Jump to content
The Education Forum

Richard Booth

Members
  • Posts

    407
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Richard Booth

Recent Profile Visitors

1,136 profile views

Richard Booth's Achievements

  1. Sounds like he was an early critic and chronicler of the FBI, did a good amount of scholarly research. It could be said that he did some work on COINTELPRO, based on what David wrote here. I'd say that's a "conspiracy" that everyone has heard of or is one of the better known conspiracies these days rather than characterize it as smaller stuff. At the time he was working on it though, surely it was little known. I would characterize the guy as a historian who focused early-on on FBI excesses which are today well documented but not so much at the time.
  2. I'm not sure. I first heard it in 2016, my partner at the time used it. She was 24 and I hadn't heard it before. She told me that I was "woke" and not in a derogatory way. I think it started out as a non-derogatory term and has morphed. I'm gonna say the kids started it and now the old fogeys use it in a sneering manner.
  3. Well, that is where we are today. Of course it is absurd, but nevertheless it's where we are. Let us wait for the "woke" CIA version which like it's recent recruitment ad will surely feature latinx and lgbt folks attesting to their newfound comprehensive understanding of the single bullet theory, with a diverse range of culturally-sensitive shills whose gender and racial identity surely trumps the expertise of Cyril Wecht or David Mantik. After all, those are just evil white men.
  4. I would have liked to have heard the guy who did PBS Frontline for many years. That's the kind of narration I like. But what I like doesn't necessarily help the documentary get traction or followers or interest. Goldberg has sway with millions and regular people, the kind who watch "The View" will probably be swayed a great deal by hearing her on this thing.
  5. "Since 2007, Goldberg has co-hosted and moderated the daytime talk show The View, for which she won a Daytime Emmy Award." I've never watched the show but this is a good point
  6. I didn't see you write about this on another thread, sorry I missed it. Would be great to see doors open for Oliver. I think I'm just an asshole on this subject and I'm wrong.
  7. There is a clip from the film here: https://deadline.com/2021/07/oliver-stone-mainstream-docs-propaganda-pieces-us-empire-in-fear-revisiting-jfk-assassination-cannes-1234790181/ In the short clip you've got Mantik and Wecht and some talk on the single bullet theory. The narration is Whoopi Goldberg, which I thought was a horrible choice when I first heard it. After some thought I think that it's probably a good choice to pick a person with a warm relatable voice, it may be compelling to an audience to hear a person they can relate with and trust delivering the facts rather than some kind of anonymous "voice of authority" type of narrator.
  8. After some consideration I think I'm just an old asshole. Oliver Stone was in a better position to decide who narrates his film, better than me. One thing to consider is that Whoopi may appeal to a lot of regular normal people, by talking about this subject in a voice that is relatable to them. So instead of the documentary appearing like some kind of know-it-all blasting facts out above your head it sounds like a reasonable person you might know. Which makes the material more likely to be compelling. Sorry for being an asshole.
  9. Oliver Stone's own narration on his last documentary series (which almost everyone I know hates, but I liked) was pretty damn solid. Maybe I am an asshole because I want a serious sounding guy with some bass in his voice talking about serious things rather than a folksy salt of the earth comedian.
  10. I didn't think it was good either. The first thing that struck me was "I know this voice. Who is this." It did not elevate the work. I guarantee if you took five professional narrators and put them over this thing and put them up against Whoopi Goldberg she would not be the first choice. Perhaps it is my biases. I hear Whoopi Goldberg and I think of comedy and television. I never did watch that television talk show she was on, I know her from the 80s and from Star Trek: The Next Generation.
  11. Hi Jim, I'm asking this on a pubic forum rather than a direct email because I believe others might also want to know the answer to these questions. First off congratulations on your work with Oliver Stone on the new documentary which is showing at Cannes. I think I speak for all of us when I say we want to see it. I saw a CLIP of the documentary posted on a website recently, a short clip. It had Mantik in it and it had Cyril Wecht. What immediately struck me was the narration. It was, to be kind, not good. Who is narrating this thing? My hope was that there would be a great voice professional doing the narration, because this can really elevate a work. The opposite is also true. If anyone else wants to hear the narrator who sounds like they have a speech impediment you can hear that here: https://deadline.com/2021/07/oliver-stone-mainstream-docs-propaganda-pieces-us-empire-in-fear-revisiting-jfk-assassination-cannes-1234790181/ Looks like IMDB says it's Whoopi Goldberg. What a strange choice. Perhaps the problem is me. I expected to hear something more like Peter Coyote or James Earl Jones. Perhaps it is my biases showing. I could be the person who is wrong here. But that doesn't change my impression that this narration doesn't elevate the work.
  12. Absolutely it will It's already being suggested--without basis--that the film "failed fact-checking" w/ Netflix and National Geographic. Which probably consisted of some intern googling things and looking at Wikipedia rather than checking Jim's extensive endnotes/documents.
  13. My mentor, Lt. Colonel Roger Charles, always told me to ask this question: "Why now?" You've answered it, in this matter.
  14. Thanks Ron. I agree, Lyndon and J. Edgar were also neighbors and really good buddies. I think they both would have been pleased to be rid of JFK and if given assurances that it would never in any way get back to them and it was a "sure thing" they would go along. In addition, both of them had their asses on the line if JFK won a second term with LBJ off the ticket due to the Bobby Baker scandal and J. Edgar fired. I'm not sure if psychological profiles were really in-use at that time, but had one been done on LBJ and/or Hoover by the planners I suspect the results would have told them "you can approach these guys and they won't say a word -- you're giving them exactly what they want and what they need to keep their jobs."
×
×
  • Create New...