Frame of Mind

Notwithstanding the credibility of the whole JFK assassination conspiracy theory, if you just take this as a standard cop thriller, you should be moderately entertained as detective inadvertently discovers unexposed photo frames which may prove the existence of another shooter on the grassy knoll.

Evans is sufficiently relaxed as he eases into the unfolding intrigue, clues starting to mount that the CIA may be somehow involved in the assassination. Veterans Barrie and LoBianco appear in small but significant supporting roles, whilst SITC alumni Noth co-stars as an academic and conspiracy theorist Evan's befriends as he tries to unravel the dangerous riddle. And then in some truly bizarre casting, KISS drummer Peter Criss appears in a minor incidental cameo as a desk cop.

Evans (who also directs) manages to compose a reasonably taut and coherent mystery despite some obvious budgetary limitations and occasional plot lapses that threaten to overblow the production scale. Limited action and virtually no on-screen violence stifles what could've been, instead we're left with a largely existential threat that rarely seems real to the scale of its source material. Sufficient tension holds the interest, but the high profile storyline needed the higher production values to really succeed.

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.

Looking at the other reviews about this film, I wonder if I saw the same picture they did. This is not a great movie, but it is certainly not as bad as some would have you believe. The technical aspects of this picture were top notch. There are some holes in the plot but overall this is a decent picture dealing with a compelling subject.

I am always suspect of motive when a reviewer denigrates an Actor/writer/director and dismisses the picture as a "Vanity" film. Are they jealousy? There have been some truly wonderful "Vanity" films like Citizen Kane, Slingblade, One-Eyed Jacks....not that this is a wonderful film, but you never know how something is going to turn out until it's finished. I liked it. Kudos to Carl T. Evans for trying. Nobody sets out to make a bad film and this is NOT a bad picture. See it and make up your own mind.

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.

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.