DVD Review HTF REVIEW: JFK - Two Disc Special Edition (HIGHLY RECOMMENDED). (1 Viewer)

[EdwardKarlinski]

You want the Director's Cut:

http://www.dvdsoon.com/show-title-details.xml?uid=7135

 

[Haden]

I HAVE the director's cut. It's my understanding that this new 2-disc set is essentially the same release, except with the addition of the 90 minute documentary. I was just curious if there's any other new additions/changes besides the documentary. I'm still debating whether or not I want to upgrade.

 

[Patrick Larkin]

you end up with a mountain of evidence that shows it pointing in one direction only

Isn't the point of a government conspiracy or coup d'etat to fabricate so-called goverment evidence? Wouldn't key evidence be altered or created in time for the investigation? And wasn't X just a character used as a plot device to fill in a lot of exposition? And if I am to believe that Oswald acted alone, how do I reconcile the magic bullet?

 

[Herb Kane]

It's my understanding that this new 2-disc set is essentially the same release, except with the addition of the 90 minute documentary.

Haden... That's correct. You'll have to decide if the Beyond documentary is worth the upgrade.

Mike... The new SE is widescreen.

The NEW SE has Two Disc Special Edition written across the top of the box within a thin gold banner.

Herb.

 

[Chad A Wright]

Having never seen this film, I can't wait to pick it up.

 

[Brent Bridgeman]

Hey, if nothing else, this is THE BEST movie to use in playing "Six Degrees of Kevin Bacon". I mean, Jack Lemmon, Walter Matthau, Donald Sutherland, and Ed Asner for gosh sakes!

That said, I really enjoy this movie, while taking the content with a bucket of salt. Fascinating filmmaking. Already have the Oliver Stone Collection version, so I doubt I'll double-dip this one since the transfer is the same.

 

[Eric Paddon]

"Isn't the point of a government conspiracy or coup d'etat to fabricate so-called goverment evidence?"

Here you are demonstrating the kind of distortion of basic historical methodology which is to ignore evidence you don't like by posing an unprovable question and an unprovable assertion to get around the inconvenient evidence. That isn't how the scientific process of studying history works. The burden is on the other side to come up with specific evidence to justify the charge that 26 volumes of Commission testimony, not to mention thousands of pieces of physical evidence subjected to intense scientific study is somehow "fabricated" and this is a burden that conspiracy buffs have never met.

"Wouldn't key evidence be altered or created in time for the investigation?"

In a word, no because try and analyze the evidence we're talking about from the standpoint of common sense. Why go to the trouble of faking three separate photos of Oswald holding the rifle when only one suffices for your purpose? Why even bother doing one to begin with when the photos are irrelevant since they just prove he owned a rifle which we already know he did thanks to the mail order documents purchasing it which are in his signature? That's the kind of common sense question that doesn't get asked after Stone and company present this silly bit about the government faking photographs of Oswald. And that's just one of hundred examples I can cite.

Then there's the matter of the fabrications that *Stone* has to resort to to push his theories. I can document fabricating of the record a lot better for Stone then anyone ever could for the government.

"And wasn't X just a character used as a plot device to fill in a lot of exposition?"

Nope. He's a real person named L. Fletcher Prouty who among other things was associated with fringe groups that believed in Holocaust Revisionism. That's the worthless credential of the man Stone relied on to present us with his big explain-all theory.


"And if I am to believe that Oswald acted alone, how do I reconcile the magic bullet?"

Quite simple. Because that bullet satisfies the physical evidence more then anything else does. The bullet is slightly deformed and flattened as the result of it being fired and passing through Kennedy and Connally. And if Kennedy and Connally were struck by separate bullets, then buffs have to explain how a bullet that passes through JFK on a downward trajectory but doesn't strike Connally somehow manages to disappear into thin air without damaging the interior of the limousine, and then they'd have to explain away the medical report on Connally which says his wounds were caused by a bullet slowed up and tumbling in mid-air, which means the bullet that hit him had to pass through something else first, namely Kennedy (the doctors also said that if Conally were struck by a separate bullet he would have been killed; the scar of the initial entry wound on Connally's back was a sideways scar which meant he was not hit by a bullett that passed through nothing beforehand).

Seems like the real "magic bullet" is the one the buffs can't come up with in their alternate explanations. My side has a specific picture of how this event happened. The buffs usually think that all they have to do is ask "reasonable doubt" questions but that will not suffice. They have to provide an alternate explanation that accounts for all of the evidence such as the medical reports on Connally, the trajectories etc. and this they have never been able to do, because answering questions of how it happened alas is something buffdom is usually not very good at because when forced to do so, it becomes clear how silly their alternate explanations are.

