Today we're going to mark the 50th anniversary of the assassination of John F. Kennedy by doing something we generally don't do here at Raving Reviews - getting serious. We decided to do this after watching the PBS Nova documentary; Cold Case JFK (you can watch it at that link). Now, generally we have nothing but the highest respect for both Nova as a series and PBS in general, but this show was downright awful and we're going to document just how strange it was by pointing out all the things that are wrong with it (and in using the term we're borrowing from the now very famous Youtube.com series Cinema Sins). We figured that if the logic behind movies can be attacked, why not use the same approach to question a documentary? Plus much of the rest of the evidence we're going to look at comes from youtube.com - something we didn't have not so long ago.
It's not our goal here to speculate as to who may have actually committed the assassination (whether it was a lone gunman or conspiracy is the key question). It's our goal to assess whether this documentary accurately applied its investigative approach towards helping to solve the mystery.
Please note that the picture from show highlights a problem with trajectory...
The documentary opens with promise to use the latest forensic science to get to the bottom of the assassination. They mention that the majority of their focus will be on ballistics. The main questions that the show asks falls into the following categories:
What type of wound does the Carcano rifle produce in soft tissue?
What type of head wound would a Carcano rifle produce?
Is the magic bullet theory accurate?
Was there audio evidence of another shooter?
What are the realistic trajectories of (possible) different shooters?
Before we start, keep these things in mind:
There were two official investigations, The Warren Commission (mid-60's) and the United States House of Representatives Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA) in 1978 - the HSCA was initiated as the result of the release of the Zapruder film.
There are two well-known films of the assassination (the Zapruder film and the Muchmore film). There were as many as 20 other home movies made that day in Dealey Plaza.
There is at least one audio recording (which was examined in the congressional investigation).
There are many, many details associated with the assassination that the documentary does not attempt address; some background information is presented but not in any kind of organized fashion. We will not address most of those issues either.
Enhanced view of Zapruder film
Here are the problems we found with the film:
The film interviews the Secret Service agent who jumped on the back of the President's limo to cover Kennedy and the First Lady. He describes having to cover the President's head in order so that the first Lady will let him go at the hospital - yet the film fails to ask the unbelievably critical question - what did the head wound look like?
The film does not mention anything about what the Dallas ER doctors saw while treating the President and examining him after his death.
This is how the surgeon at Parkland hospital described Kennedy's head wound. It shows an exit in the back of the head.
Here's the quote from Dr. McCelland (who treated Kennedy at Parkland) - "I was about 18 inches above that wound. I got a better look at it than anybody in that room. It was way back in the back (of the head), which may lead to the thought that he was shot not only from the back, but also from the front.” This is never mentioned in the show.
The film does not attempt to find rifle experts with expertise shooting the Carcano 6.5 rifle in question. There is no mention made of the rifle's poor reputation. You would think that given this show's focus on ballistics there'd be more discussion about the rifle.
Oswald with the Carcano - no mention of how odd this photo was or the differences in the shadows
The show does not present any history of the Carcano 6.5 rifle Model 38 Fucile Modello 91/38 - other than stating it was a military rifle with full-metal jacket. The history of the Carcano is very, very complicated. This discussion also highlights that the Carcano was nowhere near as accurate as the M14 sniper rifle and very difficult to fire quickly. It was originally meant to be used a Calvary rifle - it was modified to be used as a short carbine with limited accuracy at a distance (testimony given during the Warren Commission was misleading in this regard). Also, worth noting all of the remarkable characteristics that the ballistics experts in the Nova program seemingly discover on their own are widely known and available in other websites describing the history of the gun. The particular model Oswald used was produced in 1940 and production was discontinued in less than 1 year (in favor of another model). Read this testimony from people at the firing range where Oswald practiced - note the discussion of the odd "ball of fire" coming out of the barrel. Now, this is interesting because of all the eyewitness testimony in both official investigations, the only reports of a flash (like the one that might be produced from a gun muzzle upon firing) was seen coming from the Grassy Knoll. If 3 shots had been fired from the book depository building, why did no one see flashes from there - and from the same gun that other witnesses at the firing range said produced flashes?
