Author Topic: JFK Revisited currently has a Rotten Tomato score of 55%  (Read 1064 times)

Offline John Mytton

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3108
Re: JFK Revisited currently has a Rotten Tomato score of 56%
« Reply #10 on: July 15, 2021, 08:24:10 AM »
If you think the Warren Commissionís report was a whitewash then you are a conspiracy theorist.

The report, without supporting evidence, pins two murders on a guy.

The WC report was a corroborative effort, that's conspiracy.

Elementary, my dear Watson.

"without supporting evidence" LOL



JohnM
« Last Edit: July 15, 2021, 08:31:35 AM by John Mytton »

Online Otto Beck

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 925
Re: JFK Revisited currently has a Rotten Tomato score of 56%
« Reply #11 on: July 15, 2021, 09:23:32 AM »
"without supporting evidence" LOL



JohnM

Looks impressive.

Until you start digging.

Remember cabbie Whaley?

Offline Jerry Organ

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1626
  • Halifax - Canada
Re: JFK Revisited currently has a Rotten Tomato score of 56%
« Reply #12 on: July 16, 2021, 03:49:03 AM »
LA-based "Deadline Hollywood" entertainment trade blog's Todd McCarthy nudged the Tomatometer to 60%. Yet another deluded reviewer praising Stone's "conspiracy facts".

    "No matter how skeptical one might choose to be about conspiracy
     theories, there is simply too much evidence to ignore, too many
     suspicious details that undermine the lone gunman theory, too
     many credible reasons to believe that bigger players and master-
     minds than Lee Harvey Oswald were behind the act"

    "The composition and ultimate secrecy of so much of what the Warren
     Commission did in its presumed full assessment of the crime continues
     to cast a shadow over its work, even if Stoneís persistent digging did
     liberate a good deal of evidence and testimony."

    "But even if informed citizens think they know most of what theyíll ever
     know about the assassination, Stone has spent a great deal more time
     than the rest of us have examining and re-examining the question of
     who was behind the assassination and its endless aftermath."

The credit for "a good deal of evidence and testimony" would be better directed to the Warren Commission's 26 volumes of Hearings and Exhibits, and the HSCA's 12 volumes. What massive "secrecy" was the Warren Commission engaged in? What did Oliver Stone personally "dig into" when he's been relying on the works of Garrison, Marrs and DiEugenio, and evidently avoiding books like "Case Closed" and "Reclaiming History". Stone also seems to have purposely ignored, for example, this Forum, the McAdams site and the Dale K. Myers blog, all of which appear in Google Searches for conspiracy claims.

I suppose it's to be expected some of these film-buff types would think one of their own is gifted with profound knowledge. The truth is there is an increase of high-standard true-crime documentaries being made these days, but I can't think of one that uses dubious crackpot devices like Gerald Ford "moving" a wound site.

Online Jerry Freeman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3028
  • I am not a "CT"
Re: JFK Revisited currently has a Rotten Tomato score of 56%
« Reply #13 on: July 16, 2021, 04:56:17 AM »


For about $10....you can get an easily storable CD containing all 26 volumes. They actually fail to support the ultimate determination of the Report.

 I have linked this before and the statement was ignored-----
Quote
Four of the seven members of the commission, Boggs, Cooper, McCloy, and Russell, had serious doubts regarding the conclusions of the commission that the President and Governor Connally were both wounded by the "magic bullet" and regarding the view that Oswald had acted alone.[30][31]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warren_Commission#Skepticism

The majority of the very Commission itself "had serious doubts" regarding their own conclusions!! So, would that not have made [by definition established here on this forum by the anti-skeptics] these gentlemen 'conspiracy theorists'?

Offline Jack Nessan

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 435
Re: JFK Revisited currently has a Rotten Tomato score of 56%
« Reply #14 on: July 16, 2021, 03:18:19 PM »


For about $10....you can get an easily storable CD containing all 26 volumes. They actually fail to support the ultimate determination of the Report.

 I have linked this before and the statement was ignored-----https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warren_Commission#Skepticism

The majority of the very Commission itself "had serious doubts" regarding their own conclusions!! So, would that not have made [by definition established here on this forum by the anti-skeptics] these gentlemen 'conspiracy theorists'?

McCloy should not be in this group. There is no place for the bullet exiting JFK's throat to go but into JBC's back. McCloy also states this very point.

