Siskel & Ebert - "JFK"
Vložit
- čas přidán 27. 12. 2012
- 2 thumbs up for Oliver Stone's "JFK", regardless of its historical veracity.
EDIT: The comments section has gotten wildly out of hand really quickly. Therefore, I kindly ask that, from this point forth, all comments focus on the film itself, rather than its historicity. Any further attempts to argue about the Kennedy assassination conspiracy theories, rather than the film itself, will be deleted as soon as I notice them. - Krátké a kreslené filmy
The scene with Mr. X, explaining his past career as a black ops specialist for the CIA... riveting to a high degree, Stone's best film for me
The interviews given by the real life Mr. X, colonel Fletcher Prouty, is fascinating, riveting, compelling and scary as hell. It's on CZcams, search for "Fletcher Prouty the secret team".
Fletcher was a holocaust denier
I think Sutherland should've been nominated over Tommy Lee Jones.
@@bossfan49 Tommy was amazing too!
@@bossfan49 I tend to agree, but since he was barely in the film, I’m guessing that’s why he wasn’t nominated.
Never a dull moment in 3 hours. Exhilarating stuff, with mind-blowing editing.
No pun intended.
The best edited film of all time.
Piece of crap movie that spread false info supporting Stone’s wacko conspiracy theories.
I miss Siskel & Ebert.
they should get back together
@@jamsid33 The smell would be incredible
@@jamsid33 Siskel & Ebert are deceased.
So do I.
I miss them too, with every shot I take.
I saw this at the cinema in early '92 - that was 29 years ago. That is more time than between Kennedy's death and the release of the film.
I saw JFK in the theater when it came out with a couple of friends. Afterwards we went for coffee and debated the film for longer than the length of the movie.
An excellent movie, indeed, and it's one of my all-time favorites! If any of the events that were in the movie are true (& I believe that most of them were), then it shows what really happened. However you look at this movie, it's a very compelling watch! I personally believe that the fatal shot came from somewhere in front. There's no way that the fatal shot came from the back. No way! However, that's my opinion. Only God knows what really happened. Whatever...
@ronaldshank7589 that's a considerable if when it comes to movies. We should never take our history lessons from movies. Take them as an inspiration to look more into the subject.
In my opinion this is Oliver Stone's best movie.
He has personally said that it's his favorite film that he has directed. He has also said that he considers it to be his "The Godfather"
I fully agree. It is a great movie. Very underrated.
He’s made so many great movies but I always lean toward Natural Born Killers as his finest work. Though it was also his last great movie. Haven’t seen anything of his since NBK worth watching.
I don't agree i think Platoon is his best film but JFK is a good 2nd or 3rd.
I agree. This movie came out when I was about 11 years old and it got me addicted to politics and conspiracy theories for the rest of my life. A splendid piece of cinema
The editing, writing, and acting are great, but what really makes it a masterpiece is how it puts you into the mindset of a conspiracy theorist.
That's what makes it great but also makes it really annoying seems like everytime I watch this movie my mind is a race thing in a million different directions on this and after reading a book about JFK's assassination that just adds to the confusion
JFK's a great movie, what is there to debate?
I saw this when I was 16 years old and it was one of the greatest movie experience I've ever had. I went to see this with my friends and going out of the theatre, we had long, heated, interesting discussions about it. This movie was so inspiring.
When I watched it, I believed everything that was in it. Nowadays, I still think there's a conspiracy there but not that far-reaching. Still, it was a great nightmarish vision, almost a horror movie. It's Oliver Stone's Masterpiece.
Despite de subject I think this is Stone's masterpiece, the editing is exhilirating, the cinematography is beautiful and the performances are right on.
By the end of JFK, I was wondering if I myself might've been involved in JFK's assassination. However, I was born in 1967, so I have the perfect alibi (or at least, that's what "they" wrote on my birth certificate).
who knows yu could be???
Maiden Utah Previous life my friend. It could have been you..
Here's the truth : You are JFK !
@@HEAD3455 You think prime minister Yu killed Kennedy?! Wow you just blew my mind!