View from 3rd floor of Dal-Tex building (straight line trajectory - no trees) - multiple reports place a gunman there
The show mentions how incredibly unusual the rifle was (there was no evidence of it ever being used in a crime before in the U.S.), but doesn't ask the question why someone would want it (except by stating it was cheap - so we're given to believe it was chosen because it cost $19.99 in a mail order magazine). It is worth noting, that even though the rifle itself was cheap, the ammunition for it was not (and was very hard to come by at that time). The lack of attention to or examination of the rifle itself by the film / investigators is beyond strange (they only focus on the ammunition, but even that isn't done thoroughly). How can you have a ballistics investigation and not talk about the gun??? [and BTW - they never mention if the 'pristine' bullet found on the stretcher in Parkland Memorial Hospital matched tests done on firing bullets from the actual (retrieved Carcano pictured below) gun - this is the most basic component of any forensic ballistics investigation].
The Carcano 6.5 we're told fired the shots in Dealey Plaza - note that it's a Carbine (short rifle)
Almost no discussion is made regarding the time it takes to recycle the rifle (see video 2) between shots. Nor is there mention of what it might be like to try to use the scope under those (rapid fire) conditions.
The show's investigators, supposedly a bunch of brilliant forensic experts, fail to ask basic questions time and time again about the actual shooting - instead of their mocked up tests. For example, never once do they address why Oswald if he was the lone shooter, didn't take any shots at the President's limo while it was on Houston Street before turning onto Elm. This shot would have provided Oswald with a direct line of sight and no trees to obstruct it.
Note that the right corner 6th floor window of the book depository provided nearly a straight angle shot onto Houston Street
There's no mention that Oswald bought the gun in March of 1963. Oswald moved to Dallas in late 1962. How could he be planning for an assassination attempt in March given the Dallas JFK trip wasn't announced until September?
Very strangely, the show doesn't not mention that the Warren Commission claims that Oswald using the same rifle from Nov 22, tried to assassinate Gen Edwin Walker in Dallas on April 10 (just weeks after the gun arrived). According to the Warren Commission two suspects were involved and importantly, they missed the General who was sitting stationary at his desk. Ballistics tests done later seem to confirm it was the same gun. Please remember that all the shots at Dealey Plaza were taken at moving targets.
The General Walker story is even more bizarre when you consider that the JFK administration had charged him with treason, arrested him and put him in a mental facility prior to the Dallas visit - and were afraid his followers in Dallas were a security threat. So why did Oswald try to kill someone JFK considered an enemy of the state?
Excellent photo showing the relative position of the limo just before the shots were fired, Book Depository (left behind trees) and the Dal-Tex building (directly behind the limo with a straight and flat line of sight)
Lot's of inane and irrelevant details are paraded in the show - such as the Secret Service breaking off the handles of the President's casket, etc.
While discussing the autopsy at Bethesda Naval hospital does not address the controversy about the back of the President's head (which was mentioned by the doctors at Parkland hospital - e.g. that there was a large exit would in the back of the head). They don't mention anything about the possibility that the scalp may have been placed back over the wound (there's been a lot of discussion about that ever since the autopsy photos were made public).
The show does mention that that the autopsy doctors noted that the 1st shot that went from the back through the throat came from behind not above. This is critical.
The show neither acknowledges or shows the other home movies taken of the assassination.
They mention that Kennedy was given a Tracheotomy at Parkland Memorial hospital - no one asks why - they had just gotten through mentioning how much of his brains had been shot out - why do a Tracheotomy?
They do mention the 30 frame interval (1.6 seconds) in between the two main shots (Kennedy's shot that comes out of his throat and the fatal head shot). This is the reason given for the need for the magic bullet. Rather than questioning why anyone would go out of their way coming up with the Magic Bullet theory (e.g. trajectories and timing) they focus on trying to prove it instead.
