Jump to content
The Education Forum

Finally: A New, Non-Oliver Stone Film About The JFK Assassination


Recommended Posts

  • 10 months later...
  • Replies 75
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

The script supposedly fingers the Mob as being behind 11/22/63. Stars Pacino, Travolta, Courtney Love. Directed by David Mamet. 

Viggo Mortensen, Shia LaBeouf Board David Mamet's JFK Thriller - Variety

Hollywood can read public sentiment about the need for a better explanation than the WC work of fiction. 

Edited by Charles Blackmon
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Charles Blackmon said:

The script supposedly fingers the Mob as being behind 11/22/63. Stars Pacino, Travolta, Courtney Love. Directed by David Mamet. 

Viggo Mortensen, Shia LaBeouf Board David Mamet's JFK Thriller - Variety

Hollywood can read public sentiment about the need for a better explanation than the WC work of fiction. 

I'm (not??) surprised at the cast. I've really liked Mamet's screenplays. This cast has the Avi Lerner stamp of approval. The Expendables 15. 

 

Edited by Bob Ness
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hallelujah!!

No wonder the mainstream media is so excited!!

At last a film telling the TRUTH about the JFK assassination-- unlike JFK and JFK Revisited... 😂

Edited by W. Niederhut
Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, Benjamin Cole said:

I can't see how the Mob built the LHO biography, or worked with LHO in Dallas. Of course, the whole cover-up was a federal government job. 

 

If it is as entertaining as Stephen King's 11.22.63 that would be nice.  I doubt there will be any revelations like JFK Revisited or some of the better documentaries.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, W. Niederhut said:

Hallelujah!!

No wonder the mainstream media is so excited!!

At last a film telling the TRUTH about the JFK assassination-- unlike JFK and JFK Revisited... 😂

It's probably more like a counter-myth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Mark Ulrik said:

It's probably more like a counter-myth.

Mark,

      I shouldn't pass judgement without seeing the film, especially since David Mamet is writing the screenplay, but I'm picturing a guy walking out of the theater saying, "Gee, honey, I always thought Oswald and the Russkis killed Kennedy, but now I know it was an Italian job!" 🤥

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am not looking forward to this one at all.

And I will be explaining in detail why soon. But let me drop a synopsis.

The DOJ and FBi and the local Chicago authorities had total surveillance on Giancana.  And when I say total, I mean total: everywhere he went they followed, even on the golf course.  Every meeting place he had, they had a bug in the wall.  This included his fixer, Humphreys--his 52nd floor apartment was bugged.  They had three cars around his house at night.  They even monitored his pay phone calls, by running to the phone after he left.

Giancana was so frustrated he went to court to file a civil suit.  In his documentary Celozzi says Sam won the suit.  

That is not accurate for two reasons.

First, Bobby Kennedy did not offer a defense on constitutional grounds.  He did not think the local judiciary had the right to intervene in a DOJ inquiry.  So although the initial decision lessened the surveillance, RFK won the appeal and it went back to where it was.

Secondly, the total surveillance was never dropped.  Why? Because the agent in charge, Bill Roemer, asked the local sheriff, Oglivie, to take over the other duties while the case was on appeal, and he did.

Roemer wrote a book about this later.  He said he went through  everything--absolutely everything.  There was never anything on any piece of surveillance they had that indicated Sam ordered or was in on the JFK murder.  And there was never any mention after either.

In view of that fact, i expect them to fall back on the BS in that novel Double Cross which I have exposed at length elsewhere.

For the above reasons i expect this to be nothing more than an unfortunate diversion.  At a really bad time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's a falsehood that will spread disinformation that should not be made.  But might get some msm tread as such.

Jim, was it Oliver Stone or you and Oliver that had lunch or dinner with Mamet a year or so ago because (I think) he liked Destiny Betrayed?  Would he consider another lunch or dinner to tell him this is nutty?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...