’s alias and he was carrying an A. Hidell ID in his wallet during his arrest. So yes, Oswald did order a rifle through the mail. JFK: Dozens of cops descended on Texas Theater to arrest Lee Harvey Oswald for entering without paying admission? Reality: For God’s sake, Oliver Stone, if Oswald’s only crime was entering a theater without paying for a ticket, he would’ve just been kicked out of the establishment by the theater staff with no intervention of police whatsoever. The reason why Oswald had a dozen cops descend on him b/c he was suspected of murdering a police officer. Much more damning than not paying for admission. JFK: There’s no motive of why Lee Harvey Oswald wanted to kill John F. Kennedy. Reality: Contrary to JFK, Oswald wasn’t the naïve innocent as seen in the film. He was a Marxist with a history of violent behavior and a confirmed criminal. An acquaintance he had a discussion with in 1963 named Volkmar Schmidt said he “was extremely critical of President Kennedy, and he was just obsessed with what America did to support this invasion at the Bay of Pigs, obsessed with his anger towards Kennedy.” Schmidt considered Oswald “a deeply troubled man” who was “totally obsessed with his own political agenda,” and who “would have found anybody of importance to assassinate ... to leave a mark in the history books, no matter what.”

Larry Darrell
>>168750020

Ever seen Criminal Law (1988) starring Gary Oldman and Kevin Bacon? I’ve always found the roles they play in the film interesting considering the roles they normally play. Criminal Law was also the first of 3 films Gary Oldman and Kevin Bacon would star in together. The last being, Murder in the First (1995), also starring Christian Slater. All 3 are Legal Thrillers.

Mike Lemon
>>168792031

Only nine top level comments for this reaction, you need to get one more for a nice round number. Or can you step up your hate game a bit more and break 50 top level comments over this, the poll, the announcement, and the YouTube edit threads?

Larry Darrell
>>168742203

I watched the Theatrical Cut last night and it was the correct one. My Blu-ray was a a different frame rate than Cassie’s and about every 15 - 20 minutes I had to quickly pause and un-pause. Only a minor inconvenience for myself. But the Theatrical Cut, 3 hr. 8 min. Is the one she watched.

Clay F
>>168792031

I added one more, so that makes 10 according to you. I am stopping at that. This movie a low point on the channel, but glad it behind us never to rear it's ugly head again.

Mike Lemon
>>168796425

That's 10 top level comments for this post, 17 total top level JFK comments. Eight more for 25.

Clay F
>>168796425

So 10 for the JFK (1991) reaction? As I said below, I am done. I did enough to satisfy my civic duty.

Bill Maurer
>>168796425

"JFK: Lee Harvey Oswald didn’t order a rifle through the mail -- was made by others to frame him? Reality: Sorry, Jim Garrison in JFK, but the rifle in the Kennedy assassination was mailed to a guy named A. Hidell = Oswald’s alias and he was carrying an A. Hidell ID in his wallet during his arrest. So yes, Oswald did order a rifle through the mail." Why "order" a rifle through mail to A. Hidell or whoever when you can go to a store or pawn shop and give another name and buy a rifle or buy a rifle from someone selling it through a newspaper ??? No paper trace or links back to Oswald

Clay F
>>168792031

I forgot about that. So we will be contaminated JFK (1991) one more time. I don’t watch the YT edits, but I may make a comment or two.

Bill Maurer
>>168796425

"JFK: Dozens of cops descended on Texas Theater to arrest Lee Harvey Oswald for entering without paying admission? Reality: For God’s sake, Oliver Stone, if Oswald’s only crime was entering a theater without paying for a ticket, he would’ve just been kicked out of the establishment by the theater staff with no intervention of police whatsoever. The reason why Oswald had a dozen cops descend on him b/c he was suspected of murdering a police officer. Much more damning than not paying for admission." You are missing the point. By entering a movie theater WITHOUT paying for a ticket even though he supposedly HAD the money draws attention to himself. Not something someone who supposedly shot a Dallas cop AND the President of the US would want at that time

Bill Maurer
>>168796425

"JFK: There’s no motive of why Lee Harvey Oswald wanted to kill John F. Kennedy. Reality: Contrary to JFK, Oswald wasn’t the naïve innocent as seen in the film. He was a Marxist with a history of violent behavior and a confirmed criminal. An acquaintance he had a discussion with in 1963 named Volkmar Schmidt said he “was extremely critical of President Kennedy, and he was just obsessed with what America did to support this invasion at the Bay of Pigs, obsessed with his anger towards Kennedy.” Schmidt considered Oswald “a deeply troubled man” who was “totally obsessed with his own political agenda,” and who “would have found anybody of importance to assassinate ... to leave a mark in the history books, no matter what.” John Wilkes Booth after murdering Lincoln ( a President Booth hated): SIC SEMPER TYRANNIS !! Lee Harvey Oswald after shooting JFK: I am just a patsy. That last line kind of blows away the whole ".. “would have found anybody of importance to assassinate ... to leave a mark in the history books, no matter what.”