Time travel.
Flawless filmmaking. Why Stone is not considered the equal of Spielberg, 70's Coppola, and Scorsese is beyond my understanding.
Because he exposed the truth.
@@jfm8955 He glorified a homophone while flubbing the facts.
It's because quite frankly his stylistic flourishes can be a bit much and also what stories he tells and how he tells them quite frankly I feel when he directly tells a story and doesn't involve his own personal beliefs he makes pretty amazing movies like Platoon and World Trade Center and Wall Street but when he includes his own personal views you get relatively good movies but with problems like JFK or movies that are just baffling like Alexander
@@AirmanRugby6 how was he a homophobe
@@homermontana2392 If you research Garrison’s actual crusade against Clay Shaw, it is largely conspiracies built upon the secret life of a homosexual man. There’s a reason conspiracy theorists flocked to New Orleans and then deserted the case.
Gary Oldman was terrific in this film.
Gary Oldman is terrific in a bunch of films and is one of the most under rated actors ever.
@@MarkB-vp9ki Oldman is a great performer.
finest actor of our time.
@@strangeplacestv I'm not sure about that. He is very good, though
Gary Oldman looked almost exactly like Lee Harvey Oswald.
Early on in the film when they show him on the news, I thought that was real footage of Oswald.
"JFK" is a dramatic film. It does NOT claim to be a documentary and Stone has always said that this was his counter-myth to the even greater myth of the Warren Commission.
In 94, my 7th grade history teacher played us this movie like it was a factual account lol, so for years I thought this is how it went down. Oh well, toss it in with Columbus and all the other BS.
I was an extra in the black and white grassy knoll scenes.
Personally, I LOVED "JFK" as I had LOVED the other films of the great Oliver Stone as well! As for the unfortunate controversy surrounding "JFK," I thought it was totally uncalled for and I already decided on what a great movie this was: A modern dramatic classic film for all ages!
I think the best thing to come out of that movie is that John Williams Score. The JFK theme is incredible.
Anybody that does not rank JFK in the Top 5 of the year is wrong.
top five of all time more like it
I watch J.F.K once a year like a tradition. Even I know every line and scene, I never get sick of it. Kinda like Star Wars for conspiracy theorists.
amazing film, the quality of acting an editing is off the charts, watch it as fiction and it is one of the best ever, unmissable
This was a fantastic movie! Whether or not you believe Oswald killed JFK, this movie is amazing!
I can’t believe that Oswald killed him, there were many individuals in involved
Underrated classic. R.I.P. Siskel and Ebert
JFK is one of my top 3 films of all time, I've lost count the amount of times I've seen it now, just fantastic.
It's a fantastic film and it's funny how people thought stone was crazy who killed him and today we all know was government.
Henry Hill I guess ur not the Real Henry Hill???
Who cares about the story, this film is gorgeous, editing, cinematography, acting, sound, incredible!
One of Stone's best, though it may have hurt his later movies: he fell a little too in love with the wild-eyed, listen-to-my-wisdom approach coupled with the frenetic editing & shooting styles that worked so well here, and started using them in other films that didn't need them.
It also shows that you don't need to agree with a movie's point of view to enjoy it; certainly I don't subscribe to the conspiracy theories that it puts forth, but while watching I can set that aside.
Exactly. Whether you believe in a conspiracy or not, the film exists in a world of its own, and as a film, it’s utterly brilliant.
The Zapp-rooder footage haha Ebert flubbed it but I still love these guys most when they agree on a review.
Hey @CZcams-tied - Yeahhh ... Abraham Zapruder (Zapp-rooder - proper pronunciation) ... did Roger dwell on a vowel too long to your liking?!?
The editing in this movie is fantastic
JFK is the game changer of '6 degrees of Kevin Bacon.' Jack Lemmon, John Candy, Tommy Lee Jones, among others, in the same movie, like what. Perhaps the most eclectic cast of all time.
4:40 - 4:49 Siskel was spot on here.