They show Kennedy's clothes and you can clearly see the bullet exited the left side of the tie (and shirt collar) - no mention is made of that. This is also important.
Clearly visible is an exit wound passing out the left side of the President's tie
There is a very short section of the Zapruder film which seems to be missing - no one mentions it. It is when the limo rounds the corner onto Elm street - we see a jump cut to the limo about 50 feet down the road. It appears as though maybe 30 or so frames missing. Now, interestingly, in at least 3 other home movies we've seen so far taken of the motorcade passing through Dealey Plaza the section where the car turns onto Elm Street is either missing or damaged (the same spot where the missing Zapruder frames were). It begs the question, what happened during that interval? [this is important due to some reports that a first shot actually occurred at that point - one that likely missed).
They mention that Kennedy is hit in frame 224 or 225 of the Zapruder film. Governor Connolly is only noticeably hit around frame 236. That's about a .3 second lag between the two hits. To give this context the film does mention that upon exiting the gun, a Carcano bullet travels at nearly 2100 feet per second. The distance between Kennedy and Connelly is perhaps 3 feet. Even at a 1000 feet per second, there shouldn't be any noticeable lag between the two hits (in what is called the magic bullet). Nowhere in the following Magic Bullet theory discussion do they spend any time exploring the inexplicable lag time between frame 224 and 235 or 236.
Note the relative position in the car of Kennedy and Connelly (left side of Kennedy's tie points to Connelly's left not right)
They do mention how forensic specialists were not used to do the autopsy but don't make any statements regarding the experience or skills necessary for attorney Arlen Spector to have made his assertions about the Magic Bullet (his expertise or lack thereof is never called into question).
Arlen Spector's notes on the Magic Bullet - this is not shown in the film
They acknowledge it takes 2.3 seconds to fire the Carcano 6.5, but never talk about whether someone could fire and aim it that fast.
Video 2 - Here's what firing a Carcano looks like
Despite being able to clearly see the trees that potentially obscure a shot from the 6th floor of the book depository, it is never mentioned in the show.
Despite the documentary showing off gee-wiz laser mapping technology and trajectories, they never show or otherwise describe the trajectory from the window where Lee Harvey Oswald was supposed to taken the shots (just from the grassy knoll)
A map of Dealey Plaza and the parade route - note the relative positions of the buildings behind the route (the X's mark where the 2 shots identified b y the Warren Commission took place).
While the show does examine, in a very cursory manner, questions about the Grassy Knoll, it doesn't in any way address any other possible shooting locations (such as the park between main street or the Dal-Tex building).
The show does not include any eyewitness testimony (except for the testimony of Governor Connelly that he was hit by a 2nd bullet - the throat shot to Kennedy being the first - which does contradict the Warren commission findings which say the throat shot was second).
Listen for yourself to the actual witnesses...
No discussion was made at all about the parade route.
They acknowledge that the Magic Bullet theory calls for 1 bullet causing seven wounds and still not showing much if any damage (the pristine bullet). They show the Carcano 6.5 shooting a bullet through 3 feet of pine wood. Then they're test show the bullet becomes lopsided as it exits a flesh like material. So, even if the bullet were to come out of Kennedy undamaged, hitting Connelly sideways at a lower velocity and passing through multiple bones should have produced some more deformation to the bullet. The film does not address the fact that the bullet passed through multiple bones in Connelly's wounds. So, their tests of passing through gelatin is not accurate for what happens when the bullet hits Connelly. They try to explain this by saying the bullet is actually quished a little (flattened sideways).
While they are showing the animated trajectories in their Magic Bullet discussion, they never show the full trajectory (where it emanates from - the window in the book depository).
View from 6th floor book depository window - note the view is partially obscured
When showing the trajectory of Kennedy's neck wounds, the show inserts a diagram which seems to imply Kennedy was leaning forward - this helps to potentially line up with a sharp downward trajectory for a shot fired from the 6th floor of the book depository (because in Kennedy the entry wound in the back and exit wound in the front seem more or less level - or at least with a limited downward angle).