Larry Darrell
>>168790277

I wasn’t arguing with you by the way, I actually agreed. I was just adding a little extra about what I felt the film was trying to convey. As far as being an accurate courtroom film, I can’t say. Always assumed it wasn’t completely accurate. Clay Shaw is who he was trying to prosecute, and yet I don’t believe he mentioned Clay at all while admitting evidence and calling witnesses, until the very end, after he exposed the conspiratorial part of his case. He pretty much ended with, oh yeah, and Clay Shaw is a part of it. Convict him, to start the ball rolling. In any other courtroom film, the objection from the defense, “What does any of this have to do with Clay Shaw?” would have come up many times early on, very likely Garrison would have been found in contempt at some point. As far as Legal Thrillers go, I’ve never ranked this one very high. Now as Investigative Thrillers, it’s very near, if not at the Top. When Clay Shaw was found Not-Guilty, it didn’t feel like a bummer to me. It seemed like a foregone conclusion that Garrison almost definitely expected. He surely hoped he got a guilty verdict, but he wasn’t surprised by the not-guilty. But he made One Hell of a Case for the conspiracy, and he convinced a bunch more people. I think he was ultimately happy with that result.

Chris Thom
>>168789689

That director has some really interesting takes on famous women. The movies are downright bizarre at times. The Princess Diana one was pretty strange. Very artsy.

Chris Thom
>>168767538

Lol. Parts of that one did legit pack a punch. The part where Drew gets egged on prom night is like the Schindler's List of high school movies.

Thoko
>>168792031

Being abused by Clay in the comments is the real low point of this channel

Bill Maurer
>>168737137

"Scene: Oswald, running down stairs after the shooting, runs past Victoria Adams and Sandra Styles. Accuracy: Both women descended stairs several minutes after Oswald. Stone's Agenda: Argue that Oswald would have been seen had he retreated from the Sniper's Nest to the second floor lunchroom." Per the chat, see below, Oswald says he was never on the 6th floor at the time of the shooting. Fritz: What part of the building were you in at the time the President was shot?
 Oswald: I was having lunch about that time on the first floor. We broke for lunch about noon, and I came down and ate. Fritz: Where were you when the officer stopped you? Oswald: I was on the second floor drinking a Coke when an officer came in. There’s a soda machine in the lunchroom there. I went up to get a Coke. Fritz: Then what did you do?
Oswald: I left. https://www.realtime1960s.com/post/oswald-interrogation-transcript

Clay F
>>168796425

Oswald ordered the rifle used to assassinate President Kennedy through the mail from Klein's Sporting Goods in Chicago, likely because it was a legal and relatively easy way to obtain a firearm, especially a surplus Italian rifle, without the scrutiny of a local gun store purchase. Buying a rifle from a local gun store or pawn shop would have involved more scrutiny and potentially raised more questions than a mail-order purchase. In 1963, purchasing firearms through the mail was a legal and relatively common practice, especially for surplus or less-desirable weapons. The Mannlicher-Carcano was a surplus Italian rifle, not a high-quality or desirable weapon = easier to obtain through mail order. No -- I am not missing the point. The manager at a shoe store first reported Oswald to police after observing Oswald acting suspiciously when hearing police sirens blaring and saw him enter the Texas Theatre lobby. It was predominantly Oswald acting suspicious when hearing sirens and fitting the description of someone who killed the police officer that drew police to the theater. Entering a theater w/o paying admission would generally not attract police attention, much less a dozen police officers. Oswald, whether rational or irrational, knew that -- but didn't put a lot of thought into it as he ducked into the theater when hearing sirens. The issue is that Oswald acted suspicious when hearing the sirens. A cop being murdered in the vicinity is what drew a dozen cops to the theater to check out a guy who acted suspicious (and appeared to quckly duck into a theater) when hearing sirens, and fit the description of the guy who murdered the cop. So you do agree that Oswald had motive to kill Kennedy. By the way, the acquaintance was credible. Plus, consistent with Oswald’s previous comments and activities. The phrase "I'm just a patsy" is a rallying cry for conspiracy theorists but there is no evidence that Oswald was not the lone gunman. No evidence that there was a second gunman.