So accurate Tommy Lee Jones and Kevin Costner should have been nominated
JFK shows every point of view - yes even Oswald acting alone. They show him shooting, running down the steps & making it to the 2nd floor lunch room.
This movie is one of the best films ever made! Amazing editing, film stock choices, its just one of the best ever.
Not true. He showed very specific and flawed points of view. Vincent Bugliosi is the only person to truly tackle every single point of view in thorough detail. He embarrasses Oliver Stone, who creeped out JFK Jr.
That is true that is what I like about it though I really don't like how they tried to push LBJ Killing Kennedy that theory is just dumb and makes no sense
Absolutely not true it’s heavy conspiracy sided
Milhouse quoted the "through the looking-glass" line on The Simpsons. Pesci's character was quoting the "enigma" line from a Winston Churchill speech.
And the enigma line ended up in Seinfeld.
@@tammymism Was that the magic loogie?
@@jedijones lol would have been funny if it was. but, no, it's _The Big Salad_
Oliver Stone makes films that carry strong social messages:
1. Greed (Wall Street); 2. Shame (Platoon); 3. Sacrifice (Born on the Fourth of July); 4. Conspiracy (JFK)
I've always found Stone's visual style to be very similar to Martin Scorsese's. Here, he's even got Scorsese favorite Joe Pesci, chewing the scenery left and right.
But the difference is that Scorsese makes good movies.
Gabriel Lewis I liked "Nixon." But I found this movie quite dull. Conspiracy theorys don't interest me much. There is enuf bad government behavior that is well documented to worry about.
Mark Raymond Robert Richardson is my fav cinematographer
Ethan Davidson JFK is basically what would happen if John Grisham wrote a novel based on the Kennedy assassination.
I'd be very interested in a film that told the real story of Jim Garrison. He was a colorful, nutty character. But you couldn't have somebody like Costner playing him. Brad Garrett would be more suitable.
Gabriel Lewis oh you are sooo cooool
Honestly, who knows what was right and wrong in the film? I couldn't tell. What really happened? That's what makes this film such a haunting and brilliant thriller and film, perfectly realizing the world we live in today. With continuing threats on the NSA's part to various suspicious scandals, can we really trust our authority? It's really scary to think about what really happened in that year during those times...
Merle! Michael Rooker always nails it!
Mississippi Burning - perfect job.
It's a masterpiece of event interpretation, blending original film with recreated footage. It's also a depiction of the Garrison/Shaw case, based on a couple of books that by no means are the last word on the assassination. What seems to make some people flip out is the suggestion that there were political actors and economic actors that stood to benefit from JFK's death. Of course there were. There's a reason the film opens with Ike's warning about the military-industrial complex.
Just because someone benefits from a tragedy does not mean they caused that tragedy.
Jim Garrison’s case fall apart so thoroughly that he was abandoned by the conspiracy theorist community, who recognized his pursuit against Clay Shaw as nothing more than a homophobic crusade.
Go figure, a homosexual American veteran lived a secretive life. To this day the man is denigrated for his sexuality by the likes of Mark Groubert from America’s Untold Stories.
The conspiracy theories are a novelty, without them the JFK assassination becomes less interesting. Nobody wants to believe some scrub loser that could barely hold down a job and couldn’t support his family killed the most important and visionary man of a generation with a cheap mail order rifle.
What’s most crazy is considering the fact that those who idolize JFK the most, like Oliver Stone, put up the strongest fight to exonerate his murderer. Again, this seems to come from the notion that JFK was too important to be murdered by some loser, who couldn’t even make friends in the military (the creator of Quantum Leap and Magnum PI almost knocked him out in the 1950s for talking about communism).
The risk-reward for anyone that would’ve benefited is absurd. The FBI already had leverage on JFK, the CIA was headed by a JFK appointee at the time, JFK was so against intelligence agencies…that he created an intelligence branch within the military. The mafia would’ve had a car waiting for Lee leaving the Book Depository, he would’ve then been put 6 feet under ground. Lee clearly wasn’t paid, he couldn’t even support his family, and his wife wasn’t “taken care of.” Lee was killed, but Jack Ruby (who conspiracy theorists tie-in as a silencer) was allowed to live and die in prison where he could talk all day (and did).