Mr. McCLOY - Warren Commission Member to the HSCA about SBT

Twice in my life, and I am sure a number of people in this room may have had a somewhat similar experience, I stood right alongside of a man as he was shot. The first man--it was in World War I in France--was killed. The second man recovered from his wound. The circumstances of the second experience were really quite amazing. I am convinced, after my experience, that on occasion, when you are shot, you don't know the minute you are hit. There is a sort of a perceptible period following the impact before you get the full realization that you have been hit. In the first case, it was a fellow officer in World War I. We were not far apart and he quietly said, "Jack, I think I am hit." He shortly collapsed subsequently and died of his wound. The other experience, which is almost unbelievable, was in Berlin when we were rehearsing for the reception of President Truman, who was going to visit us at the American headquarters in Berlin after the war. I had been, as you know, an official of the Government, Military Governor, and later High Commissioner for Germany, and Gen. Lucius Clay, my predecessor as Military Governor was with me, and we began to rehearse the ceremony because President Truman was coming along that afternoon to visit the headquarters. We were rehearsing, for example, who would step up and first shake hands with the President, when the bugles should sound off, et cetera--"You are going to do this and you that." There was a friend of mine who was on Clay's staff and who later became a very distinguished jurist in Massachusetts. He became Chief Judge of the Supreme Judicial Court. His name was Cutter, and we designated him to pose as the President. We said, "you are going to be President Truman, you are going to be the President and are to stand here." We started through the rehearsal. This was in front of the headquarters in Berlin and, by George, Cutter turned to me at a certain point, sort of hesitated and said, "Jack, I think I'm shot," and in a little while, he collapsed. You can imagine what a tizzy that created.


I know Governor Connally very well; I have shot quail with him and I know he's a good shot and I know he is familiar with firearms. Frankly, I don't think he knew exactly when he was hit. I saw his recent testimony--at least somebody reported to me, perhaps indirectly, that he wasn't as certain now as when he first appeared before us--before our Commission when he said he was sure it wasn't the same shot which hit President Kennedy which hit him. I don't know where that bullet could have gone if it didn't go through Governor Connally. Moreover, Governor Connally didn't know until the next day, I think it was, that he had been shot in the hand, as well as in the body. I am suggesting that the certainty which he felt earlier isn't entirely reliable. The Germans have a word for it. They call it the "nachschlag." I believe those who had been close to places where people have been shot are frequently aware of a perceptible delay on the part of the victim in registering an awareness of the shot.

Offline Jerry Organ

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1626
  • Halifax - Canada
Re: JFK Revisited currently has a Rotten Tomato score of 56%
« Reply #15 on: July 16, 2021, 04:58:07 PM »


For about $10....you can get an easily storable CD containing all 26 volumes. They actually fail to support the ultimate determination of the Report.

 I have linked this before and the statement was ignored-----

Quote
Four of the seven members of the commission, Boggs, Cooper, McCloy, and Russell, had serious doubts regarding the conclusions of the commission that the President and Governor Connally were both wounded by the "magic bullet" and regarding the view that Oswald had acted alone.[30][31]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warren_Commission#Skepticism

The majority of the very Commission itself "had serious doubts" regarding their own conclusions!! So, would that not have made [by definition established here on this forum by the anti-skeptics] these gentlemen 'conspiracy theorists'?

Hale Boggs shouldn't be in a group that "had serious doubts ... that Oswald had acted alone". Boggs had some doubts about the SBT only; but in 1966, he said the SBT evidence was "very persuasive" and that "almost any marksman using a telescopic sight could have performed that dastardly deed". I believe Boggs was quoted in Epstein's "Inquest" (possibly the "source" for the Wikipedia paragraph; the direct source is Oliver Stone's "Untold History" book) as having "strong doubts" about the SBT. Epstein himself doubted the SBT but believes Oswald acted alone anyway.

John Sherman Cooper shouldn't be in a group that "had serious doubts ... that Oswald had acted alone". Cooper, like Boggs, doubted the SBT when he said "there was no evidence to show that they were hit by the same bullet." Doubting the SBT doesn't mean you then believe in multiple gunmen: ie the Mark Fuhrman and Andrew Mason Theories. The SBT-doubters on the Commission placed an unwarranted faith in Nellie Connally's conviction that the President was struck before her husband was, and so simply envisioned a shot through Kennedy, followed a few seconds later by a shot through Connally. There seems to be no record as to how the Blue Ribbon Doubters, in the years followed the release of the Report, explained what happened to the bullet that emerged from the President's throat if it did not strike the Governor.

Richard Russell Jr. -- who attended a whopping six out of 94 Hearings -- was the only Commissioner to have "serious doubts ... that Oswald had acted alone". He said, for example, in 1970 that he didn't have "the slightest doubt" that Oswald fired all the shots, but he "never believed that Lee Harvey Oswald assassinated President Kennedy without at least some encouragement from others" and "I think someone else worked with him." I guess he means some limited conspiracy (in the form of support) and that Oswald acted by himself in Dealey Plaza.

