Customer Review

14 of 16 people found the following review helpful
4.0 out of 5 stars How to make fact from fiction, 22 Dec 2003
This review is from: JFK [1992] [DVD] (DVD)
This is one fantastically made film, Stone mixes his own fictional footage with genuine historical footage until you don't know which one is the truth, this powerful movie bombards you with information and will not stop. Throughout the film, Garrison (Costner) and his team put foreward every conspiracy theory known to man (aside from Elvis at the Grassy-Knoll) before deciding on their prefered option and hammering it home in a riveting final court-room scene.
I for one don't believe that Lyndon Johnson was waiting for a call from Clay Shaw saying "Kennedy's been killed and I want my money". Oliver Stone is not a historian and this is not history, as Stone said, this film is merely a counter-myth to the myth that is the Warren Report and that is what it does. One only has to watch the trial scene to realise that the Warren Report was fiction and although Garrison's proposition of a government-planned conspiracy is a little off, it does make you think and that is what a good film should do.
The supporting cast is excellent with Tommy-Lee Jones earning a Best Supporting-Actor Oscar, the music is superb and powerfully atmospheric.
A good buy for anyone who likes to think and an ideal subject for discussion
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No

[Add comment]
Post a comment
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Amazon will display this name with all your submissions, including reviews and discussion posts. (Learn more)
Name:
Badge:
This badge will be assigned to you and will appear along with your name.
There was an error. Please try again.
Please see the full guidelines ">here.

Official Comment

As a representative of this product you can post one Official Comment on this review. It will appear immediately below the review wherever it is displayed.   Learn more
The following name and badge will be shown with this comment:
 (edit name)
After clicking on the Post button you will be asked to create your public name, which will be shown with all your contributions.

Is this your product?

If you are the author, artist, manufacturer or an official representative of this product, you can post an Official Comment on this review. It will appear immediately below the review wherever it is displayed.  Learn more
Otherwise, you can still post a regular comment on this review.

Is this your product?

If you are the author, artist, manufacturer or an official representative of this product, you can post an Official Comment on this review. It will appear immediately below the review wherever it is displayed.   Learn more
 
System timed out

We were unable to verify whether you represent the product. Please try again later, or retry now. Otherwise you can post a regular comment.

Since you previously posted an Official Comment, this comment will appear in the comment section below. You also have the option to edit your Official Comment.   Learn more
The maximum number of Official Comments have been posted. This comment will appear in the comment section below.   Learn more
Prompts for sign-in
 

Comments

Tracked by 1 customer

Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-5 of 5 posts in this discussion
Initial post: 25 Sep 2011 17:04:41 BDT
Nic says:
The court room scene was fiction too. Garrison did not make that speech. Clay Shaw was innocent and did not spend the whole trial sitting there with "You won't get me" written in his facial expression. The Magic bullet scene would have been laughable if not about such a serious subject.

Posted on 2 Nov 2011 09:41:01 GMT
M. Rossiter says:
it does not matter whether or not Garrison made that speech, it was oliver stones artistic license that encouraged it. what is more important is the fact that although clay shaw was proved innocent by the supreme court it is important to understand why. garrisons book 'on the trail of the assassins' has all the detailed answers to this question.

In reply to an earlier post on 17 Jan 2012 16:01:36 GMT
Last edited by the author on 17 Jan 2012 16:05:33 GMT
J. P. Ryder says:
Shaw wasn't '..proved innocent by the Supreme Court'.
He was cleared by the jury in New Orleans!

Why? Garrison had no case. He had no case because he had no evidence.

Barry

In reply to an earlier post on 23 May 2012 21:25:42 BDT
There is an interview with judge who presided over the Shaw trial and said he felt that Shaw was guilty, although he was acquitted by the jury.

In reply to an earlier post on 25 May 2012 07:29:16 BDT
Last edited by the author on 25 May 2012 07:29:35 BDT
J. P. Ryder says:
Hi,

Haggerty did, indeed, give an interview (in 1992), but at no point did he say that he, "..felt Shaw was guilty". You are wrong to suggest that he did.

Barry
‹ Previous 1 Next ›

Review Details

Item

4.4 out of 5 stars (122 customer reviews)
5 star:
 (84)
4 star:
 (19)
3 star:
 (6)
2 star:
 (5)
1 star:
 (8)
 
 
 
13.99 8.50
Add to basket Add to wishlist
Reviewer


Location: London, UK

Top Reviewer Ranking: 752,785