Using new technology, the filmmakers show what is really going on in the famous Zapruder film of the assassination of the 35th President of the United States John F. Kennedy (JFK)Using new technology, the filmmakers show what is really going on in the famous Zapruder film of the assassination of the 35th President of the United States John F. Kennedy (JFK)Using new technology, the filmmakers show what is really going on in the famous Zapruder film of the assassination of the 35th President of the United States John F. Kennedy (JFK)
- Director
- Writer
- Star
Photos
- Director
- Writer
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
Featured reviews
There's a book theorizing that Aristotle Onassis killed JFK because he wanted his wife. I never thought I'd ever find anything more ridiculous. I was wrong. You have got to be kidding me. Maybe you are kidding me. Maybe it's all a joke. No interviews with the doctors, and I thought there were supposed to be interviews with doctors, emergency room doctors, who actually worked on Kennedy. It's all a bunch of goofy theorizing by some guy, very glib and and perfectly rehearsed, claiming the use of then-unknown technology, and I'm not talking about the technology of assassination. Also, he calls mobster Johnny Rosselli, Johnny Rossalini. In fact, he knows nothing about the mob.
The movie kept talking about the 30 caliber bullet from the Italian Carcano rifle that LHO allegedly used to assinate JFK. Well unless someone put a new barrel on the Carcano rifle, it was a 6.5 MM bullet. 30 caliber equals 7.62 MM thus the 6.5 MM bullet is smaller. Not much research went into the making of this film
And for someone to allege that JFK faked his death, that is crazy.
Also to the report that Tippet was dubbed in for the examination at the hospital is wrong. He was taken to the Methodist Hospital whereas JFK was taken to Parkland hospital. Again very poor research on your end
Very big waste of time and you lost my interest when talking about a 30 caliber bullet.
And for someone to allege that JFK faked his death, that is crazy.
Also to the report that Tippet was dubbed in for the examination at the hospital is wrong. He was taken to the Methodist Hospital whereas JFK was taken to Parkland hospital. Again very poor research on your end
Very big waste of time and you lost my interest when talking about a 30 caliber bullet.
To quote an old farmer I worked for many years ago when I was a teenager, this "documentary" is as full of sh_t as a Christmas goose.
A wild, crazy mess of a theory that is closer to science fiction than a serious analysis of facts, this movie will probably appeal to the nut cases who always seem to think they are the only ones who "get it".
The build-up description of the movie promised new factual findings using modern technology that would finally reveal the truth about what happened on November 22, 1963. Instead, it presented a bizarre, convoluted bag of nonsense that will be rejected by anyone with more than three brain cells.
A wild, crazy mess of a theory that is closer to science fiction than a serious analysis of facts, this movie will probably appeal to the nut cases who always seem to think they are the only ones who "get it".
The build-up description of the movie promised new factual findings using modern technology that would finally reveal the truth about what happened on November 22, 1963. Instead, it presented a bizarre, convoluted bag of nonsense that will be rejected by anyone with more than three brain cells.
I have been intrigued by facts, theories and conspiracies about the assassination of John F. Kennedy for many years. I've viewed several documentaries, docudramas, and a couple of lectures, but this is definitely the biggest crock of steamed theories I have ever seen regarding this topic. I stopped watching after I invested 1:12:35 of my time. If I paid a penny more for the video rental, I would be considering pursuing a refund. However, a couple of the statements regarding the chain of custody of evidence were enlightening up to a point. But after seeing this, I still believe that something more like the conspiracy depicted in "Executive Action" is closer to the truth!
Seemingly put together on free editing software, the makers present a laughable theory and have the cheek to end it "maybe we can finally put this all to bed."
For someone who has had to research enough information to put together a 90 minute documentary, I'm absolutely staggered that this is the conclusion he arrived at.
The narration sounds like it was recorded one sentence at a time and lacks a smooth consistency, instead always starting off on the same annoying high tone. Cheesy sample stock footage is cut randomly between 144p resolution images of events at the time. There's a guy stood against a white wall giving us his expertise as an absolute nobody, and has the audacity to question Oliver Stone's years of research that he and a film crew conducted.
Nothing in this feels coherent, plausible or faithful to what actually happened on 11/22/63, and it's highly unlikely that if you've done more than a days worth of research on JFK that this will teach you anything more.
I'm also surprised and concerned by how easy it now seems to be that anyone can spend a weekend slapping together 90 minutes of film and get to show it on Amazon Prime.
Pros: some use of new footage
Cons: narration difficult to listen to, extremely poor quality images and videos, new crackpot theory, everything feels like it was used because it was free - a budget of $0.
For someone who has had to research enough information to put together a 90 minute documentary, I'm absolutely staggered that this is the conclusion he arrived at.
The narration sounds like it was recorded one sentence at a time and lacks a smooth consistency, instead always starting off on the same annoying high tone. Cheesy sample stock footage is cut randomly between 144p resolution images of events at the time. There's a guy stood against a white wall giving us his expertise as an absolute nobody, and has the audacity to question Oliver Stone's years of research that he and a film crew conducted.
Nothing in this feels coherent, plausible or faithful to what actually happened on 11/22/63, and it's highly unlikely that if you've done more than a days worth of research on JFK that this will teach you anything more.
I'm also surprised and concerned by how easy it now seems to be that anyone can spend a weekend slapping together 90 minutes of film and get to show it on Amazon Prime.
Pros: some use of new footage
Cons: narration difficult to listen to, extremely poor quality images and videos, new crackpot theory, everything feels like it was used because it was free - a budget of $0.
Did you know
- TriviaThe same technology that is used to restore older films back to their pristine origin is used in this documentary on the famous Zapruder film of the assassination of the 35th President of the United States John F. Kennedy (JFK)
- GoofsJay Weidner, the researcher on camera, states that an anonymous call tipped off the police that Lee Harvey Oswald was in the Texas Theater where he was eventually arrested. This is false. Mr. John Brewer, the manager of a shoe store across the street from the theater, saw Oswald enter the theater, tipped off Mrs. Julia Postal who worked in the theater's box office, who then called the police. This has been a known fact since November 22, 1963.
- How long is JFK X: Solving the Crime of the Century?Powered by Alexa
Details
- Release date
- Country of origin
- Official site
- Language
- Filming locations
- Production company
- See more company credits at IMDbPro
Box office
- Budget
- $20,000 (estimated)
- Runtime
- 1h 30m(90 min)
- Color
- Aspect ratio
- 16:9 HD
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content