In today's day and age, it's rare to see famous historical events and societal disasters not be picked apart by film directors and then transformed into a box office hit. What these films do is put a visual perspective on these events, sometimes leaving viewers speculating if whatever was depicted is in fact entirely true. I have never felt that feeling more than after I finished watching Oliver Stone’s JFK.
This 1991 film caught the attention of many as historians continually questioned its historical inaccuracies. When confronted about the numerous amount of fallacies in his film Stone responds, “This isn't history, this is movie-making," "I'm not setting out to make a documentary," (Elaine Dutka qtd. in Oliver Stone's 'JFK' under fire..,
…show more content…
N.p). Viewers should not just sit back and accept such lackluster statements by Stone but really look into all the historical inaccuracies the film portrayed. If there is ever a movie topic one might need to be more accurate than ever about it is indeed the death of a United States of America President. If there was anything that this film got historically correct the most was the nation’s state of mind after seeing their youngest president assassinated. Oliver Stone’s JFK, which won him a Golden Globe for best director of a motion picture focuses on the investigation of the assassination President John F. Kennedy in Dallas, Texas, in 1963 led by District Attorney Jim Garrison. In all honesty, prior to watching Stone’s film, I knew little to nothing about the details of Kennedy’s death and the investigation after. It was only after seeing some wonky scenes throughout the film that to me were too good to be true, that I decided to take it upon myself to see if all the criticism about its historical inaccuracies were spot-on. It was only matter of time before I gained knowledge on many key aspects of Kennedy’s investigation that were wrongly portrayed throughout the film. Shockingly there are more than 50 historical inaccuracies in the film, some more minuscule than others. There are indeed three that stand out the most. The movie broadcast an inaccurate depiction of assassinator Lee Harvey Oswald, the single bullet theory along with his rather poor portrayal of DA Jim Garrison. We only know as much history as we are told and if a well-known historical film is inaccurate we know nothing. Lee Harvey Oswald was born in New Orleans, Louisiana, on October 18, 1939. Lee’s life was a struggle from the beginning. His biological father had died only two months after he was born. For the most part of his life, Lee grew up without a father figure. His childhood suffered as his mother had a hard time raising all 3 boys. He went in and out of orphanages and found himself struggling to complete a semester in school (Warren Commission Report 671-73). During his teenage years, Lee moved with his mother to New Orleans where he found interest in Karl Marx's Das Kapital. Lee quoted this finding as the same as “a very religious man opening the Bible for the first time (Warren Commission Report 681.)” Along with his peculiar interest in Marxism, Lee was very interested in joining the Marines just like his brother Robert. One of the main claims in Oliver Stone’s JFK is that Lee was a spy, who was sent by the United States government to the USSR. Stone based this on the rumor that Oswald was taught the Russian Language by the US military. This indeed is inaccurate as Oswald was not trained in Russian, and his military file unveils that no such training ever taking place (Warren Commission Hearings, Vol. VIII, 307.) It has been noted that many of his Marine pals stepped up and stated that they observed Lee trying to teach himself Russian. Another evidence that refutes Oliver’s depiction of Lee knowing Russian was a tourist guide who met Oswald upon his initial arrival in Moscow. She believed that Oswald ‘"didn't seem to know a word of Russian,"’ and she had to speak to him in English (Norman Mailer, Oswald's Tale 43). A common question, which was also raised by Oliver Stone in the film was whether or not Lee Oswald had the motive to assassinate John F.
Kennedy. According to the article “Lee Harvey Oswald Was My Friend” published in The New York Times by Paul Gregory, a friend of Oswald recorded that Lee had kept a copy of the Time Magazine featuring John F. Kennedy as Man of The Year prominently shown in their home. Lee despised America and capitalism. He liked Kennedy for what he did for civil rights but hated the system and what he stood for. When Oswald decided to kill the president it was more of an attack to the system of America rather than that of Kennedy’s …show more content…
character. Volkmar Schmidt, another friend of Oswald recollects that Oswald was just infatuated with what America did to aid the invasion at the Bay of Pigs. 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 (Russo 118). Schmidt’s thoughts may not be the last assumptions on Oswald, but they offer a reminder that Lee Harvey Oswald was not essentially the naive, guiltless orphan Oliver Stone depicts in JFK. One of the most famous scenes in Oliver Stone’s JFK is the monolog provided by New Orleans District Attorney Jim Garrison on the topic of the Single Bullet Theory of the John F.