Problem here - Kennedy was not facing down showing that the bullet could not have come from a steep angle above
When looking at the diagrams from Governor Connelly's wounds it is clear that there is a sharp angle of descent. The bullet enters just under the right shoulder blade and exits just under his right breast. According to some diagrams it appears to be about a 30 degree angle (or 27.03). Not only that, but if we accept that Connelly was still sitting facing forward (which you can see as the limo emerges from the sign when Kennedy is first hit around frame 225 of the Zapruder film) then his right wrist was likely folded over his lap and thus the bullet was also coming from the side as opposed to being directly behind him. So, high angle and from the right side. For Kennedy, the same "Magic" bullet was on a relatively flat trajectory from behind and slightly to the right (hence the bullet leaving the left side of his shirt and tie).
A more accurate representation of the 30 degree trajectory Connelly's wounds
So from the previous discussion - how could a bullet clearly coming flat from behind and heading left (say 15 degrees or more) enter Connelly 3 feet ahead of him under Connelly's right shoulder if Connelly was facing forward? And if the Kennedy bullet didn't actually hit Connelly - where did it go? The show never considers the possibility - even though it acknowledged Connelly himself saying he was hit by a later shot. Where did it go - well, if it was headed downward at 15 degrees and to the left of Kennedy then? There was no discussion about forensic examination of the Presidential limo - which for example might have shown a bullet lodged in the back of middle row or front row seats towards the center.
Governor Connelly's wounds.
Nova goes out of the way to highlight that the ballistics expert endorses Arlen Spector's Single (Magic) Bullet theory after merely testing the Carcano 6.5 through gelatin and noting it's wobble upon exit (3 times). He makes no mention of any of the relative trajectories of the 7 wounds when making that endorsement.
The strange trajectory of the Magic Bullet. Proponents for Spector's theory try to make up for this by showing Connelly had already turned backwards even though the Zapruder shows he didn't until almost 1.5 seconds later.
No mention was made of the fact that the limo was not properly searched for forensic evidence and was completely rebuilt beginning within 3 weeks of assassination in Cincinnati, Ohio. Thus it was not available for review by the Warren Commission (or anyone else) in its "assassination" condition.
The strangest moment in the film is truly bizarre as they tackle the visual evidence that Kennedy's head was pushed backwards from a shot emanating most probably at the Grassy Knoll. They make the contention that the head shot triggered some sort of nerve cluster reaction that jolted the head and body backwards even though the entry wound supposedly came from behind. Yeah right... No evidence for this whatsoever is presented - just the preposterous theory.
One of many eyewitness accounts regarding the direction of Head wound entry
The show went out of their way to dismiss dozens of eyewitness accounts on the number of shots fired by stating that urban acoustics can make pinpointing locations of shots impossible.
Interesting examination of audio taken the day of the shooting plus eye-witnesses
They dismiss the audio tape evidence without even playing the tape and then bring in an audio expert to do an audio test. They then say that the Carcano 6.5 would present two sounds for every shot - yet the audio tape evidence doesn't seem to indicated double shots.
The show identifies a drawing of Kennedy's brain as key evidence without disclosing who provided it (they just mention a commission). The real brain is lost of course and no one wanted to listen to the doctor who treated Kennedy or even ask the Secret Service agent what the back of his head looked like. Instead, we're being given a potentially self-serving and undocumented piece of evidence that may have been used to help cover up a conspiracy, not prove one. Yet, Nova doesn't disclose these issues. This is the primary evidence supporting a head entry wound from behind.
