Frame of Mind

frame of mind is good. its a b movie but don't let that put you off. the acting has its ups and downs but i would say more ups. when i saw the plot description on IMDb i thought "god no not another kennedy film" well i got a pleasant surprise it had me interested the whole movie through, the idea is good and quiet possible and believable and for a subject matter that has been done time and time again i think it was a brave movie to attempt.

i consider myself a harsh critic of bad quality b movies and very rarely comment on this site but i think this movie apart from some of the acting flaws and low budget, had a lot of heart...hope you enjoy.

Aside from a few OK performances, most of this film just kept me thinking, "how did this get made?".

With all the great story ideas, amazing actors, directors, writers, etc. in the world, how could something so bland get A) financed and B) legit actors like Chris Noth and Barbara Barrie to act in it? Most of the other actors - I can understand taking part in something like this as I assume they really need a role in whatever they can get. To be fair, the acting is not the real problem though. Even Arija Bareikis, who is normally a decent enough actress, has the depth of an empty manila envelope in this thing. That's partly the script/character to blame, though. The main problems are that the casting is mostly wrong, (David Dinkins...really???), the sound is barely there (sound is essential to creating a mood in a film like this, guys!), the script, (seems like a first draft that no-one edited and it's waaaaay too expository), and the directing (was there a director on set?). Sorry to say that lead actor, Carl Evans, is to blame as he was at the helm - or so we are to assume from his credits.

It seems like Eavans came into a load of cash and just blew it on this thing without planning it out correctly. So sad.

Despite the other reviews, I found the acting excellent, the plot engrossing, and the outcome sad but entirely appropriate. That said, I also believe that Lee Harvey Oswald spoke truthfully when, just before he too was assassinated he said, "I'm just a patsy."

Although not necessarily disagreeing with the movie's suggestion of who the people actually responsible really were, I tend to find what Joel Belz has written more likely.

If that's so, this country is in deep, deep trouble. Why? Because topmost-level American governmental secrecy continues to grow, and when evidence of deception appears, Congress doesn't seem to care.

This could have been a far better movie, if only someone, anyone, used some serious creativity to avoid the absolutely nothing ending. The actors were all alright, the scenes moved along, building to a crescendo that never happened. It simply stopped, barely even a fizzle, just over and done. Who does this?

The plot was based on a famous, historic event. The screenwriter was able to create a strirring, suspense-filled drama. Yes, we've all heard about the historical facts surrounding this day while we were in school and from the media. This movie even brought out very interesting information I didn't even know about so I learned some new insights to this story. The acting was somewhat better than average. Even though the characters were typical in an investigative piece, they managed to convey both their personal lives along with the suspense of innocently stumbling over evidence that could endanger their lives and the lives of those around them. The tension between the actors and their roles was effective and kept me on edge, especially as it was building up towards the end. It's just too sad, too bad to drop the entire ball for the ending and walk away from any kind of fulfilling conclusion. How frustrating. It was a big letdown. I wish I knew the conclusion would be horrible because I wouldn't have invested the time and energy into this work.

Rather surprised by the downside comments I read in these reviews, but then I think one's evaluation has a lot to do with whatever credibility one may have towards the idea of conspiracy in the JFK assassination. After all, if the Warren Report was a gross cover-up, what does that say about a lot of things? Americans are very resistant to the notion that the system they live in may be one of lies, corruption, and cover-up at the highest level. Popping a huge bubble can have serious consequences. If you think little of talk of conspiracy, whether the JFK assassination or other notable events, you may do well to spare yourself this film, which is likely to appear a b-level production, confusing with mediocre acting, or downright terrible. If on the other hand you lie on the other end of the spectrum as I do (note I state other end), I suggest you see it and by all means avoid reading any synopsis in advance. You will enjoy it more without spoilers. So being biased towards conspiracy I found the film very entertaining, credible, and well-casted. Well written and I could not guess how it turned out.