Oliver Stone - Deceptive Filmmaker?

"Researchers are now uncovering Stone's highly unethical and deceptive film editing in the JFK Revisited: Through the Looking Glass so-called documentary"


JFK Revisited: Through the Looking Glass Trailer


Today marks the 58th anniversary of President Kennedy's tragic death in Dallas. As customary on this date, there are numerous JFK conferences, films and discussion about the assassination. For many people, it's a time to reflect back in history of where they were when the news broke, and reactions to it. As a kid growing up in Dallas in 1963, I have those memories as well.


For others, the Kennedy Assassination remains a mystery with no conclusion. The debate still rages on about who shot the President and the possibility of a conspiracy involved. This will never end, at least in my lifetime. Oliver Stone's 1991 "JFK" movie sparked interest again into the assassination. Marking the 30th anniversary of that movie, Stone has released a "documentary" called "JFK Revisited: Through the Looking Glass". Stone, with the participation of many old hard line conspiracy advocates, are now trying to breathe life back into assassination event. As you might expect, as Oliver Stone declared in this film, "Conspiracy Theory is now Conspiracy Fact". This is the message he and others are trying to sell to the public.


Putting all the assassination arguments aside, researchers are now uncovering some disturbing antics in the making of this film. It involves "creative editing" and specifically deals with historical archive footage.


One of the first researchers to discover this editing process, remarked:

"Finally watched Oliver Stone's new documentary, "JFK Revisited." It's interesting. I do have a problem with an 11-second segment of it. About 3 minutes into the doc, there is an interview with eyewitness Bill Newman who was, with his family, probably the closest eyewitnesses. That clip is heavily edited and the video of Newman has been reversed.
First, here is what Newman “said” in the documentary:
“The president’s car was some fifty feet when we heard the first shot and then as the car got directly in front of us, well, the gunshot from the top of the hill hit the president in the side of the temple.”
Now, here is what was actually said from Newman's WFAA-TV interview about 15 minutes after the shooting. The original interview (done by Jay Watson) contained the following exchange. The segments used in the Stone documentary are in capital letters. Here’s what was said:
Newman: THE PRESIDENT’S CAR WAS SOME FIFTY FEET still yet…
Watson: …in front of you?
Newman: …in front of us coming towards us WHEN WE HEARD THE FIRST SHOT and the President, I don’t know who was hit first, but the President jumped up in his seat. And I thought it scared him, I thought it was a firecracker ‘cause he looked, you know, fear. AND THEN AS THE CAR GOT DIRECTLY IN FRONT OF US, WELL, THE GUNSHOT apparently from behind us HIT THE PRESIDENT IN THE SIDE OF THE TEMPLE.
Watson: Do you think the first gunshot came from behind you, too?
Newman: I think it come from the same location apparently back up on the mall. I don’t know what you call it.
Watson: For the benefit of nomensclature [sic] all you folks have gone out under the viaduct and as you turn going under the viaduct on the left hand side there’s some grass. Uh, do you think the shot came from up on top of the viaduct toward the president, is that correct?
Newman: Yes, sir. No, not on the viaduct itself but up on TOP OF THE HILL, a little mound of ground there, the garden. [END QUOTE]
You can see how heavily edited it was. And like a lot of TV/film interviews, "cutaway" shots were used to "hide" the edits. In this case, the "cutaway" shots are scenes from a film taken by NBC cameraman Dave Wiegman.
The reason why Newman's scenes were reversed? IMO, so it wouldn't feed the theory there was a shot to JFK's left temple. Clearly, in the original WFAA video, Newman does point to his left temple. But that's only because he was using his right hand to hold steady one of his son's who was sitting on his lap. He simply was using his free hand, his left hand, to demonstrate what he was saying.
The edits in the Stone documentary do not change the intent of what Newman meant. I just think the heavily edited version may be quoted without people knowing it has been heavily edited."

As you can clearly see, Stone's film staff has taken historical film footage (eye witness - Bill Newman), and twisted it around to fit the narrative. I am not a filmmaker, but I'm sure film archivists, historical documentary directors/producers will call this method unethical for a documentary.


Author Fred Litwin (On the Trail of Delusion) recently caught this interesting clip in Stone's film, regarding Marina Oswald Porter:

"Oliver Stone's so-called documentary, JFK Revisited: Through the Looking Glass, presents a snippet of a Tom Brokaw interview with Marina Porter, carefully placed to make it sound like she was denying having taken the backyard photographs."

Here is the link to Fred Litwin's article, explaining the "creative editing" in a highly misleading manner. https://www.onthetrailofdelusion.com/post/jfk-revisited-uses-marina-porter-to-mislead-viewers?fbclid=IwAR263yVXtCCHOJE3PeqG1ZpB4gGxbr8Jm_0HhkUOMSufi226vrvgjoeJjNo


Another example of Stone's "creative editing" hijinks involves a clip of Warren Commissioner John J. McCloy interview with Walter Cronkite. Here is a transcript of the exchange in Stone's film (00:27 minute mark):


Whoopi Goldberg: But then Walter Cronkite interviewed John McCloy during a four-night special, co-hosted by Dan Rather.
Walter Cronkite (to McCloy): Are you satisfied that as much effort was put in to challenging that case as into establishing it?
John McCloy: I'll answer that in just a moment if I may just say one thing I...I would like to say in the first place I had some questions to propriety of my appearing here as a former member of the Commission to comment on the evidence of the Commission (scene then is edited to show Cronkite with a puzzled look on his face)
Whoopi Goldberg: McCloy never answered Cronkite's question, but even worse CBS employee Roger Feinman (film clip of Feinman) later discovered internal documents showing McCloy consulted extensively on this series through his daughter Ellen, administrative assistant to CBS President Richard Salant (photo of Salant).

Again, Stone has completely edited this film clip to misrepresent McCloy's statement. You will see in the following link, how Stone edits out McCloy's answer and inserts that puzzled look on Cronkite's face, sometime after. Start at the 00:29 minute to view for yourself. https://www.c-span.org/video/?454598-1/cbs-news-inquiry-warren-report-part-4


These are just a few examples, as researchers are continuing to review the film's authenticity in presenting the truth.


Now, media outlets are beginning to weigh in on Stone's film. Here's one from Tim Weiner of the Rolling Stone. https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/jfk-oliver-stone-conspiracy-theory-russian-disinformation-1260223/


Conclusions

Things are not only going well for Oliver Stone, Rob Wilson, and James DiEugenio in this "Train Wreck" of a film.


There was no reason to intentionally, I repeat intentionally, to engage in fake film editing of archival films. It's a disgrace.


Stone, DiEugenio and Wilson have now sunk down to You Tube video status, and that will be its ultimate resting place.


James DiEugenio, Screen Writer for JFK Revisited: Through the Looking Glass



Story still developing........


252 views0 comments

Recent Posts

See All