JFK Exhibit F-302 - The drawing the show says proves rear entry of the fatal head shot
If you look at the x-ray they say is Kennedy's skull, they posit that a bullet entered the lower portion of the back of the head (causing fractures to radiate upwards) and then exited the front top. But, this seems entirely contrary with the notion of a trajectory pointed downward at the President from the book depository (say at a 25 degree angle). You can't have it both ways - if the shot came from behind it would have had to hit somewhere near the top of the head, right? And worse than than - it would have been heading downwards so it should have exited Kennedy's face, not the right portion of his forehead. (and again if you look at the diagrams they used to illustrate the trajectory, it shows Kennedy's head leaning forward - which we know it wasn't).
So, again the show fails to connect trajectory and wound behavior or position of the subjects. Also, even in the film they show of the skull tests - the skull shot from behind is pushed dramatically -forward. The extended expert testimony Nova provides even emphasizes that the bullet is 'arching upwards' into the top of the head without any mention as to why or how the bullet could have entered from that low and from that angle.
Nova ends the show basically saying that science has proven the Magic Bullet theory is correct (without having in any way done so) and that the testimony of one guy (who worked at the same lab that was trying to prove the Magic Bullet theory was correct) who says the backward movement of Kennedy's head was in fact some type of instantaneous seizure.
So, what should we think about this? Is it merely incompetence on the part of the people making the film or a deliberate attempt to obscure and otherwise confuse some very obvious facts:
Neither the show nor the commissions have yet been able to account for the lag time and change in trajectories for the 7 Magic Bullet wounds.
No one can explain (or even tried to in this show) how someone could take a very poor bolt action rifle and make those shots so quickly.
No one can properly explain the fatal head shot.
No one has asked the obvious question about the Dal-Tex building - which when you look at photos is in a nearly straight line behind where the limo was driving. There were reports of shots fired from the 3rd floor of that building - that trajectory would be consistent with the Kennedy throat wound.
No one has yet to properly explain what happened in Dealey Plaza that day 50 years ago this week. We may not know in our lifetimes what really occurred. However, Nova has done us a real disservice with this documentary by presenting such a sloppy investigation. It only serves to remind us of how poorly managed this cold case actually was.
Not too long ago we presented our list of the 10 Dumbest Movies of All time; today we're taking a 'glass half full' view of the world and focusing on the positive. Determining what movies qualify to be among the top 10 is no easy matter though.
Midnight Cowboy
There are quite a few truly great films out there to choose from - so we applied the following criteria to help make our picks:
Each film had to be a profound story - something out of the ordinary that sticks with you and effects you at an emotional level.
Each film had to be cinematically innovative. This could take a variety of forms from introduction of special effects to the cinematography itself and of course the story-line.
Each film had to have more than one scene that is remembered as being historic (like the baseball scene from the Untouchables although that film didn't make this list because while a classic the story-line was a just to thin).
To be on our list usually also involved having a very good musical score as well.
What we didn't do was base our list of critics' determination of what ought to be considered 'the greatest of all time.' This is why movies like Citizen Kane does not appear on our list.
Orson Welles was always over-rated, especially by himself
So here's our list of the Top 10 Best Movies of All Time:
# 1 Best Movie of All Time - Schindler's List: Why did this film top the list? There were several reasons; first because this version of the Holocaust tale was different than those that had gone before it. Spielberg made it seem more real. Perhaps it was the use of Black and White or perhaps it was the fascinating character studies provided by Ben Kingsley, Liam Neeson and Ralph Fiennes - and each of those actors turned in what was probably the performance of their careers. Second, this film was about both horror and hope and how the human spirit can overcome the lesser angels of our nature. Third, perhaps it was the timing of it - while this film debuted a new genocide was just beginning in Europe in Bosnia. NATO intervened to stop that war and the Genocide in 1995 - it seems to us that this film may have played a role in helping to remind the world about the human face of Genocide. It's a lesson that will likely need to be learned over and over again in the future - and now we have this film to help teach that lesson.