Buddy, these things just don’t add up. There’s 53 key points of evidence PROVING Lee’s guilt, and there’s only speculation and innuendo on the other side. Most of the BS is easily dispelled when you examine the actual record, one only has to look at the asinine theories surrounding Ruth Paine.
That is why I have never bought the LBJ taking down Kennedy Theory
I also I really liked Joe Pesci & John candy in this, but Kevin Costner, Donald Sutherland & Gary oldman were amazing
second best flm of 91 after silence of the lambs candy gave one of the best performances
Man, quite a few great movie classics came out in 1991! Terminator 2: Judgement Day, Silence of the Lambs (Hello, Clarisse!), City Slickers (Remember that one?!?), and JFK! Another favorite of mine came out in 1990, & it, too, starred Kevin Costner. That movie, of course, was the classic movie Dances With Wolves. History will always come to light, no matter how hard man may try to hide it. Look at what happened in Dances With Wolves, and JFK. If the events portrayed in those movies are true, then you'll understand what I mean.
The music score for this movie is brilliant!
One of my favourite movies of all time. Its a masterpiece.
Packed with style, mood, narrative drive, incredible performances from about everybody in it (I can't pick who I liked best--Jones' smarmy, decadent Shaw?; Candy's slippery French Quarter lawyer?; Pesci's raving misfit??)--a real vision from Stone that may be the finest treatise on how a conspiracy theory is usually wrong but draws us in by how much more entertaining it is than the simple, boring truth. Great review from Siskel and Ebert who saw past the controversy.
The issue at the heart of the controversy that many seem to miss is that Oliver Stone’s objective was not to make an entertaining film. It was to use his abilities as a story-teller to create what he saw as a definitive statement on JFK.
Oliver Stone himself said he wanted his film to replace the Warren Commission.
S&E were the Lennon & McCartney of film critics.
Great acting from everyone in this cast.
Great movie.
As opposed to the Warren Commission’s findings, then?
Hey thanks for posting! Do you have the full episode by any chance?
@Sam Weisberg - since you got no answer, obviously the answer is not known, or videographer is not willing to post full episode. Any other questions?
some art is true. art is true about emotions rather than it is about history. this film captured the emotions created by the assassination. the need for the truth
Can’t believe how much I miss these guys. Now I get all my reviews off CZcams. Just not the same. These guys were pros and fed perfectly off one another.
Hilarious how they think a proposed sequel to GWTW is a big deal. Nobody remembers anything about that now.
Great acting, great editing, great music but, Oliver Stone backed the wrong horse in Jim Garrison who has long been discredited.
***** His ( Jim Garrison ) own actions discredited him. For example, the drugging of witnesses
look up the trail of clay shaw. a lot of Jim's testimony was induced by hypnotism and by the drug sodium pentothal.Also, the most logical explanation of the murder of JFK comes from the book Mortal Error.. Are you a 911 truther too?
it's Jakob,not Jacob. Like I said read Mortal Error. Garrison has been in trouble multiple times in his career..the main reason he went after Shaw, was bc he was gay and he used is homosexuality against him at the trail.
BTW, you do know that the governor that was seating in front of the president was seating lower and to the left of the president. so the whole"magic bullet" has been explained by science.
I saw the movie The Big Easy recently. I noticed that the judge in the movie is named Jim Garrison as a reference to the Kennedy assassination. Then I looked up who played him and that indeed was Jim Garrison playing himself.
@The Book Was Better - re: "Jim Garrison playing himself." 1. Yeahhh, Mr.Jim Garrison was Earl Warren in the movie. 2. What else is new?
@1:05
"Helloooooo... [beat]... Newman... "
Hey do you have the full episode by any chance? I would love to see the reviews of “grand canyon” and “father of the bride.” Thanks!
Hey @Sam Weisberg - Second time you have asked the question. No response. How about seeing those two films ... yourself ... without any input from a movie critic(s).
