Frame of Mind

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.

I thought that this was a well made low budget "b" movie . excellent acting,, premise,, well done for something that's been overdone in so many different ways for so many years.. I mean think about it,, it's actually plausible for someone who died many years ago,, to have saved something,, and an ancestor finds it after they die,, heck I found Kennedy Newspapers from 63,, Life Magazine,, right after he died,, I never knew my parents kept all that stuff, so yea I can totally buy that part. as for the movie itself,, it's definitely more than likely possible,, after watching the Marathon on the History Channel about 5 weeks ago,, I totally buy there was a conspiracy based on the open mike radio from the patrolmen from the motorcade,, tapes have been gone over and analyzed and proved that there were up to 5 shots that happened that day.. but the movie is very good,, I loved it because I'm an assassination buff,, and I love a good mystery,, and am a student of History,, if we don't learn from the past we are doomed to repeat it.

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.

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.

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.