Schindler's List was Best Picture in 1993
# 2 Best Movie of All Time - Dr. Strangelove: Some might find the selection of "Dr. Strangelove or How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb" as an odd choice for the second best film of all time. We think the rank is well-deserved. First, this stands as the most profound and biting political satire on film - ever (second place is Chaplin's "The Great Dictator"). Second, this movie provided the most damning critique of the Arms Race ever produced. Third, Peter Sellers gave the performance/s of his career (playing at least 3 characters). We will never forget his insane parody of Henry Kissinger as Strangelove.
Peter Sellers as Strangleove
# 3 Best Movie of All Time - The Godfather: What can we say - this movie had everything; a soundtrack that we can never forget; one hell of a story and some of the best acting ever. Al Pacino will probably always be remembered for his role as Michael Corleone - seeing him become the new Godfather at the end of the movie is one of those cinematic moments we'll never forget. In fact, the entire movie is chocked full of iconic scenes.
Michael becomes, the Godfather...
# 4 Best Movie of All Time - Blade Runner: We reviewed this film some time ago and we have to admit - we just keep liking it better and better as time goes by. Blade Runner brings together a fantastic Science Fiction story by Philip K Dick ( Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?), unbelievable cinematic vision from Director Ridley Scott and some truly memorable performances by a huge and wildly talented ensemble cast. This film set its own standard in terms of creating a unique universe all its own - it's LA Noir with flying cars and genetically engineered super-humans. We're hoping the rumors of a sequel are true but it is unlikely that any follow-on movie will match this original. The soundtrack by Vangelis is perhaps the best movie score ever.
The FX from Blade Runner inspired a generation of Hollywood film-makers and animators
# 5 Best Movie of All Time - The Matrix: This movie still retains the title of Coolest Movie of All Time. The Matrix combined a powerful critique of the human experience with state of the art visuals and special effects. The result is nothing short of breathtaking. Even though the follow-ons in the trilogy didn't live up to the original - the first Matrix still stands the test of time. We recommend that you take the red pill.
# 6 Best Movie of All Time - Midnight Cowboy: Not a Western at all, with the absolute best theme song from any movie - ever. If this film doesn't tug at your heart - you're probably a Zombie. Dustin Hoffman's portrayal of Ratso Rizzo is one of the truly great performance s in cinema history.
# 7 Best Movie of All Time - Dr. Zhivago: This movie still stands of the most beautiful pieces of cinema ever produced. It represents the best of the epic films from the 50's to 70's and tells the story of one man's struggle to survive amidst the chaos of the Russian Revolution. It also stands as one of the greatest love stories on film. Julie Christie gave the performance of her life in this movie as did Rod Steiger. Sir Alec Guinness, Geraldine Chaplin (Charlie Chaplin's daughter) and Omar Sharif rounded off the stellar cast. The Zhivago soundtrack is the second best in the history of cinema. There were some truly great lines in this film - like Zhivago's brother stating "I did admire him; but I didn't think he was a better man. Besides, I've executed better men than me with a small pistol."
# 8 Best Movie of All Time - JFK: This movie is a bit controversial, just like it's topic - the assassination of John F. Kennedy. Director Oliver Stone assembled a huge cast of the best talent in Hollywood headed by Kevin Costner in what is probably the best performance of his career. This movie represents the ultimate courtroom drama in cinema history as Stone pieces together the real story while exposing the gaps in the Warren Commission's finding. The movie was so powerful that it led to the passage of President John F. Kennedy Assassination Records Collection Act of 1992. This means that many documents that haven't already been released will be in 2017. While still late, the truth may finally be known after all these years. It's a movie that literally made history.
JFK was awesome, we rest our case
# 9 Best Movie of All Time - AI: Artificial Intelligence was Stanley Kubrick's last project. Before he died he handed it over to Stephen Spielberg to complete. The result was truly stunning. AI tells the story of a boy named David who isn't actually a boy - he's a Cyber Pinocchio. But David is more than that - he is the first artificial being who can dream and can love. This movie was meant to take HAL to the next step and fully humanize him. It succeeds with an entertaining story, stunning visual imagery and one of the best performances by a child actor - Haley Joel Osment - ever.