Kennedy assassination. The single-bullet theory was introduced by the Warren Commission in its investigation of the assassination of President John F. Kennedy to explain what happened to the bullet that struck Kennedy in the back and exited through his throat. The Warren Commission that investigated the Kennedy assassination established that the reactions of Kennedy and Connally happened too close together for two single shots, even from the same gun, to have been accountable for their injuries. In an interview with Piers Morgan Stone said, the single-shooter theory and the "magic bullet" theory "fall apart, if anybody in their right mind looks at it." "It angers me sometimes, to think of the degree of stupidity about Oswald and the Mannlicher-Carcano (rifle) on the sixth floor making these shots. It's almost as if we don't believe what we see with our own eyes in the Zapruder film," Stone
added. Both Kennedy and Connally almost seem to react at the same instant, in the enhanced version of the Zapruder film seen by the commission. They concluded that one, sole bullet caused the wounds to both the President and the Governor. Stone goes to great lengths to try and debunk the single bullet theory, leaving vast discrepancies between the narrative and the historical record. Right off the bat Oliver begins to twist histories facts. The argument is not the believability of the Single-Bullet theory but how it was represented in the film. In JFK the scene where Kennedy and Connally are in the limo seated directly in front of each other together there is inaccurate as Connally was seated in a jump seat just a little lower than Kennedy. Quoting Jim Garrison in the film in regards to the single bullet theory, “It then moves upward in order to leave Kennedy's body from the front of his neck -- his neck wound number two...” This statement is, in fact, false. It is not true that the Single Bullet Theory dictates that the bullet needed to travel upwards. By propagating that idea, Oliver Stone is reiterating an objection raised by Cyril H. Wecht, a nationwide prominent expert on forensic pathology, and one of the most raucous critics of the Warren Commission. In fact, a photograph taken three seconds before the assassination shows Kennedy's jacket rucked up above his shoulders. Once you take that into account, it looks like the bullet's trajectory continued normally downwards and was consistent with a shot from the book depository. The misunderstanding arises from a conclusion reached by the Forensic Pathology Panel of the House Select Committee, of which Dr. Wecht was a member, which reinvestigated the JFK assassination in the late 1970s. The panel noted that "when seen in the autopsy position, the outshoot wound [the wound of exit in the President's throat] was described as being at about the same height (or slightly higher) relative to the inshoot wound [the wound of entrance in the President's back] ". (HSCA Hearings Volume 6, 43). It seems that the lone thing moving about like a magic bullet here is the film. Oliver Stone does a great job swerving unpredictably between misconceptions and absolute lies in a gritty struggle to evade the actualities. The instant Oliver Stone decided that Jim Garrison was going to be the protagonist of his film, JFK, it is hard to imagine he would know what the public’s response would be. Fortunately for him, he did not have to wait long to find out.
John F. Kennedy’s assassination has been a mystery since it happened in 1993. John F. Kennedy was shot in a moving car in Dallas, Texas. The murder surprised the nation in a time of peace and calmness, It was also “... the first time the vivid immediacy of such acts was brought into the homes of millions” (“The Warren
There are similarities and differences in how the authors of “American History” and “ TV Coverage of JFK’s Death Forged Mediums’ Role” use Kennedy’s assassination in their writing.
During Garrison’s trial, Stone includes flashbacks to Oswald fulfilling the requirements a lone assassin would have to fill to fit the evidence and witness accounts. Oswald would have had to run down stairs “in less time than it took two other men to climb one flight”, and he must have snuck past witnesses without being noticeable, while still moving exceptionally quickly (Lee Harvey). Additionally, Stone emphasized how fast Oswald would have fired bullets in order to fit with evidence that was uncovered in a film of the assassination. He would have had to cause the wounds on Kennedy, Connally, and a civilian with only three bullets, and all three of these bullets would have to be fired in six seconds or less (How Did Lee...). Stone includes unattainable shots of Oswald accomplishing these feats to portray the sheer impossibility of a lone assassin.
