Change Your Image
paultross-44204
Reviews
On Trial: Lee Harvey Oswald (1986)
Frustrating
This exhibition trial is frustrating and disappointing because of its lack of focus and the miserably inadequate defense attorney. They should have maintained focus on Oswald himself - evidence for his his actions before, during, and after the murder of JFK; more witnesses that actually interacted with him; alternative explanations for his political behavior. Bugliosi needed a better opponent - one that was more intelligent, articulate, precise, and had a better grasp of the scope of the case, and one that could knock his massive ego down a peg.
Nevertheless, it was fascinating to hear testimony from so many witnesses to history.
Parkland (2013)
Concerns
Some observations, informed by careful research:
*Timing of the shots in the movie are not even close to any consensus among researchers.
*Marilyn Sitzman was standing on the pedestal with Zapruder (to help him keep his balance) - the movie showed him alone.
*Inaccurate portrayal of Jackie's conduct and demeanor.
*Gratuitous, disrespectful display of gore (in my opinion).
*The priest administering last rites was not as composed, or as compassionate as portrayed in the movie.
*How is it that the Dallas FBI office (in the movie) believed Oswald killed the President, without any evidence, less than an hour after the shooting? And based on an incomplete file?
*How is it that Robert Oswald (in the movie) automatically assumed that his brother was the lone assassin?
*Marguerite Oswald (who admittedly was a confused and troubled woman) is made the embodiment of all nutty conspiracy theorists, the writer putting plausibilities about her son in her mouth right along with incomprehensible gibberish (a devilish tactic - to mingle information with disinformation).
*The movie's Gordon Shanklin assumes (with seething passion) that Oswald is guilty, based on very little.
*Zapruder made a mistake, trusting Life Magazine (under whose care the original film was damaged and altered).
*Even the movie's Parkland staff assumed Oswald's guilt, presumably based only on media coverage.
*In the DVD commentary, the writer/director repeatedly betrayed ignorance of historical facts and details.
Parks and Recreation: Hunting Trip (2009)
Anti-comedy
This episode is included as an extra on the Season 6 DVD set of The Office. I watched to see if it lived up to the show's often glowing comparison to The Office. For me, it did not in the slightest. This episode showcases P & R as an Office-style show for a less-educated, more superficial, less-appreciative audience. The humor is pre-packaged, ready-to-eat, cheap, and void of any real nutrition (to use a food analogy). The acting is "sit-commy" and far less natural and authentic than The Office. The characters are annoying and empty.
The show screams, "poor Office rip-off" and this episode dissuaded me from watching any others.
Chisum (1970)
Differing Perspectives
Reviews for this movie prove that people filter history through their own perspectives, often distorting it. They allow larger-than-life actors like John Wayne and movie producers to replace libraries and painstaking research.
The movie itself is beautifully filmed. But John Wayne plays himself, not John Chisum. He does and says everything you'd expect John Wayne to do and say. I found Geoffrey Deuel's portrayal of Billy the Kid to be the most interesting and entertaining (though not necessarily authentic) aspect of the movie. In fact, it seems more his movie than Wayne's.
The Legend of the Lone Ranger (1981)
Western Superhero
This movie was made on the heels of Christopher Reeve's Superman, Lynda Carter's Wonder Woman, and Bill Bixby's Incredible Hulk. Somehow for me (an 8-year-old when I first saw this movie, fittingly in a Pueblo, Colorado movie theater), Klinton Spilsbury's / James Keach's Lone Ranger was a like a western super hero with a great origin story. And this Lone Ranger origin story had heart, when you really think about it. Unlikely boyhood friends, both acquainted with injustice and loss, one saves the other's life, they form a special bond, then are separated. Years later, after experiencing yet more respective injustices, they reunite and pledge to fight for justice as a team. Simply as entertainment, this movie is very enjoyable (regardless of naysayers). Sure, it has some pesky shortcomings - a good, but repetitive John Barry soundtrack, a careless characterization of Ulysses S. Grant (that whole section would've benefited from a richer portrayal of the 18th President), overdubbing the title character, etc. But there is such good chemistry formed by all the movie's great elements - the look and feel of being in the untamed west; the breaking of Silver (a fine horse who really played his role well); the friendship of John Reid and Tonto was well-developed yet not heavy-handed; Christopher Lloyd masterfully plays a villain (I chuckled when he demonstrated his plan to hijack the President's train, using a crude model not built to scale!); and the long development of the story before the Lone Ranger's first appearance is an effective, skillful touch (a la Richard Donner's long Superman back-story) rather than a flaw.
The Legend of the Lone Ranger was a wonderful boyhood memory, and continues to be an enjoyable movie as an adult.