Interview with the Assassin

I learned an important lesson from Interview with the Assassins. If your elderly neighbor claims to have shot John F. Kennedy... run. Rob Kobeleski, the main character of this film, unfortunately didn't know that. Interview with the Assassin is about a reporter, Rob, whose neighbor, Walter, claims to have been the second gunman on the grassy knoll on that fateful day in Dallas back in 1963. Intrigued, Rob tries to learn more, but gets himself in over his head as a massive conspiracy unfolds around he and Walt, putting both of their lives in more danger than he could have imagined.

The intriguing catch to this film is that it is all shot from Rob's perspective. Rob operates the camera and we follow the story along from his eyes and his vantage point. It adds a very unique allure to a film with an oddly compelling story. It makes the film a very interesting watch and it engages us in the story in a very different way. Of course, without this gimmick Interview with the Assassin likely wouldn't amount to anything, but that is usually the case with these kinds of films; see Cloverfield or The Blair Witch Project.

Personally, I'm a sucker for these types of films. I haven't seen one in this style that I didn't like, and the same goes for Interview with the Assassin. It's a great little film that excellently blends suspense, action, and gripping drama. The story is one of those that makes you turn your head in confusion at multiple points, sometimes out of absurdity but mostly out of genuine interest in the bizarre story that unfolds in this film. There are definitely some odd and possibly unnecessary elements in the film, and the script falters at points, but overall this is a unique experience. Granted it doesn't amount to a whole lot and you can sort of see the climax coming, but for a relatively short film it's totally worth the watch.

Blair Witch Project meets Oliver Stone's JFK and puts both to shame. Nasty, brutish, and short (85 minutes) and true to life in every other way too. Highly sophisticated and intelligent, it cuts right to our most primal fears while presenting itself in a deceptively primitive fashion. Explores the shadows in our recent history and national psyche with acute, paranoiac vision.

This film had a really good premise - the presentation of a fictitious (to some of the viewers out there : yes, FICTITIOUS!) story within a factual-like packaging. This is something that Michael Crichton has done in his books in the past in titles such as "Eaters of the Dead" and "The Great Train Robbery". When done well, as Mr Crichton did, this technique can make an otherwise ordinary or even boring story great. I thought that this was what "Interview with the Assassin" was going to do.

The film started out well and the performances were good - Raymond J. Barry was particularly well-suited to his role. Later, though, it began meandering and in the end, became little more than just another Hollywood mass-produced flick. I wished that the director would have been a little bit more consistent in his vision. What did he want the movie to be? A documentary (albeit a fictitious one) or just a standard thriller? In the end, unfortunately, he took the latter route.

Documentaries which examine things in real life usually do not have a beginning, middle, and end - life is just not this tidy. This movie, however, does have a beginning, middle, and then a neat little resolution of things in the end. Movie goers can then dust the pop-corn off of their chests and return once more into the grind.

In short, "Interview with the Assassin" was a movie which could have been something new and exciting but instead ended up being something old and mediocre. As a documentary, it is not very believable (at least to me it wasn't.....), and, as a thriller, it is not very good.

This film is amazing. 100% amazing. Everything about it is so real, all the little touches lead to it looking like a true documentary, and yet there are some great filmmaking techniques that are "happy accidents" that advance it as a dramatic story as well.

The lead actor is frighteningly good, as is the mostly off-camera actor playing Ron... very impressive and just downright astonishing.

Recommended easily, and its very rewatchable too. Hell, even some real documentaries don't hold up to repeated viewings like this mock-one does.

Not knowing what to expect, I recorded this on broadcast TV and was riveted from the opening scene. I usually like movies about ordinary people in extraordinary circumstances, and this was a great example.

The sense of place and tension was gripping, even with no soundtrack. The very lack of music added to the stark feel. A subtle scene involving video surveillance was especially chilling. It makes other movies seem overproduced and fake. They should use this technique in a lot more films. No need to involve a cameraman's angle; just have everyone talk and act naturally. Most movie dialog is too slick.

It's hard to imagine anyone else in the role of the shooter, laconically yet frighteningly played by Raymond J. Barry. He's one of those actors you know you've seen before but can't quite place. I'm going to check out his other movies to see if he pulls off that same quality.

Without giving away the ending, I don't think they could have done it any better. IWTA isn't as overtly scary as a more famous pseudo-documentary about a witch, but I put the two films in a similar category. You have to wonder if this was inspired by the BWP concept. It's excellent either way. I'll have to watch it again to catch anything they cut on TV.