In 1976, the US Senate ordered a fresh inquiry into the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, who was murdered in 1963 during a motorcade in Dallas, Texas while campaigning for re-election. People who had been involved in the original Warren Commission investigations were asked to make fresh statements. The FBI and the CIA were persuaded to release more of their documents on Oswald. New lines of inquiry were opened and individuals who had not previously given evidence were persuaded to come forward. Most important of all, pieces of evidence such as photos and sound recordings were subjected to scientific analysis using the most up-to-date methods and equipment. The House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA) completed their investigation in 1979 and they finally came to a discrete verdict that Lee Harvey Oswald fired three shots at Kennedy, one of which killed the president. A fourth shot was fired from the grassy knoll, which was contradictory to the statement printed by the Warren Commission 16 years earlier. They concluded that John Kennedy was assassinated as the result of a conspiracy.
people lining the streets hoping to get a glimpse of the President. As his motorcade proceeded down Elm Street, Governor Connally's wife said, "You can't say that Dallas isn't friendly to you today Mr. President." Upon that, John F. Kennedy, the thirty-fifth President of the United States was assassinated. The United States mourned the death of its young and inspiring President. It has been many years since the assassination of John F. Kennedy and people are still uncertain as to who was actually responsible for his assassination. Through the years there have been numerous theories that the CIA and the FBI were somehow linked to the assassination.
The assassination of John Fitzgerald Kennedy, the 35th president of the United States, marked a tragic historical moment in American history. The president was fatally shot by a sniper while traveling with his wife, Texas Governor John Connally, and Connally’s wife in a presidential motorcade at 12.30 pm on Friday, November 22, 1963. JFK was pronounced dead shortly after rushing to Parkland Hospital, where a tracheostomy and other efforts failed to keep him alive. Although Lee Harvey Oswald, a former United States Marine, was convicted of the crime, the purpose behind the assassination remained inclusive as Oswald’s case never came to trial as he was shot to death two days later by Jack Ruby, a local nightclub operator in Texas. The assassination raised many questions and theories concerning the murder.
In Oswald’s single gunman theory, Oswald was on the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository building with a bolt-action sniper when he fired the three shots that killed the president and injured governor Connally. The rifle Oswald used was found on the sixth floor which was a good spot for him to kill kennedy. Many people say tha...
...s at that time who have come of age. Perhaps no film in recent history has captured more attention and generated more controversial debate. This film resonates the feeling and question that common people had about the JFK assassination in the 60s. As a result, the debate about the validity of JFK extended much further into the war-torn cultural landscape of America in the 1990s than most observers noted. The JFK was a telling incident demonstrating the larger cultural conflict over values and meaning in America and the competition to define national identity. The whole affair demonstrated how effective a motion picture can be as a transmitter of knowledge, history, and culture. As a result, the debate about the validity of JFK extended much further into the war-torn cultural landscape of America in the 1990s than most observers have noted.
Some theories are that it was organized by the CIA, Fidel Castro, an Anarchist group, even by Vice-President Lyndon Johnson. However, once all the evidence is examined, it appears that the assassination was done by a lone man. So much of the evidence, from the way the assassination occurred, to the details of the alleged assassins’ life, and even to the official government findings and a film of the assassination, all point to the fact that there was no conspiracy and that Kennedy was killed by a lone gunman, Lee Harvey Oswald. Evidence that proves Oswald’s guilt are as follows; Oswald was pro-Communist, and hated America. He was in the Depository at the time of the assassination, and searches of the building found evidence of his work. The rifle with his finger prints on it was found by a make-shift snipers nest.
