Good, but a little too complete for such a mystery..

Rating: Null/10 (25 June 2000)

Oliver Stone's JFK is a good movie, but it relies on too much historical revision to get it's point across. It's good that viewers have had their minds opened and may now believe JFK was killed by our own government, but at the same time Oliver Stone's rather fanatical opinions about government issues in the 60's and 70's cloud this film. For all of you who have not actually read any detailed research about the assassination, I would recommend it. The film JFK takes many elements which are only speculation and makes them into hardline fact. Now, I don't think the film is bad...80% of it is pretty much all based around the circumstances that comprise most of the conspiracy theory, but the remaining 20% is a little iffy. The best example I can think of is Donald Sutherland's character of Mr. X. In the film, Mr. X is essentially the turning point for Garrison. His story convices Garrison that the assassination is well beyond the scope he initially assumed. However, in reality, Mr. X didn't really exist. The story he tells in the film was actually lots of information from several different sources and people. Making the character of Mr. X might have saved screentime, but it deteriorates credibility. Audiences were probably pretty impressed that a high-ranking military official would confess these things to Garrision...well, he didn't. While some claim that Mr. X was indeed a real person, the information is sketchy. my point is, Stone makes a lot of the case look for more believable than it really is. Regardless, the movie certainly makes people think, and maybe that's why so many right-wingers love attacking its fans as "Communists" or historcial revisionists. Anyone who earnestly thinks the ENTIRE case for conspiracy is simply paranoia and coicidence must be virtually brain dead, as much as I hate to say it. There is something here, and getting people to think and talk about it is pretty damn important.