It's a movie, not history

Rating: 7/10 (8 July 2016)

This is a well-made, suspenseful movie--in spite of it being about the most famous murder in history. When I watched the movie--most of which narratively was told in retrospect--I felt the knot of suspense that I feel while watching a fictitious thriller---even though I know what's going to happen because it's historical!
I'm also an amateur historian, a trial attorney who deals with the problems of reconstructing past events by using various types of evidence. Over the years I've read most of the Warren Report; I've read the conspiracy books. I find flaws in the former--and serious error in logic on the latter. Long ago, I concluded the evidence available was overwhelmingly demonstrative of Lee Harvey Oswald's factually causing the death of the president by shooting him with the rifle found. How that would have played forensically in a real trial is impossible to say.
The conspiracy writers have no evidence of anything, just holes in the evidence presented by the Warren Commission. From these holes come theories that devolve into circular arguments where they end up proving the theory by assuming to be true. If the conspiracy writers could have been able to assist Oswald's defense counsel (hypothetically), they could have created reasonable doubt, which may have acquitted Oswald--or gotten him on reduced charge of manslaughter. But enough reasonable doubt to prevent a conviction is NOT the same thing as proving beyond a reasonable doubt the guilt of other alleged culprits.
But this is a movie website, made for movie buffs like myself, who enjoy reading about movies and discussing movies and reading what other film buffs have to say about movies. As a movie, JFK is something I have watched a few times because it is so well crafted. I suspect Oliver Stone must be tough as a director because he also got performances out actors I didn't think possible--even known talents. It's editing, the music, the sound, the sets--everything creates this bizarre, paranoid effect, where nothing is as it seems. Like one of the legendary conductors that can move an entire orchestra to great climactic crescendos, Stone creates a thriller set withing a courtroom drama.
It's a virtuoso work, that also shows mastery of narrative technique, such as shifting point-of-view, retrospect and foreshadowing, story-within-a-story, building to devastating and heartbreaking ending of JFK's death and of a traumatized nation left with fear, uncertainty and unanswerable questions in the middle of a nightmarish Cold War.
As an historian, I am not moved very much from what I still believe to be the sad, absurd and unspectacular truth. As a lawyer, I am impressed with the way reasonable doubt can be generated by working up facts more likely to be deemed irrelevant at a trial; equally, I am relieved to see that reasonable doubt to prevent a guilty verdict in the trial of one person (which never happened) is not sufficient to prove conspiracy in the trial of another. As a movie fan, I am awed with what a great director can do with historical material and a good cast and crew. As an American, I am also glad that movies like this can be made. It is the mark of a society free enough to express such withering criticism of the government without fear of punishment.
I strongly recommend this movie to anyone who has not seen it yet, and that it be seen repeatedly by those who have already seen it. The mark of a classic is it that can speak to people of all generations--and differently to the same person moving through life into older generations.