Welcome to Rouge City
# 10 Best Movie of All Time - One Flew over the Cuckoos Nest: While this isn't a happy tale, it is inspirational. This movie marks the zenith of Jack Nicholson's career. It provides us some truly memorable characters who've all come together under less than ideal circumstances. Cuckoo's Nest follows in the same foot-steps as Midnight Cowboy in creating a story that is totally character-driven and painfully realistic.
Honorable Mentions:
The Graduate - This movie helped to define a generation with a soundtrack by Simon and Garfunkle no less.
2001 Space Odyssey - We loved it, but the characters we're a little thin for this category.
Apocalypse Now - A great movie, but a bit too uneven to make the top 10.
Scarface - "Say hello to my little friend." Al Pacino's over the top Cuban gangster became one of the all-time most memorable characters in cinema in this film (no chance of sequels either).
The Shining - A masterpiece that came very close to getting on the list. Kubrick and Jack Nicholson together - wow.
High Noon - One of our few older films in contention. This movie stood as the ultimate Western - at least until The Unforgiven came along.
Gone with The Wind: This movie defined the Hollywood epic for the next 75 years. While the racial stereotypes depicted in the film are insensitive to say the least - they also stand as testimony to how far we've come in just a couple generations. What would Clark Gable thought of President Obama?
Modern Times - Charlie Chaplin was a genius, end of story. Cinema wouldn't be what it is today without him. He was also a brilliant social critic and one of the few people on earth in the 1930's to take on Hitler. The little tramp had some big cojones.
Chaplin takes on the Industrial Revolution single-handedly
Ben Hur - Star Wars episode 1 was largely a tribute to this movie - how cool is that?
Lawrence of Arabia - David Lean took a very odd (yet true) story from history and turned it into a legend. Lean also directed Zhivago.
Copyright 2012 - Raving Reviews - All Rights Reserved
It's the New Year but we still have finished our lists, so here is part 2 of the Best Films of 2010 we haven't seen yet but want to...
Vincere - (which means victory in English) This is an Italian film about Mussolini but with a personal twist. The cinematography looks fantastic and this seems to be far the best foreign movie trailer we've seen for 2010. Although the film is in Italian it looks to be fascinating and perhaps enlightening as well - most of us only know Mussolini as a clownish caricature but there must have been more to him to get as far as he did (even if he did turn out to be a bit of a jerk).
The secret true story about Mussolini's other wife & rise to power
Hubble 3D - If there are two things we love - it's space and IMAX movies. Now it just so happens that your editors were present at the original launch of the Hubble Space telescope back in 1990. And guess what this was narrated by Leonardo Di Caprio, who as we've noted seemed to be in the midst of a number of the most interesting projects in Hollywood last year - so this documentary has everything going for it.
Zonad - This movie looks as crazy as the title but for a comedy we figure that's a good thing. We've always believed that Ireland was a happier place than most contemporary movies portray it and perhaps this is the proof that we needed - and of course what could be funnier than Irish space aliens?
Take me to your nearest pub earthlings....
Princess Kaiulani - This is a bio-epic about the heir to Hawaii's thrown right as the United States was moving to take over Hawaii at the end of the 19th century. It certainly appears to be a compelling story, shot in both Hawaii and England.
The Best Worst Movie -A documentary about what has been acknowledged to be the worst film ever-made, Trolls 2, which has now become a cult classic. For folks like us who love lists, this is a must see.
Agora - From as far as we can tell this is the story of whoever it was who burned all the books in Alexandria (Egypt, not Virginia) way back whenever and some lady who tried to stop them. As far as we know there may have been a papyrus version of People magazine - well, that's all conjecture. The lovely and talented Rachel Weisz stars in this one and given her previous role in the Mummy series this seems like a theme she's developing...
