Promotional poster for "JFK" directed by Oliver Stone
This is not about debating the merits of Oliver Stone’s politics or his theory on how former President Kennedy was killed.
So let’s get it out of the way: is Stone’s theory presented in “JFK” convincing or airtight? By no means. Is it presented in a technically stunning and compelling fashion? It most certainly is.
It’s important to note “JFK” is not presented as a documentary. There are actors and sets, after all. While there are certainly logic gaps to be found throughout “JFK,” director Oliver Stone is not out to present the “truth” of the Kennedy assassination.
Instead, “JFK” is a movie about emotions, specifically the anguish of the American people over a tragedy and their outrage that the case still has not been solved. And on that level, it succeeds tremendously.
“JFK” opens with documentary footage of President Kennedy and America in the early 60s as a narrator relates the events of Nov. 22, 1963 and their impact. From there the plot switches tracks to follow New Orleans District Attorney Jim Garrison (Kevin Costner).
After witnessing the assassination, Garrison comes across what looks like a conspiracy that involved many more people besides Lee Harvey Oswald. Implicated in the conspiracy is New Orleans businessman Clay Shaw (Tommy Lee Jones), whom Garrison believes has ties to the CIA and eventually puts on trial.
Most of the film concerns Garrison’s efforts to track down various witnesses to the assassination and examine the various reports from the different agencies that investigated it. It’s slow going: Garrison is repeatedly denied access to files and witnesses have a habit of meetings rather mysterious ends.
But this part of the film is the most compelling because of the way Stone shows the investigation unfolding. He cuts rapidly between cuts of Garrison gathering information, documentary footage of the assassination and re-enactments of meetings between the various conspirators. To keep all of the story threads straight, Stone uses different film types, aspect ratios and black and white for each different element.
If nothing else, Stone deserved credit for being able to assemble all of his material into a comprehensible and gripping narrative (the theatrical release is three hours long and the director’s cut is three and a half).
Fortunately, there’s a great deal more to admire about “JFK” than Stone’s technical prowess. It also features several standout performances from its stars. Kevin Costner gets the most screen time as Garrison and he brings a believable dogged determination to the role. But Garrison is not a perfect hero. His fascination with his case (some call it an obsession) leads to a distancing from his friends and family. They cannot see what drives him on in spite of all his obstacles.
The supporting cast is sprinkled with stars like Kevin Bacon, Joe Pesci and Gary Oldman. The best of these however is Tommy Lee Jones as Clay Shaw, the only person to be put on trial regarding the Kennedy killing. Jones hides behind a screen of wit and Southern charm, but is allowed in moments to be ruthless and terrified. Jones went on to earn an Oscar nomination for his performance.
By the time the credits roll, Stone has embedded his sentiments if not necessarily his arguments in the audience. It seems highly unlikely Oswald could have caused the damage he did on his own, but who his co-conspirators were is no clearer.
In “JFK,” Oliver Stone made a story that captured the truth of our collective angst regarding President Kennedy. And in this case that’s true enough.
Contact CU Independent Entertainment Editor Rob Ryan at rryan@colorado.edu.
