The Commission

I see this movie as being more like a living document. Something in the vein of a Ken Burns documentary. What is extraordinary about it is that is does not pose any theories. Just gives you the facts, especially the ones missing from the final report, then lets you make up your own mind about it.

The performances are mostly good, though some of the smaller roles seem very stiff, as though he was using non-actors. Sam Waterston is great as he comes off with a full personality. And, of course, it's always great to see Joe Don Baker.

Definitely a movie worth seeing.

This film his shined the light on the secrets hidden for so long. It is so prevalent with todays politics. I have always thought that there was more to what happened to Kennedy, and the pure lack of any real investigation has cemented my original opinion. The facts that are shown in The Commission are indisputable. There was a cover up. I am even more convinced that Johnson was involved more deeply than many will want to admit. This was an amazing cast, and I can see why they all wanted to be part of this film. I am incredibly excited to see the final version and hope that this film finally closes this chapter in American history. This film shows what truly happens behind closed doors. Thank you Mr. Sobel for finally showing the truth.

I feel privileged to have seen this movie and truly hope that it will be widely released soon!

"The Commission" uses documented fact to address the mysterious and confusing subject of how the Kennedy assassination was investigated. This film reminds me of Michael Moore's "Fahrenheit 9-11" in that it uses "fact-as-drama" to make its case. It is a highly potent method of film-making. I found myself thinking, "that couldn't have happened," but then remembered that the script for "The Commission" was compiled transcripts.... IT DID HAPPEN.

I am not an assassination buff, but I have to say that I've never been as interested in the Kennedy assassination as after seeing this film. This movie does not tell you what to believe --- it simply provides factual information which allows you to come to your own conclusions.

I am so pleased to see a wave of edgy political docu-features in the spotlight. It is truly encouraging to me that film-making is breaking ground on a new genre. Like "Fahrenheit 9-11", this film is something special.

This documentary should be seen by any citizen who cares about the future of this country. With everything in the film taken from the historical record, the Warren Commission reveals itself to be the public relations snowjob many have long suspected it was. The director lets the historical characters speak for themselves, and the result is devastating. All the performances by this first-rate cast (all of whom participated without pay, simply because they believed in the project) are excellent. It is crucial that this film be released theatrically. Americans need to reclaim their own history; nothing has been the same since November 22, 1963.

I saw The Commission at a Warren Commission conference. The film was disappointing even though there are some interesting elements of value in the movie.

The acting performances were good in many places and the switches from one shot to another with interesting changes in camera angle were extremely good. But some of the more significant scenes for the thesis of the film, particularly Martin Landau as Senator Richard Russell, were stiff and halting as if there were no underlying aesthetic momentum. I got the impression in these places that more takes might have smoothed out the film.

I was reminded of Landau as Bela Lugosi in the Ed Wood biopic and it was difficult not to laugh.

The director sticks to the dialogue generated by the Warren Commission hearings and report and some of the stiffness results from this particular choice. And the director has a particular bias about the Warren Commission which is not substantiated at all by the historical record so that a perspicacious viewer is put off by the film because it seems jury-rigged and preachingly hokey. There are also some serious misinterpretations of conversations between Russell and then President Lyndon Johnson which are historically weak and unperceptive again in the service of the director's thesis.

Some of the hard-core evidence refuting the director's thesis is simply left out. For example, the exchange between Arlen Spector and Governor Connally's doctor, Dr. Shaw, in which Specter develops some iron clad facts about Connally's wounds vis-a-vis the single bullet theory, doesn't appear in the film despite its significance in the commission's work itself. This elision gives a false and seriously misleading impression of the conceptual texture of the Commission and might be seen by some as a striking moral failing.

The major problem with the film then is its rather frightening disregard for the real evidence in the JFK case.