The Warren Report stated: "There was no question in the mind of any member of the Commission that all the shots which caused the President's and Governor Connally's wounds were fired from the sixth floor window of the Texas School Book Depository." This is something at that time that all members agreed to. Yet, Freeman, whose motto is "I am not a 'CT'", wants (showing his bias) to have most of the Commissioners be CTs.
« Last Edit: July 16, 2021, 11:50:37 PM by Jerry Organ »

Offline Jerry Organ

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1626
  • Halifax - Canada
Re: JFK Revisited currently has a Rotten Tomato score of 56%
« Reply #16 on: July 21, 2021, 10:23:22 PM »


"The Playlist" review by Mark Asch just checked the Tomatometer to 56%. Some excerpts ...

    "So many of the supposedly telling facts about the chain
     of evidence of the assassinís bullet, the muddled autopsy
     protocol, conflicted eyewitness testimony, even the weight
     of Kennedyís brain, are treated as damning, rather than as
     minor inconsistencies most easily explained as the natural
     consequences of confusion, trauma, bureaucratic sloppiness,
     the limits of forensic science in the early 1960s, and the
     unreliability of memory."

    "Even without the benefit of a pause button to check Wikipedia
     to see which facts Stone has omitted, his sleight-of-hand is
     obvious. A bullet the voiceover claims was undamaged is
     clearly deformed in its tip when seen in a frontal view"



( Reviewer probably meant the rear tip as seen "end-on" )

Offline John Mytton

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3108
Re: JFK Revisited currently has a Rotten Tomato score of 56%
« Reply #17 on: July 24, 2021, 01:47:07 AM »


"The Playlist" review by Mark Asch just checked the Tomatometer to 56%. Some excerpts ...

    "So many of the supposedly telling facts about the chain
     of evidence of the assassinís bullet, the muddled autopsy
     protocol, conflicted eyewitness testimony, even the weight
     of Kennedyís brain, are treated as damning, rather than as
     minor inconsistencies most easily explained as the natural
     consequences of confusion, trauma, bureaucratic sloppiness,
     the limits of forensic science in the early 1960s, and the
     unreliability of memory."

    "Even without the benefit of a pause button to check Wikipedia
     to see which facts Stone has omitted, his sleight-of-hand is
     obvious. A bullet the voiceover claims was undamaged is
     clearly deformed in its tip when seen in a frontal view"



( Reviewer probably meant the rear tip as seen "end-on" )

"That sequence is just the beginning of our demolition of CE 399.  One of my objectives in writing the script was this: From here on in whenever anybody even mentions CE 399 everyone will giggle. And that is what we did. Remember what Mantik says about it being foundational to the HSCA and WC.  Well, we will show that there was no foundation to it. It was all lies."
James DiEugenio

Talk about delusions of grandeur, read what DiEugenio claims about CE 399, but I bet the film doesn't address the bullet being planted on a different floor and how "they" just hoped someone would find CE 399 and make the necessary link and I bet they don't explain how even before the surgery was finished the psychic conspirators knew to plant a bullet with a tiny amount of missing lead that just happens to closely match the amount of lead found in Connally and how they knew to deform the bullet so it was consistent with travelling sideways as it smashed through Connally's ribs another fact which only become apparent after Connally's surgery.





JohnM
« Last Edit: July 24, 2021, 03:34:12 AM by John Mytton »

Offline Michael T. Griffith

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 592
    • JFK Assassination Web Page
Re: JFK Revisited currently has a Rotten Tomato score of 55%
« Reply #18 on: July 26, 2021, 09:55:34 PM »
So a bunch of establishment media outlets have panned the documentary. Shocking! Say it ain't so. What a surprise. By the way, on IMDB, the documentary has a rating of 7.9 out of 10, but of course you went and cherry picked only the negative reviews.

The documentary is actually quite good. It's a huge improvement over the movie JFK.




Offline John Mytton

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3108
Re: JFK Revisited currently has a Rotten Tomato score of 55%
« Reply #19 on: July 26, 2021, 10:30:58 PM »
So a bunch of establishment media outlets have panned the documentary. Shocking! Say it ain't so. What a surprise. By the way, on IMDB, the documentary has a rating of 7.9 out of 10, but of course you went and cherry picked only the negative reviews.

The documentary is actually quite good. It's a huge improvement over the movie JFK.

Quote
So a bunch of establishment media outlets have panned the documentary. Shocking! Say it ain't so. What a surprise

That pesky "establishment", more than half a century later and still trying to keep the man down. 

Quote
By the way, on IMDB, the documentary has a rating of 7.9 out of 10, but of course you went and cherry picked only the negative reviews

Oh yes, user reviews are oh so reliable, let's have a closer look at the distribution of user scores and as I predicted clearly a lot of old paranoid "scholars" have review bombed this film but simply in reverse! Hilarious. Thanks for the laughs Griff, I hope you stick around and share more of your pearls of wisdom.



JohnM

« Last Edit: July 27, 2021, 02:44:48 AM by John Mytton »

 

Mobile View