JFK is an Oliver Stone’s drama that displays the investigation into the assassination of President John Fitzgerald Kennedy. Jim Garrison, the New Orleans district attorney, leads the investigations. JFK is considered as one of the most controversial films that have ever been produced. There are complaints that the film mixes fact and fiction at the same time. The main controversy in the movie is on the topic and its treatment (Raskin 498). The misuse of history is portrayed based on two main notions. The first notion is that the historical film does not have any concrete support from written history. The other notion is that the history portrayed in the movie is made up of organized complications of facts.
JFK was a film that started receiving …show more content…
JKF assassination was considered ambiguous from different aspects. In an example in the film, Lee Oswald was accused of trying to murder General Edwin Walker. The situation may have been or might not have been so since there was no definite evidence. The fact that he did shoot at Walker before does not approve that Oswald is the one that shot Kennedy. The main accusation and controversies that are in the movies were directed at this type of issues. The film mainly focuses on the investigation by Jim Garrison of the New Orleans aspect of crime (Rogin 505). Most of the film material falls in this category. Some of the accusation that was made on the films were accurate and pointed out for factual errors in the …show more content…
From the film, Stone also gets wrapped up in telling unproven amalgamation of theories. Each monologue that the writer is engaged in details gives a different aspect (Rosenstone 497). Just like the writer’s views, the film is portrayed in a contradicting way. In the defense of the film, the writer claimed that the film was set out to tell the whole truth of the assassination. The writer also claimed that the film was a hint at the theories that could be in one way or the other answer questions about the assassination of Kennedy. This defense by the writer can be considered as an attempt to create more discussion on the
JFK was a film that started receiving …show more content…
JKF assassination was considered ambiguous from different aspects. In an example in the film, Lee Oswald was accused of trying to murder General Edwin Walker. The situation may have been or might not have been so since there was no definite evidence. The fact that he did shoot at Walker before does not approve that Oswald is the one that shot Kennedy. The main accusation and controversies that are in the movies were directed at this type of issues. The film mainly focuses on the investigation by Jim Garrison of the New Orleans aspect of crime (Rogin 505). Most of the film material falls in this category. Some of the accusation that was made on the films were accurate and pointed out for factual errors in the …show more content…
From the film, Stone also gets wrapped up in telling unproven amalgamation of theories. Each monologue that the writer is engaged in details gives a different aspect (Rosenstone 497). Just like the writer’s views, the film is portrayed in a contradicting way. In the defense of the film, the writer claimed that the film was set out to tell the whole truth of the assassination. The writer also claimed that the film was a hint at the theories that could be in one way or the other answer questions about the assassination of Kennedy. This defense by the writer can be considered as an attempt to create more discussion on the