Larry Darrell
>>168792031

But think of the YouTube comments. You know that YouTube crowd. They’re unpredictable and small-minded. Think of how many subscribers Cassie has. 450,000+ are going to watch a condensed version of this film. Oliver Stone Facts back to back to back to back for possibly more than an hour. All the people going on YouTube searching for videos on newly released JFK files just may find her reaction video and that 450,000 will increase even more. Tons of young folks who were born in the new millennia who have never looked up the JFK assassination will be first exposed to it by Cassie’s reaction to Oliver Stone’s JFK film. More than half a million new conspiracy theorists could be born from Cassie’s Reaction. (Just kiddin’ Clay. This has been Fun ;-)

Bill Maurer
>>168737262

read though it ... guaranteed i was working also at the time but see nothing that says it was an issue getting Marina out of the USSR. Why was Oswald left back in ?? Why was he not held or prosecuted for him renouncing his citizenship and leaving the USSR during the height of the Cold War ?

Clay F
>>168737137

Doesn’t matter what Oswald said. The evidence is clear that Oswald shot Kennedy from the 6th floor. Oswald’s fingerprints (not just palm prints) on the rifle. https://www.jfk-online.com/prints.html We know that Oswald ordered the weapon; the handwriting on the order form has been positively identified as Oswald's by numerous handwriting experts. Contrary to the impression given by Oliver Stone, there is no doubt about the fact that the rifle found in the Texas School Book Depository belonged to Lee Harvey Oswald; he ordered it from Klein's Sporting Goods; he had his wife photograph him with it (it is identifiable by the same markings that allow it to be identified in the newsreel footage of Tom Alyea); his fingerprints and no one else's were found on it; physical evidence links this rifle, to the exclusion of all other rifles, to a bullet recovered from the motorcade; one eyewitness, Howard Leslie Brennan, positively identified Oswald as the man in the "sniper's nest" window he saw fire at the President. Oswald then fled the building, killed a police officer forty-five minutes later, and tried to kill a second police officer soon after that. No doubt some will continue to insist that Lee Harvey Oswald was framed for all this, but the long-discredited claims and pure speculation offered by Oliver Stone don’t support that.

Bill Maurer
>>168796425

".. without the scrutiny of a local gun store purchase" What scrutiny ??? This is Texas ... in the 60's. He could have used a fake name (ala A.Hidell or Frank Bean for that matter) to buy a gun from a store in Texas and given a fake address. They would have never known. He could boughten one locally through a newspaper or someone he would have known. All without this transaction ever being traced back A. Hidell or Lee Harvey Oswald. This was Texas, in the 60s' even before the terrible UT Bell tower shooting. Why buy a gun knowing it can be traced back to you IF you are using it for a crime Why buy a Mannlicher-Carcano who you yourself says is not a high-quality weapon for a shooting like this? Why buy a bolt action at all? He could have purchased a M1 Carbine semiautomatic, like the UT Bell shooter (66) did. That was a gun more familiar with Oswald dating back to his Marine Corps days. And it still would not LEAD the authorities back to Oswald / Hidell Why, if he was acting suspicious did he NOT buy a ticket just adding more suspicion to his actions. Entering a theater w/o purchasing a ticket adds to his suspicious actions and alerts the theater owner / ticket lady. No, I don't see a motive. He was a Marxist? I can see that before him leaving for the USSR but wasn't he disaffected with what he saw in USSR to make him want to come back?? Wasn't he also on the anti-Castro crusade as well?

Clay F
>>168792031

Larry, you are good natured. Any abuse toward Thoko was only triggered by his abuse in trolling in replying with outlandish biased negative comments on many of my posts on multiple subjects. It is Thoko who is abusive. Maybe you agree with him, but Thoko lost all credibilty with me when he said "somebody directed the planes remotely into the towers" on 9/11. Dumb and paranoid.

