Question for Jim on Stone Documentary

[James DiEugenio]

I just saw the list.

There were 137 press representatives at the screening today.  From all over.  And I mean all over the world.

[Anthony Thorne]

Positive review. https://www.screendaily.com/reviews/jfk-revisited-through-the-looking-glass-cannes-review/5161529.article

[Ron Bulman]

1 hour ago, Anthony Thorne said:

Positive review. https://www.screendaily.com/reviews/jfk-revisited-through-the-looking-glass-cannes-review/5161529.article

Great!  Congratulations to Jim for being given credit in this review for the Screenplay.

[Anthony Thorne]

Finn Halligan, the Screen Daily critic, had originally cited John Foster rather than Allen Dulles in her review. I wrote her a friendly correction and she wrote a thank you back, noting that it was the only thing she had wanted to check before posting but had been in a rush because of everything happening at Cannes. It's now been fixed. Quite a favourable review. Owen Gleiberman's review for Variety is half grudging concession about the documentary's fine technical qualities, half an uninformed rant arguing the case for Oswald's guilt.

[James DiEugenio]

Owen G did one of the worst things a critic can do.  He was arguing with the film in an uninformed way.

Just to indicate two things:

1.) He says that to avoid Adams, Oswald could have waited ten seconds before descending the stairs. He is not aware that if such was the case that would have guaranteed that Garner would have seen him.

2.) I fail to see how direct eyewitness testimony at Parkland and Bethesda qualifies as hearsay. 

He then wanted us to do the whole triangular firing sequence?  That is the kind of stuff we avoided. In favor of factual stuff.  So he badly distorts what is factual and asks us to do something we can only speculate about. Whew.

 

[Vince Palamara]

1 hour ago, James DiEugenio said:

Owen G did one of the worst things a critic can do.  He was arguing with the film in an uninformed way.

Just to indicate two things:

1.) He says that to avoid Adams, Oswald could have waited ten seconds before descending the stairs. He is not aware that if such was the case that would have guaranteed that Garner would have seen him.

2.) I fail to see how direct eyewitness testimony at Parkland and Bethesda qualifies as hearsay. 

He then wanted us to do the whole triangular firing sequence?  That is the kind of stuff we avoided. In favor of factual stuff.  So he badly distorts what is factual and asks us to do something we can only speculate about. Whew.

 

Jim, PLEASE tell me that the Secret Service is brought up in the documentary. The documentary sounds like it is going to be great!

[Jamey Flanagan]

I also have a question for Jim D. Do they cover Zapruder film alteration at all in either the 2hr or 4hr? The Dino Brugioni stuff that came out in the ARRB? I know at the time JFK came out even most of the conspiracy crowd still took the extant Z film at face value though some had their suspicions. So alteration wasn't really explored in the movie JFK.

[James DiEugenio]

Yes it was.  In fact we go over the Chicago and Tampa attempts.

I am pretty sure they are in this one,  I am positive its in the long version.   Oliver really liked that stuff.

 

[James DiEugenio]

1 minute ago, Jamey Flanagan said:

I also have a question for Jim D. Do they cover Zapruder film alteration at all in either the 2hr or 4hr? The Dino Brugioni stuff that came out in the ARRB? I know at the time JFK came out even most of the conspiracy crowd still took the extant Z film at face value though some had their suspicions. So alteration wasn't really explored in the movie JFK.

No, this is something we avoided.  I told Oliver not to get into things that are controversial, and in which you would be caught in the middle of.  I only wanted to go with new stuff about which there could be little or no interpretation.

[James DiEugenio]

BTW, I just talked to Rob Wilson, the producer.  He is at Cannes.

He said the audience reception was really good and the production company, Ingenious, is excited about all the inquiries they are getting.

It was supposed to screen once tomorrow, but I think because it went over well, they are doing two open screenings. (Recall, its already Tuesday there.)

[Jamey Flanagan]

Thanks for the reply! That definitely makes sense! Looking forward to the stuff on the Tampa and Chicago plots! You can find some stuff online about those but even in the best documentaries they may get a sentence or two about them.

[James DiEugenio]

BTW, the reviews from those in Europe are darn good.

They are either positive or mixed positive.  

 

[Jamey Flanagan]

Yeah, those in European countries have known pretty much all along that it was basically a palace revolt. In America however our project mockingbird controlled press are still trying to keep those skeletons hidden in the closet and most of the reviews are gonna be hit pieces. They'll give the film backhanded compliments once in awhile and always try to lump the JFK conspiracy theorists in with holocaust deniers and other kooks. 30 years ago they attacked JFK for it's use of dramatic license and now they are attacking the doc for not giving us the answers but giving us irrefutable facts and letting us make up our own minds.

[Joe Bauer]

Jim, I don't think our San Francisco Chronicle film critic Mick LaSalle likes to get into the JFK thing...but did he happen to do a critique?

Also, what parts of the film are you most excited about in the final cut regards revealing what you feel are the most important new aspects of this production?

Did you notice any new and somewhat consensus positive audience reactions over-all?

[James DiEugenio]

I was not at Cannes.  I just got some feedback from Rob Wilson, the producer who is there.  He said it was a really positive vibe at the press/exhibitors screening and the production company was excited about the reaction.  In fact, there was supposed to be one open screening on Tuesday, now there are two.

The part I wanted to harp on was the fact that although both the WC and the HSCA relied on CE 399, that bullet is clearly a fraud. It was never fired in Dealey Plaza and had utterly no chain of custody. (I loved how Henry Lee explained this.)  It would never be allowed in a court of law.  And we go into that in depth with documents.

Another part I wanted to accent was the whole Jeremy Gunn interview with Stringer for the ARRB.  Where he said that he did not do those skull x rays.  And he based it on the film type, and the technique used.  We had Horne do that one since he was in the room with Jeremy.

My other favorite part was the outlining of the two plots to kill JFK prior to Dallas, in Chicago and in Tampa.  Wait until you see what we did with Elmer Moore.

Edited July 13, 2021 by James DiEugenio