Ruby and Oswald

Don't buy the silly 1992 film that makes Ruby out to be some kind of Shakespearian hero, and shooting Oswald because it would bring some huge conspiracy to light (when in fact, the killing was largely responsible for appearing to make it a big mystery!).

This is the movie to see to know the real Jack Ruby, and Michael Lerner nails him exactly. In a way, Ruby was like a very low rent Frank Sinatra. Both were sensitive about their child-of-immigrants upbringing, which is possibly why they both liked John Kennedy so much. Both had a hot, impulsive temper. Both were also extremely fond of attractive women and capable of great generosity. And both considered mobsters unfairly persecuted good-time boys with money.

The movie depicts a couple things that would cast doubt on Ruby being part of a conspiracy. One was that when he went to see Oswald being brought out, he left his beloved dog sitting in his car. The other was that when Oswald was scheduled to be brought out, Ruby was not in the garage, but across the street wiring money to a stripper in need. He returned just in time for the fatal encounter.

A worthwhile 90 minutes for those obsessed with the events of Nov. 22, 1963

Having just completed viewing this made for TV movie I can say several things. 1)It was adequately made but not outstanding as far as entertainment. 2)The acting was hit & miss, with Michael Lerner doing the best at portraying an emotionally unbalanced Jack Ruby. 3)As far as historical worth goes this is virtually worthless for any but those who slavishly hold to the Warren Commission's finding of a "Lone Gunman" in the case of not only Lee Harvey Oswald but in HIS assassin Jack Ruby as well. Believers in the "Lone Nut" scenario accused Oliver Stone's film "J.F.K." of being complete fiction & I suppose that it would be to them in the same sense that footage of the Moon Landing would be complete fiction to someone who believes that we never went there & consequently faked the whole thing. This made for TV film is a rote,down the line love letter to the Warren Commission findings,eliminating anything inconvenient (Like the whole "Magic Bullet" part of the tragedy for example. Aside from the trajectory of it which defied the laws of physics "Lone Gunman" adherents would have us believe that it just magically fell out of Governor John Connally to lay gently beside him on the hospital stretcher in practically pristine condition, a condition that never has been repeated since in countless tests under countless conditions. A bullet fired through NO bones or flesh but simply water itself has more degradation than that present on the "Magic Bullet" not to mention that the fragments of shrapnel removed from Governor Connally add up to more mass than is even missing from the conveniently discovered cartridge in the first place!)that they might not be able to explain away with the ease of how for example Jack Ruby came to know that Oswald had been involved in the Fair Play for Cuba committee. (Here it has Ruby overhearing it on the radio shortly before arriving at the police station where he just so happens to get into the press room so that he can have the first of his moments in the spotlight before getting locked away until his own suspicious death under incarceration.) What they don't replicate for their own purposes (Like having Oswald scowl a lot to make him look more guilty) they simply invent (Like the radio bit that I just mentioned) or eliminate entirely (Like the "Magic Bullet" stuff or the fact that Oswald worked at a top secret photo developing lab & would have known how to fake the photos of him with the guns that basically announced to the world "I'M GUILTY!" Here it's portrayed like he was just saying that they were faked with nothing to back it up. Or the fact that a man fitting Ruby's description was seen around Dealey Plaza at the time of J.F.K.'s murder. "When in doubt, throw it out" seems to have been the order of the day here.) so as to convince either the casual viewer who doesn't know much about the case or the choir of Warren Commission apologists that they're preaching to that this indeed is the way that it REALLY happened. (As a side-note it's interesting that with so many rave reviews it's not rated very highly. Almost makes you suspicious doesn't it?)

I'm not saying that you HAVE to believe that there was a conspiracy (Though I think that's the only reasonable conclusion to reach upon examining all of the evidence.)but what I am saying is that if you're interested in the assassination of President Kennedy (As I would assume just about everyone watching this would be)then AT LEAST look at the evidence presented from both sides & decide for yourself.

I had high hopes for this after reading the box. It said "Filmed at actual locations." As I watched, I came to the realization that this was a wretched waste of time and film. The only good thing about it was the "actual locations," which included the Texas Schoolbook Depository and all of the Elm street area. As for the rest, bear with me. The most glaring error was Ruby's motivation for killing Oswald. He was portrayed as a broken-hearted man overcome with grief. This couldn't be farther from the truth. All of the events of that Nov. 22nd are out of order. Oswald is shown shooting Officer Tippett in front of a dozen or more people. Didn't happen. I could go on but I'll make it short and sweet: DO NOT BELIEVE ANYTHING THAT HAPPENS IN THIS FILM. There, that should do it. Watching this without knowing any of the facts of what happened that day will give you the worst revisionist view imaginable of a terrible tragedy. Score this a 3 out of 10 for the Dallas locations only.

This may actually be the most true to life movie ever made about the Kennedy assassination. More of a docudrama than hollywood type movie,it relies on facts and sworn testimony of witnesses for the story line. It has a small but unique reputation for driving conspiracy nuts batty.

Being in England, the Kennedy assassination did not have the same impact on me or my contemporaries, than it would have had to the American people. For that reason I think we English can view the events of that day in November 1963 from a more detached viewpoint. Whether the conspiracy theories have any credence to them I couldn't say, maybe they do and maybe they don't, I keep an open mind on that. However, I do find the motives put forward in this film for Jack Ruby killing Oswald somewhat implausible and hard to believe. I watched this film earlier this evening on one of the movie channels, and I must admit I did find it entertaining and worth watching, but I think one has to be selective in what one takes for gospel and what is supposition, in my opinion it was too simplistic and naive in parts. I thought the acting was good though, both of the actors that played the lead parts were very good and dealt with a sometimes 'iffy' script admirably.