@@warriormanmaxx8991 you don’t know me nor are you even the poster of this video, so why do you give a shit what I asked? let the poster get mad at me if it’s even something to be mad about. The second question was a mistake, I accidentally submitted twice, but even if I didn’t, again, why do you care?? oh god, suuuue me, I’m a fan of the show, I DID see those movies but like tons of other people watching this show I’m curious to see their discussion about it. I’m a freelance critic and like movie criticism. There? Does that answer your question?
@@samweisberg3673 I wanted to see the whole show, too.
You forget that Stone made this movie exactly for the reason to keep the debate alive and to immortalize it on film. He's a prominent believer that Kennedy was assassinated by the government which is why he made this movie. Yes, it's entertainment, but it's the kind that makes you think.
It's much more than "entertainment".
ZAPP ruder? How many times do you have to hear that name spoken before you can get it right? Anyways...one of the best films I've ever scene from all aspects..writing, directing, acting, cinematography, set, wardrobe. I think Donald Sutherland should have been nominated for Best Supporting Actor over Tommy Lee Jones.
That is one magic loogie.
😅
One thing Kevin Costner never could do was accents.
The real jim garrison was from Chicago and didnt have a new Orleans accent lol
@@jlobiafra Interesting, though I wish they'd told Costner that because it sounds like he's trying to do an accent of some sort.
@@toucansam3 yeah it was bad
Walter Cronkite attacked Siskel and Ebert for praising this film. In other words, Cronkite attacked them for asking questions about what the Government did.
Keep this movie in mind if you ever play "Six Degrees of Kevin Bacon"
The smaller roles like Michael Rooker, Jay O. Sanders, and bigger names like Gary Oldman and Ed Asner were perfect.
Really...when I saw this review today I realized that this included Rooker who did a great job, what is funny to me is that since his higher profile appearances in Marvel movies and movies like Tombstone he has been in a lot of older movies (such as Mississippi Burning), great actor.
I forgot to mention the 2 scenes with John Candy- he was amazing!!
On October 2, 63, Kennedy received the report by McNamara and Taylor, chairman of the JSC. The main recommendations, which appear in Section I(B) of the report, were that a phased withdrawal be completed by the end of 1965 and that the “Defense Department should announce in the very near future presently prepared plans to withdraw 1,000 out of 17,000 U.S. military personnel stationed in Vietnam by the end of 1963. This was the basis for NSAM 263. It is SOLID PROOF, and JFK never moved from this.
Watching the pan and scan clips here really shows you how a film shot at 2.35:1 is ruined by “full screen cropping”. Notice how Costner is cut off in the very first clip with Sutherland.
Hey @Lloyd Christmas - partly shot documentary style ... so Kevin Costner is slightly cut off in the first Sutherland clip. Camera was on Sutherland ... the whole time ... since Sutherland was doing most of the talking. Any other criticisms ?!? Ehhh?
@@warriormanmaxx8991 “Ehh”??? What are you, from Canada? The fact is the frame is blown up and cropped. There are examples of how horrible it looks THROUGHOUT the film in the pan and scan version. Dummy.
It's a great movie, an artistic interpretation of life, it does not purport to be a history lesson. In the same vein, "Amadeus" is not a biography of Mozart but an artistic interpretation of Mozart's life through the eyes of Salieri.
I love this movie. One of the, or maybe THE greatest who done it movie of all time. I think it was Professor Plum with the candlestick in the study who killed JFK.
@Gitfiddle 7766 - Ohhhhh ... you are SOOOO funny with the Professor Plum joke !! (Not!)
In 1991, USA movies could be made about distrusting the USA's government. In 2020 and beyond...that is unacceptable. Trusting the government line is the only speech that is allowed.
What about the casting in the Gone with the Wind sequel?
Great actors, great director. Questionable story.
What heppend to that sequel to "Gone with the wind"?
TV Movie with Timothy Dalton. Not very good.
That scene where they are talking about the CIA and its juxtaposed against the photoshopping of the Life Magazine picture is brilliant.