South of the Border - Oliver Stone & Hugo Chavez; G.W. & Fox News must have really hated this movie - that's probably good reason to see it in itself. But it appears as though Oliver got a chance to talk with multiple South American presidents - giving us a unique perspective into what's happening south of the border.
True Grit - What can we say, we like the Cohen Brothers and really admire Jeff Bridges (although sometimes, like in this year's Tron, he let us down a bit). A lot of people have tried to make comparisons between John Wayne's Rooster Cogburn and Jeff Bridge's character - well, we think the difference is simple - The Duke was always playing some variation of himself in his Westerns (which worked out pretty well), Jeff tends to explore his characters a bit more, become them - instead of the other way around. We're looking forward to seeing how this works out in the new True Grit. BTW - it looks as though both Josh Brolin and Matt Damon went the extra mile on this one too...
The Old West was full of bearded, one-eyed vigilante marshals who shot straight and spoke funny - or so we've heard tell...
Never fear - we're not done with our lists yet - next one will be the top ten movies we watched last year but wish we hadn't...
"W," I'm afraid in today's context refers to 'Waste of time.' I can't remember being so disappointed in a movie, although I honestly don't know what I was expecting. It is truly hard to believe that the combination of one of Hollywood's most controversial liberal directors and perhaps America's most controversial Republican President since Abe Lincoln would produce nearly two and half hours of utter boredom.
I remember Dennis Kucinich's famous words during the second Bailout vote: "Why, why, why !!!" This plea for sanity rang out in my mind as the movie trudged forward, lurching unevenly from one event in W's life to another:
Why didn't Oliver Stone use the two hours to build W's character ?
Why did Stone constantly show close-ups of W eating sandwiches and slurping down beers?
Why did the actress playing Condi Rice pretend she was on Saturday Night Live?
Why did they turn Dick Cheney into Darth Vader, at times I thought he was going to refer to W as Anakin?
Why didn't someone write a script? The plot here seemed to be as hard to find as WMDs in Iraq.
Why did the movie leave out the single defining moment in W's life - 9/11 (or even the 2000 election for that matter) ?
Why did we have to watch a 40 year old Josh Brolin pretend he was an 18 year old fraternity pledge getting hazed?
Why did we have to see W sitting on the pot (not part of the drug war, the bathroom)?
So many questions, so few answers, so many lost opportunities - it is a real shame on a number of levels. Making movies is not just about entertainment, it is also in many cases a way to document living history and I think this film missed out on both. At the end of the film I came out not much clearer on any aspects of President Bush's life and bored out of my mind.
More importantly though, I think Stone missed the character study entirely - despite spending all of that time, Bush's character seems just as vague and shallow at the end as it appeared at the beginning of the film. Perhaps that was the point Stone was trying to make, that W was a completely clueless, somewhat vulgar guy with really big sibling rivalry issues. But, as most of us realize, President Bush is not a mere stereotype, he is a much more complex guy than many have given him credit for and he did win the Presidency twice. This movie writes him off as a hopeless loss in 2004 before his reelection - if he was such a failure then, how come he won (swift boat didn't do all of it) ?
My point isn't to make a plea for a more compassionate portrayal of George W. Bush, but rather to note that a superficial examination of his life does not do history justice. Our recent history is almost trivialized in this movie, something that shouldn't be allowed to occur. What has happened over the past eight years has had a remarkable and long-lasting impact on this country. I for one, would like to know Mr. Bush better - I don't care whether he drank too much when he was younger, I want to understand the ambition and the drive that led him and us into our current world situation. George W. Bush is a study in ambition, a man who has comfortably worn his controversies and continued to move forward. W changed the world. His is an incredible story, and one that remains to be told properly.
Regardless of what your political beliefs are or your opinion of him may be, W is not the cartoon character this movie portrays him as. If Mr. Stone was trying to make some sort of point in this biopic, it got lost in his own personal cynicism.
The Raving Reviews Blog is dedicated to the convergence of popular and critical review of the motion picture art - that and taking a sometimes irreverent view of popular culture.
.jpg)