Above Average Dave
>>168700512

Don't forget that many were in WWI, as well (Dulles was major in the Army, albeit stateside), and Dulles was appointed as a representative by Wilson at the Versailles Peace Talks. Within 15 years of the end of WWII and its transition from OCS, the "Agency" had become a black hole to most in government and seen by many as an autonomous entity often trying to direct world affairs and foreign policy from its own perspective and actions. This was not just well documented years later, it was exposed by the Church Committee after Watergate. Also, don't underestimate how unnerving it was for Washington to basically have a Soviet base 90 miles away. Or that the experts in our government estimated that the Soviets had many more thermonuclear weapon than we did and better ICBMs for delivery. After Munich, any appeasement or backing down was seen as "weak" by a significant percentage of people in the 3-letter agencies and by many people in the U.S. While Kennedy's popularity was always heralded by the media and historians, in fact, he and the Democrats were worried about the 1964 election, with many believing he was growing too unpopular with an increasing number of Democrats to sweep the South, which was more or less controlled by Democrats ever since U.S. Grant left office. A very complex time with so many variables.

Clay F
>>168796425

You have it backassward. Oswald covered his tracks by ordering the rifle from a Chicago mail-order house under the alias A. Hidell to be sent to a registered post box in Dallas under the same alias. Obviously, Oswald believed this would be the better approach rather than buying a rifle locally in person where he could be later identified as the purchaser, and he was correct. Ordering the rifle through a mail order house in Chicago under an alias proved to be the better alternative, since once Oswald‘s picture would have appeared in the newspaper and on television, if a gun shop in Dallas would have sold him that rifle they would be quick to phone the FBI or the Dallas police to inform them that that was the man who bought the rifle in question, and thereby directly connect Oswald to the murder weapon itself. After shooting Kennedy, Oswald knew he likely would have to leave the rifle behind and quickly make his escape. It was more than a week before the FBI was able to connect Oswald to the rifle’s purchase itself, even though at that point, they physically had the rifle and its serial number. The FBI was able to first find the sales distributor of the type of Italian rifle by questioning local gun shops, and then from there, they were able to trace the rifle to Crescent Firearms Inc. of New York City, the distributor of the surplus Italian military rifles that had been imported from Italy. This alone took a number of days for Crescent Firearms to search their records to inform the FBI that, that particular rifle had been sold it to Klein’s, the mail-order house in Chicago. Keep in mind this was before computers, so once again it then took a number of days by working night and day by searching their files, that the mail order house in Chicago was able to come up with the rifle’s purchase order by matching the corresponding serial number to connect it to the same rifle that was sold to A Hidell and sent to the corresponding postal box address in Dallas Texas. “According to its microfilm records, Klein's received an order for a rifle on March 13, 1963, on a coupon clipped from the February 1963 issue of the American Rifleman magazine. The order coupon was signed, in hand printing, "A. Hidell, P.O. Box 2915, Dallas, Texas." (See Commission Exhibit No. 773, p. 120.) It was sent in an envelope bearing the same name and return address in handwriting. Document examiners for the Treasury Department and the FBI testified unequivocally that the bold printing on the face of the mail-order coupon was in the handprinting of Lee Harvey Oswald and that the writing on the envelope was also his. 5 Oswald's writing on these and other documents was identified by comparing the writing and printing on the documents in question with that appearing on documents known to have been written by Oswald, such as his letters, passport application, and endorsements of checks. 6 (See app. X, p. 568-569.) “

Above Average Dave
>>168796425

All points. However, Clay, three things keep me from believing Oswald acted alone and that there wasn't a massive cover-up after: 1. Renouncing his citizenship, defecting to the USSR living there under special privileges that many ordinary Soviet citizens weren't afforded, and then being allowed to LEAVE and getting ready entry BACK INTO THE U.S. The "leave" part is hard enough to believe on its own. The USSR was an incredibly oppressive place that exerted tremendous control over its citizens. It was hard enough to travel to other Soviet bloc countries—something reserved for party officials and people deemed "true communists." Getting to go to a western country was nearly impossible. The ease which he left would almost certainly dictate to the three-letter agencies that this guy was now a spy or something even worse. Almost as improbable is someone who openly defected to the USSR and was the subject of numerous news stories because of this being so easliy released from the Soviet sphere and then allowed BACK into the US without an extended detainment for extensive—and back in the early 1960s, one can assume aggressive—interrogation. All the events from his defection to re-entry and freedom of movement in the US without the above and 24-7 surveillance stinks more than five-day old fish shoved in gym shoes that have been left out in the Houston sun. In July. 2. The shot from the book depository building. Reading your posts, Clay, I can't tell what if any your association is with firearms, but I've been shooting since I was 7, was on a rifle team in my teens and have continued target shooting well into adulthood with all sorts of firearms. I can tell you recycling the bolt to get 3 shots in 6 seconds under stress firing at a moving target (so with each shot it travels father away) from elevation (significantly more difficult to do this with a drop AND calculate the added distance, all while cycling the rifle) and hitting a mark the size of a mellon that is moving not just away from you but also side to side as the person waves and leans and looks at the crowd is another near possibility. Maybe 100 guys on the planet can do that right now, but they'd need much high quality equipment that's sighted in and would have to use match grade or better ammo. 3. The Magic Bullet Theory. This is impossible and defies the laws of physics. No slug—especially one of lead, which is realtively soft—hitting that many different impediments survives without some compression and impediments. It. Is. Physically. Im. Possible. Which means, someone put the pristine slug on the gurney. Which in itself screams collaboration and cover-up. You can argue about witnesses, what people heard and saw, associations with suspected operatives and underworld, credibility of people involved with this case and all these other variables, but the three facts above, which produce Oswald's presence and actions on Nov 22, and the key evidentiary exhibit of those actions include: an extremely improbable occurance, a nearly impossible feat of marksmanship using substandard equipment and off-the-shelf load and the key piece of evidence being a physical impossiblility. So for me, yeah, Oswald acting alone is a hard no.

