Ruby and Oswald

As a student of the John F. KENNEDY assassination, I want to point out that this movie is a very accurate portrayal of the real Jack Ruby. First of all, I strongly feel that Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone--NO conspiracy. And another thing, I think that Oliver Stone's movie, JFK, stinks. It is one of the most fraudulent, deceptive piece of historical analysis that has ever been my personal displeasure to watch.

I believe that both Lee Harvey Oswald and Jack Ruby were too emotionally unstable to be a part of a conspiracy, because sooner or later they would have cracked under pressure. (Oswald once tried to commit suicide and Ruby was notorious for NOT being able to keep his mouth shut).

This movie shows Jack Ruby very accurately portrayed (for a change). Ruby was very emotionally unbalanced, unstable and was extremely fond of JFK.

For a couple of books on the JFK assassination, try "Case Closed," by Gerald Posner and "Reclaiming History," by Vincent Bugliosi (pronounced bull-YO-c).

Certainly this film is worth watching for the location filming and the real film of JFK but, as several reviewers have pointed out, as an account of the assassination of JFK it bears little resemblance to the truth. Some glaring errors have already been noted above, especially the ridiculous characterisations of Ruby and Oswald. Ruby was a mobster working for the New Orleans and Chicago mob and was never known to be a defender of JFK's 'honour' as portrayed in the film. This is a later invention aimed at providing a motive for his murder of Oswald, which was done to silence Oswald. Everything that Ruby does in the film is clearly intended to present him as some kind of good guy/avenger of JFK and is clumsily obvious. Furthermore, even basic details are wrong in this movie - for example, the package of 'curtain rods' which Oswald carried into Dallas was described by several witnesses as 13 inches long - yet in the film it looks more like two feet long to suggest a rifle. As for this film being based on the findings of the Warren Commission and thus being a 'truthful' account, a Senate Commission on Assassinations in the late 1970s re-investigated JFK's death and discredited the Warren Commission findings completely. In the opinion of the Senate Commission - which reviewed physical and witness evidence that the Warren Commission deliberately refused to admit, there WAS a conspiracy to kill JFK and they concluded that if Oswald was directly involved, he did not act alone. This is undisputed fact, as anyone can check. Further physical and eyewitness testimony that the Warren Commission refused to review also conclusively demonstrates that the fatal wound to JFK's head came from the right front, meaning there was a second gunman at least. Also, no fingerprints were ever found on the alleged murder weapon and Oswald's partial palm print was 'discovered' until after his death two days later. The only accurate point is that we never see Oswald firing the rifle - no one ever did.So viewers who think this film is an accurate representation are deluding themselves - and no, I'm not a conspiracy nut, I just prefer to keep an open mind and base my opinions on established fact rather than the accepting on face value anything that a government chooses to tell us. Incidentally, much of the acting in this movie is poor to say the least, wooden I would say. Only Frederic Forrest as Oswald carries any conviction in my opinion.

This movie is a straightforward docudrama on the events surrounding JFK's assassination during the weekend of November 22, 1963. As the movie states at the very beginning, it is based upon the witness testimony given to the Warren Commission. If you want to see the truth of what actually transpired during that weekend then this movie is worth watching. There are many well-researched conspiracy theories that have been put forth during the last four decades concerning JFK's assassination. Yet not one of them has ever disproved the majority of the assassination witnesses' original testimony given to the Warren Commission or the physical evidence that pointed to Oswald as the assassin. Frederic Forrest gives an excellent portrayal of Lee Harvey Oswald as does Michael Lerner of Jack Ruby. I think the movie might have been more effective if it had been filmed in black & white since so many people watched those events on a black & white television.

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.

Its appropriate I suppose that I am writing these words near the 40th anniversary of John F. Kennedy's assassination. The day that was like blood on the American flag and darkness at noon. I have always eagerly watched every movie or documentary on the assassination. Everyone loves a good mystery and this is one mystery that will never be solved. Ruby And Oswald was first shown when I was in the fourth grade and I have seen it several times since. Frederic Forrest and Michael Lerner (who is unfairly known mainly for looking like Roger Ebert) both do a fine job in the title roles. One is a bitter young loner seeking fame by killing the President the other is a hot-tempered man driven to violence by grief. The only thing that I have against this film is its very naive and simplistic viewpoint. Its almost as if the writers just read the Warren Commission report and took it as Gospel without looking below the surface. The one question that I have is this. If Ruby loved Kennedy so much (there is a scene early in the film where he tells his nightclub audience about "our dear President Kennedy" and angrily attacks a man who insults the President) why wasn't he out watching the motorcade as it practically passed by his front door? He was in a newspaper office at the time going over ads for his nightclub! I think its been proven that Ruby was just a pathetic loser who wanted his "fifteen minutes" of fame so to speak by shooting Oswald. I recently wrote a letter to Jim Leavelle the Dallas detective who was handcuffed to Oswald when Ruby shot him. Leavelle wrote me that there was no conspiracy and that people like Oliver Stone are basically just out for a buck and don't give a tinker's damn about the truth. I called Mister Leavelle and spoke with him and he said that he thought Ruby believed he would be a hero and that everyone would shake his hand and he would be on the Ed Sullivan show for shooting Oswald. Still, this is a good film with fine performances that really brings that terrible day to life.