 

[ScottR]

Can we please just discuss the disc itself, since this thread is in software and not movies? Thanks!

 

[Eric Paddon]

The problem is that so much of the software (commentary, documentary, supplements etc.) is too tied up in the content of the film, which I think is why it's harder to separate the two in this instance, unlike other movies. If you say it has a commentary by Stone, then it's not surprising if comments on what Stone has to say on that commentary, which is part of the disc comes up in the conversation here, which in turn invites the broader discussion.

Just my opinion on why that happens with Stone's films. Would it be out of line if the review of "The Perfect Storm" which mentioned the Sebastian Junger commentary about the real events led in turn to a discussion of the real events? Sure, it wouldn't provoke the same kind of passion this film does, but the principle would be the same.

 

[Patrick Larkin]

- post deleted in deference to Jack -

 

[Jack Briggs]

Please stop!

And I mean it. We are discussing the disc itself, Herb's review of same, and the extra features. Transfer quality? Fine, talk. Did Oswald act alone? Not fine, not germaine to this thread. Save that sort of stuff for a thread in After Hours.

Again, no further discussing endlessly the events of November 22, 1963, themselves.

And if one wants to discuss the merits or otherwise of JFK as a film, there's the Movies section.

Now, let's talk about the DVD.

 

[Anthony Thorne]

I own the earlier Oliver Stone Collection edition and like it a lot. Great picture, great sound, and (to me) a really solid commentary track from Stone, who puts forward a very articulate and informative case for his film. I didn't find the track dry at all. I am a little bit miffed that this re-release features better packaging and now includes the doco that should have been on the old edition, but I like the movie enough that I'll probably double-dip. Thoroughly recommended!

I hope that NIXON does get a proper 16x9 remaster at some point. I haven't seen the film and want to wait for a decent version before watching.

 

[David Fisher]

The documentary is the only "new" item on the DVD, but it is ten years old and has been shown on television before. If you own the Director's Cut already, then there isn't any real need to upgrade.

Oliver Stone's commentaries usually open up his films and expose the good along with the bad. He is honest about the material and explains the decisions to include fictional characters in his dramas. If you are at all interested in the movie or the assassination, this commentary is essential listening. If you find the movie to be objectionable, then ignore the DVD and commentary.

If you've recently seen Kill Bill and would like to see more of Bob Richardon's beautiful cinematography, then check out this DVD. The DVD transfer looks fantastic, and really showcases Richardson's mastery of the lens. If you're interested in film editing, you could learn a lot from this film. I know two film students who literally took notes during some of the key monologues. Really fantastic stuff here, and shows that lightning quick editing can really service a film's narrative instead of making it look like a music video.

I do apologize if I spoke out of line or offended anybody. I've read a lot of material on this case, and can not come to any definite conclusion. If Oliver Stone wanted to make a controversial film portraying Oswald as the lone gunman, I would watch it as openly as this (or his disappointing Commandante).

 

[David Von Pein]

Yes, there is quite a bit of material relating to the making of the film as well as behind the scenes footage... including a close look at the motorcade route and the people who were lining the streets and how that was all put together.

Just now got through watching my VHS copy of this program. ... And I must have been watching another documentary featuring Oliver Stone, et al, also titled "Beyond JFK", because my 90-min. VHS copy has virtually none of the above-mentioned content.

Yes, there's a few (very few) "snippets" of behind-the-camera material. But there's no "here's how we did this" type of discussion or extensive B.T.S. footage.

It's almost ALL talking heads discussing NOT the film, but the events of and surrounding 11/22/63. Some interesting comments though, and many "heads" coming at ya .... Costner, Garrison (in both 1989--healthy--and in 1991--extremely frail and on death's edge), Sissy Spacek, Gary Oldman, Stone of course, Cronkite, Robert Groden, Tom Wicker, Tip O'Neill, Lou Ivon (Garrison's top investigator), and Robert MacNeil, among still others.

Another witness shown on the documentary is Jean Hill (who, interestingly, claims in this 1992 program that she DID indeed STEP INTO THE STREET to wave to the President, which we know is inaccurate from just one glance at the Zapruder Film. But, then again, this is a woman who's changed her story more times than than a traffic light at a busy intersection).