Larry Darrell
>>168792031

I’m done Clay. I had a fun week revisiting the film JFK and catching up on many developments in the investigation that I’ve missed. But now I’m moving on to The Rainmaker and beyond. I hope you’re getting plenty of rest and can find some peace soon. Lastly… and I mean lastly on this subject with you on PIB… Thoko’s claims not dumb or paranoid. If you have never watched the documentary… The New Pearl Harbor https://youtu.be/iuyemPUXSz0?si=11x4xULTigH8GFOg Please do. Or check out the website, Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth… https://www.ae911truth.org Scroll down the website and watch the videos of the towers falling. Read the comments by some of the 3000+ Structural Engineers, Metallurgists, High Rise Architects, Civil Engineers, Fire Protection Engineers, Forensic Engineers. Calling his claims dumb and paranoid, simply does not work. That’s it. I’m done. Be Well.

Stick Figure Studios

As I have already said elsewhere as well as in this thread, this was a seminal work in my development as a cinephile. My father was, and still is, an expert on the Kennedy assassination. He owned every book, documentary and movie made about it. He was intimately familiar with every name, date, event and detail surrounding it and though he is not generally a conspiracy nut (he accepts that we have indeed landed on the moon, for example, and he has no trouble acknowledging that Shakespeare wrote the plays that are attributed to him), he believed then and now that Kennedy's assassination was the result of some kind of conspiracy. After seeing the film with him in the theater as an adolescent, I was also convinced of this (I even borrowed my dad's copy of the published screenplay and devoured it voraciously as every single fact mentioned in the film was footnoted and cited in some book that I knew my dad also owned). Over the decades, after even further research, I am not as convinced of this anymore as he is. However, neither am I fully convinced that Oswald acted alone. I have become more or less an agnostic on this particular subject, accepting that we will all probably never know for certain, but not begrudging anybody their own opinions on it (and tending to bristle when individual people attack my integrity, my intelligence, my wisdom or my allegiances by trying to impose their own particular perspective on me bullying tactics). Nevertheless, my regard for the film itself is still significant. I think remains a superb example of passionate social justice, impeccable craft in filmmaking and expert dramatic storytelling. When I first saw it, I was gobsmacked by the striking visuals, powerful -- and at the time provocative -- editing (I still think it's one of the best edited films I've ever seen), John Williams' phenomenal music score, the fantastic performances an utterly stacked cast and the hugely compelling exposition dumps that Stone managed to make enthralling rather than boring. JFK blew the doors wide open to my young and impressionable mind about what cinema had the potential to be. I ultimately decided that it's veracity as history, While not insignificant, is ultimately secondary to its value as art... much like how some of Shakespeare's plays were highly historically inaccurate -- and could even be characterized as propaganda -- given the Elizabethan audiences he wrote for in his day but which our heralded today as great works of art (HENRY V, RICHARD III, etc). I think JFK was, is and always will be a great film and I will always defend it as such. I'm so glad that you got a chance to see it and I'm even more pleased that you liked it.

bknsty14
>>168789803

I drove by the Grassy Knoll on Thursday. Is that good enough? Drove right over the X. I can tell you one thing. That kill shot didn't come from behind and up. Neither did the entry wound on his neck.