John F Kennedy was assassinated for many reasons. One big reason was that many people considered him a bad president. One reason for this is that he signed an order that would put the International Bankers who own the Federal Reserve out of business. On June 12, 1963, and executive order number 11110. It basically was going to strip the power of the federal reserve to loan money to the U.S government. This means that the bank was going to be out of business. When this was proposed, this meant that many people were going to lose their jobs. And they all got mad at JFK. They thought he signed it so he's responsible for our jobs. This cased hatred between many people. Another reason why people hated JFK was the Bay Of Pigs Invasion. The Bay Of Pigs Invasion was a plot to overthrow Cuba's communist government. This plan was started before his presidency. Later when he was a president, he learned about the plan. On March 11, 1961, Kennedy invited CIA director Allen Dulles and Richard Bissell the CIA's chief of operations to the white house. They were all going over plans on how the mission was going to be like. Dulles and Bissells both said that they were going to start the invasion with air strikes....
Since November 23, 1963, the day after President John Fitzgerald Kennedy was assassinated, there have been speculations as to the happenings of November 22, 1963. Along with the Warren Commission, there are hundreds of conspiracies and theories attempting to explain the assassination of Kennedy. Many people agree with the Warren Commission in that Lee Harvey Oswald acted as the lone gunman, while others maintain that another gunman was involved. Because of extensive evidence, I believe that Oswald did not act alone on November 22, 1963 in the assassination of Kennedy. The additional gunman was strategically placed in the grassy knoll area, in order to shoot at Kennedy from a frontal view (Rubinstein 4).
2001 was released in the tumultuous spring of 1968, at the same time that Americans were reeling from President Lyndon Johnson’s announcement that he would not seek reelection and the assassination of Martin Luther King, Jr. It might seem odd that so many people would get so excited about a science fiction movie in the midst of urban race riots and campus protests against the Vietnam War, but to many, 2001 had far greater importance than its sci-fi trappings. Baffling early audiences with its non-traditional structure, theme, and presentation, the film was soon embraced by many members of a younger generation entranced by its consciousness-raising message and its psychedelic special effects. Over the next 30 years, the film would not only become a part of American culture, but would eventually be hailed as a masterpiece of modern cinema.
In the early nineteen sixties, John Fitzgerald Kennedy held the position as president of the United States. President Kennedy was very popular among the people, but because of his extreme principles and policies, Kennedy had some critics however. President Kennedy became a strong ruler of America in the sixties, which made individuals worried. As for one man named Lee Harvey Oswald, he thought the same. Oswald an ex-military sharpshooter had a plan of his own for Kennedy. On November 22nd of 1963, President John F. Kennedy was shot by Lee Harvey Oswald, from the 6th floor of the Texas School Book Depository (Wunsch 2). Although, people believe Oswald was accompanied by multiple assassins. This was later disproved by the Warren Commission. Many speculate that Lee Harvey Oswald was not a lone assassin, but much evidence points to Oswald being the lone assassinator of John F. Kennedy.
Films are necessary in our time period because the human eye can articulate the message intended through sight allowing visual imagination to occur. In the book, world 2 by Max Brooks, he creates a character by the name Roy Elliot who was a former movie director. Roy Elliot manages to make a movie titled “Victory at Avalon: The Battle of the Five Colleges” and some how it goes viral. Similarly, Frank Capra’s film, “Why we Fight” expresses a sense of understanding the meaning of wars. Films do not inevitably portray truth because they display what the film director views as important and beneficial for people to know.
...ctual roles, or adding in exciting events that revise the storyline. These changes are beneficial to producers because they engage a large audience and generate massive profits. In contrast, they do not always have a positive effect on viewers. Although they are entertaining which is an important aspect of theatre culture, they also are often misguiding. Many spectators take movies at face value, without considering that they may not exactly qualify as primary source material. Even when an historical event is fabricated to teach or enhance a moral message, it still doesn’t compensate for bending the truth. Moviegoer’s may have a positive experience and gain some skewed historical perspective, perhaps better than what they knew before the movie, but they loose out on the truth and therefore, a genuine understanding of the historical event, and its significance.