More Oliver Stone conspiracy bullshit!


https://www.slashfilm.com/oliver-stone-jfk-documentary/

Stone revealed his new JFK documentary was headed to Cannes during a conversation with filmmaker Spike Lee, via Variety. According to the filmmaker, he’s had a lot of time finding a distributor for the doc – Netflix and National Geographic turned it down due to an “unapproved fact check.” Stone hopes the doc’s presence at Cannes will help rectify all of this. “That’s a big step for us because, at least, if it can’t be recognized in America as a document, it will be recognized in the end by international people. And that’s important,” the filmmaker said. Stone added that the documentary “makes the case harder, tighter. It’s about real facts that are shocking to people.”

Stone has, of course, covered this material before. His star-studded 1991 movie JFK was a huge hit – the sixth highest-grossing film of 1991 worldwide – and became a kind of cultural phenomenon. The movie generated so much attention that it was partially credited by the United States Congress in helping with the passage of the President John F. Kennedy Assassination Records Collection Act of 1992, which directed the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) to establish a collection of records to be known as the President John F. Kennedy Assassination Records Collection.

The film portrays a vast, labyrinthine conspiracy surrounding the assassination being investigated by New Orleans District Attorney Jim Garrison, as played by Kevin Costner. It’s a fantastic movie – in fact, it’s one of my all-time favorite films. But here’s the thing: it’s also…how shall I put this…full of shit. Stone bends and alters innumerable facts to tell the story he wants to tell. In his defense, JFK isn’t a documentary – it’s a movie, and movies based on true stories play fast and loose with the truth all the time. But the film style of the movie – which blends archival footage with grainy black-and-white recreations meant to resemble archival footage – lends the entire movie an air of authenticity. In short, many people come away from JFK thinking that the film portrays what really happened that November day in Dallas in 1963.

reply

Nono, it's good stuff.

reply

"In short, many people come away from JFK thinking that the film portrays"
-------------
Then "people" are stupid. What happened though, is not what we have been told. Those that reflexively believed the "Warren Comm." were lied to. Stone has done a service to try and get information whatever it is. He was not making a Documentary.

reply

JFK Revisited is a whole different thing, and it is very well done, and has come partial answers, enough to show that the Warren Commission was a farce. Also enough to show that the murderers of American President John Fitzgerald Kennedy were protected and will never face justice. The criminal mafia-like cabal that runs this country needs to be outed and brought to justice.

reply

The movie JFK is full of shit because the government pumped out so much shit so there was no way to find or analyze anything that did not turn into shit.

JFK was indeed shit movie that only signifies what any American who lived through that event, and those who have bothered to look into it since know ... all the facts are disinformation. That is how you hide something like this. And I suspect this is how the Republican party has filtered out anyone with a speck of integrity to fill it up with thugs and yes-men who march against the American people while wearing jackboots, waving the flag and whistling Dixie. Ultimately the ruling Trumping military if push comes to shove - the junta will murder anyone who gets too out of line or who seeks to change things.

That movie resonated with Americans so much because it said in the only acceptable way - we know what we hear in the news if rigged, the elections are fixed, the country is corrupt ... and we cannot do anything about it ... but make no mistake ... we know.

reply

The movie was garbage. I've always thought that, and never bothered to see it until several years ago.

This movie is not garbage and is very credible. It is documented by 2 million pieces of evidence, and it only takes a few of them to prove that the Warren Commission was covering up ... and 3 unconnected to the military-intelligence services proved that in their notes. They were disgusted by the Warren Commission and said there was something going on.

And they were right.

reply

Can someone please cite the specific points cited by NatGeo which led to them rejecting it?

Thanks

reply

The basic problem of the unanswered questions that supposedly require a conspiracy to explain, is that the eyewitness testimony to the shooting, all of it, is given equal weight. Which is not how eyewitness evidence works. If ten people say they saw Jimmy shoot his friend Billy, including Billy himself before he died. And Jimmy is found a block away with a gun that matches all the bullets found in Billy. But an 11th guy says he saw the shooting and he couldn't identify Jimmy in a line up. And a 12th guy who saw Jimmy being arrested on TV says he also saw the same guy putting his car through the carwash at the time of the shooting. And years later people who originally said they saw nothing or saw nothing that contradicts the first ten eye witnesses wind up having vivid detailed memories of having conversations with Jimmy around the time of the shooting, or recall seeing Jimmy and Billy laughing and joking minutes before the shooting (which means neither could have killed the other, of course, right?)... and so on. When that happens, you are not obligated to explain all the varied and non-corroborated statements that contradict what the primary witnesses consistently described, independent of one another. It does not always require proof of falsehood of one testimony when it contradicts several other testimonies, all consistent and obtained independently, when the differing sets of testimonies cannot both be true.

reply