Brett Richey
>>168789803

You don't sound angry enough. Can you just keep repeating yourself until the world turns backwards like in the 1st Superman film? Then someone can just warn JFK not to die and we can all avoid the invention of conspiracy theories.

Clay F
>>168796425

No, I meant backassward. "Backassward" is an informal US adjective and adverb meaning utterly or ridiculously backward, foolish, or wrong, and is a variant of "ass-backwards".

Rick Williams

Good job Cassie. It was an interesting ride. One bullet causing 7 wounds to two people. Sure, it did.

Jeff
>>168790277

Yes, we agree. I was just pointing out something to add on too, as you were. Just for shits and giggles: when this movie first came out, I couldn't figure out why I loved it so much. Months later it occurred to me that it was this: in an era of total and constant government incompetence, it was impressive that they could pull something like this off, lol. The CIA, the FBI, military intelligence, the Mafia, the Cubans, local law enforcement, the Warren report people -- all in cahoots with perfect precision and all without a single leak even after decades. They may be evil, but still, right? It's also why the theories in the movie can't be true, even if Oswald didn't act alone. Still a terrific flic though.

Jeff

Just for shits and giggles: when this movie first came out, I couldn't figure out why I loved it so much. Months later it occurred to me that it was this: in an era of total and constant government incompetence, it was impressive that they could pull something like this off, lol. The CIA, the FBI, military intelligence, the Mafia, the Cubans, local law enforcement, the Warren report people -- all in cahoots with perfect precision and all without a single leak even after decades. They may be evil, but still, right? It's also why the theories in the movie can't be true, even if Oswald didn't act alone. Still a terrific flic though.

Luke Godfrey

Haven't seen this movie in a long while. It's so well done and the cast is fantastic. Cassie only recognised a fraction of famous faces. While I am positive a lot of this movie is fiction, I am 100% convinced JFK's assassination was not carried out by one man. The gory video speaks for itself.

Keith Jones

First time I have seen this because...well Stone is a nut. I do believe Oswald was the only shooter, but he wasn't aiming at Kennedy but Connally (and the magic bullet isn't magic, the Warren comm got the men's locations in the limo wrong, Connally was in a jump seat closer to the middle and lower, and all the sudden it's a straight line) So why was he shooting at Connally? Connally was Sec of the Navy when Oswald requested his retroactive Marine dishonorable discharge for defection to the USSR rescinded since he returned. Connally refused causing Oswald to tell numerous people that he would "kill that son of a bitch one day". So why not take the easy shot on Houston St? While it was an excellent shot on Kennedy, slow-moving little left or right movement, Connally's lower seat kept the windshield blocking Oswald's shot till much closer to the building, a shot that he would have had to extend himself halfway out of the window, exposing himself to possible Secret Service counter-sniper fire (none was there that day, but Oswald didn't know this). So he waits for the shot on Elm, a shot that is a right-to-left accelerating shot, a much harder shot, but the only clean Connally shot. The Warren committee was not going to let Kennedy's legacy be that he got into the way of another man's bullet, no, he was gone and thus had to be the target struck done in his prime, the only narrative that would be tolerated. This theory has been growing since the mid 90's, still a very small minority, but several historians believe it worth study

AdrianF
>>168742203

When I first noticed the BD was miles out of synch was about 45mins in, maybe longer, so the framerate thing in that case could have been the issue, but that said when I went back to the BD after trying the 4K for a while, it was fine. Anyway, I enjoyed the reaction and it wokred in the end!

Jacob King

My personal take on the JFK assassination is that all the shady groups from the mafia to the CIA, the Cubans, the oil industry, the FBI, ONI, Pepsi, MK-Ultra, operation mongoose, the discordians, the Dallas PD, the Secret Service and more we’ll probably never know about all assumed someone else had killed the president but because they were all on the same side they lied and covered it up and spread misinformation thinking they were helping their colleagues. There is no grand conspiracy to be discovered because the CIA were obsessed with “need to know” and compartmentalising information. Oswald was nut but he got that way because since he was a teenager he had been surrounded by professional spooks who lied to and manipulated him. Burn After Reading (2008) is a lot closer to the reality of how espionage works. I do appreciate Joe Pesci’s performance in this one but the wig wasn’t nearly crazy enough, an example of Oliver Stone taking it too seriously.

John A

I had also forgotten and was surprised that so many great actors made cameos in this movie. Oliver Stone also did a documentary in 2021 called JFK Revisited: Through the Looking Glass. It is a good watch also.