Hill also claims right to the camera in "Beyond JFK" that she "saw the shooter behind the knoll", a direct contradiction with what she said with TV cameras rolling just 1 hour after the assassination, when she claimed "No, I didn't see any person fire the weapon."

Herb K.'s comments about much more behind-the-scenes footage on the DVD version makes me wonder if it's a longer, more-detailed version on the DVD set. Also, Herb says there's "a close look at the motorcade route and the people who were lining the streets and how that was all put together". No such footage is even remotely shown on the 90-minute VHS version I just watched an hour ago.



Jean Hill, as seen in the Zapruder Film, is the lady on the left ON THE GRASS.

OK....sorry Robert C. .... I'll shut up now (re. non-DVD related "JFK" issues. )

(I just wanted to demonstate, via the above image of J. Hill, that *some* of what you'll hear from witnesses (like Hill) on this "Beyond JFK" program on the DVD 2-Disc Set is NOT necessarily consistent with earlier statements made by THE VERY SAME WITNESSES.)

 

[Herb Kane]

[*] Beyond JFK: The Question Of Conspiracy. This is a documentary that was produced in 1992. This is an excellent documentary where numerous witnesses to the actual event and actors from the film are interviewed. Also discussed are the theories demonstrated in the film. Duration: 90.00 minutes

David, my reporting on the documentary as seen above is accurate - obviously its the same feature. While the behind the scenes coverage is sparse, clearly the documentary focuses on the theories.

If you're having difficulty finding the motorcade sequence that I refer to, better pull out your VHS tape again and check the 02:30 mark.

Herb.

 

[Gordon McMurphy]

I'm Scottish and I had to put up with BRAVEHEART, for Chris'sakes !!

Hah ha hah! Now there's a crime of 'Cinematic History'! Man, I thought that I was the only Scotsman who despises that film! Mel's next biopic sould be a gas!

The whole JFK assassination conspiracy cum crazed hunt for the Truth by many people around the globe bores me now. Every year there are new documentaries, books and assorted litrature, deabates, etc - and that's all fine and dandy, but in my mind, his assassination has no bearing on Modern Life. Most of the people who may have been involved in Kennedy's sickening demise are now either dead, dying or are forgotten. Even if the Truth was revealed, there would be no one there to take the heat - no one's head would be on the block - there would be no trial! There wouldn't even be an apology to the Kennedy Family. I think that the JFK assassination is pretty simple to explain: He pissed off the real Powers That Be and he basically told them to go f**k themselves, and so they whacked him. Is it important who, why, when, how they did it? The fact remains that he, his brother, Martin Luther King, Malcolm X, Anwar Sadat and many, many, many others were killed by the opposers of peace. And yes, it pisses me off as much as anyone, but the thing to do is to not let it happen in our world today.

Oliver Stone's film is an outrageous riot, brilliantly made. It created a shitstorm, which is what Stone was after and it reawakened the urge in many people to seek the Truth. Which is always a good thing.

Oh, and the DVD is pretty good.


Gordy

 

[John Hodson]

Which is the real point; it's a hell of a rollercoaster of a movie and probably bears as much truth to actual events as They Died With Their Boots On

Oh, and can I stick my hand up and say that I hate Braveheart too? Or being English, am I supposed to? (When he's giving 'that' speech, I want one of his troops to nudge another and say: 'Blessed are the cheesemakers?!')

---
So many films, so little time...

 

[Brett_B]

WOW!!! I came into this thread thinking I would be reading about the DVD itself. Instead, this is nothing more than the Movie (JFK) Discussion Thread.

Isn't there a discussion thread in the Movie section of this forum where the bulk of this should be?

Oh well...:rolleyes

P.S. Thanks for the review of the DVD, Herb. Sorry to see this thread turn in to a debate about the movie.

 

[Yumbo]

um, wasn't Kennedy killed by the guy in TAKEN in order to keep funding the Roswell project?

 

[Eric Paddon]

I think that it is impossible to review this movie without its content impacting the review. I have *never* seen a dispassionate review of JFK in any DVD forum that manages to stay confined to the matter of its picture quality, sound quality, extras etc. without the reviewer making some kind of editorial comment endorsing the movie's arguments about the real events it purports to depict. The review in this thread was but the latest example of that tradition.

I respect the positions of the moderators on this matter, but I should note that it was only because I saw an editorial endorsement of the film's content in the initial review that I felt warranted a response and not the desire to start an argument for the sake of it.