Maybe it's got a lot of fiction in it. It does. But there's a lot of facts too. If there weren't, it wouldn't still be such a hot button debate issue more than half a century after the assassination. Example 1: Where did the President's brain go? Example 2: Why did the parade route change? Example 3: Back.....and to the left. There's about a hundred more.
S&E miss 3 interesting items in JFK. #1: Stone depicted Jim Garrison as the real Jim Garrison because virtually everything covered in the movie was part of Jim's actual investigation. The other characters on Jim's team were mostly fictitious, but Jim himself was not because Stone wanted realism. I believe he considered using the real people on Jim's team as characters too but chose not to because he didn't want competing characters in the story. That said, to do them homage, Stone should have worked in cameos of Jim's actual team members. (Among the investigating members of Jim's team that were still living at the time were attorney and JFK assassination researcher Vincent Salandria and comedian Mort Sahl.) #2: Although the government agents adding a palmprint to the rifle could be considered "speculation," it's really not because of facts that are actually in the government record. It's a fact that when the FBI first tested the rifle, they found no finger or palmprints anywhere on it. And it's a fact that the FBI found no powder marks on Oswald's hands or face, indicating he didn't fire a rifle or use a revolver. And it's a fact that only after government agents privately visited the morgue where Oswald's body was held pending burial and took Oswald's finger and palmprints did the palmprint appear on the rifle. Thus, the only plausible explanation for the belated appearance of the palmprint was that the government agents added it. #3: JFK was one of the first pictures if not the first picture that used actors largely known for comedy performances in serious roles. Among these actors were Jack Lemmon, Walter Matthau, John Candy, Ed Asner, Brian Doyle Murray, and John Larroquette.
Lemmon, Matthau and Asner were all known as actors, not comedians. Acting in a comedy was said to be harder than acting in a drama. Candy surprised people. The other two, IDK.
Basically. The more honest answer is that I simply have neither the time nor the inclination to go back and delete all comments that preceded the policy, and I simply don't believe in ex post facto rules.
I never have any trouble finding the review by Siskel and Ebert, but does ANYBODY out there have the section where a few weeks after the release of the film, they did a special segment over the controversy, and defending their opinions of the movie? (people tend to forget that this movie caused a real, uh, sensation upon it's release - to say the least)
I'm not finding a record of this online. Could it have been their best of the year episode where they both named JFK one of their best? They basically do what you said on that one. If you Google for Siskel & Ebert Best of 1991 you'll find it on the Siskel & Ebert fan archive site.
@@jedijones No. I distinctly remember it came towards the end of one of their regular review shows - it was towards the end. Both Siskel and Ebert were blasted by people such as Cronkite for giving the movie a favorable review. The controversy was loud enough to where they felt they had to defend themselves. Afterall, they were reviewing a MOVIE. Not any documentary. Hope that makes sense.
@@flmlvr OK, I think you mean this episode. They even interview Costner about it. It's on CZcams under this title: Siskel & Ebert Juice The Hand that Rocks the Cradle Freejack 1992
@@jedijones Nope. I don't THINK that was it - okay, here is how I remember it. What happened is that I tuned in before the show ended, and the one thing I remember was Siskel saying to the effect of "Oliver Stone doesn't know who did it and that's why EVERYBODY is in on it." I remember that so well because that has always been my defense of the film. The movie is loaded with buzzwords such as "Maybe", "could have", "suppose". Even before they reenact the entire attack, it's preceeded with "Let us speculate". But keep in mind, this is nearly 30 years ago, and I only THINK I'm remembering this right. hehe.
@@flmlvr Then I think you're thinking of the Best of 1991 episode. Siskel says "he throws in everything" and "everybody's implicated in this thing." The JFK portion starts at 20:02 on the copy of this episode on the siskelebert org site.
The past is prologue.....
How about the fact that some of the kids seem to disappear during the film?
I don't even think restaurants or any businesses were open on Easter in those days, and even if they were, a Catholic family with a lot of kids and babies would not eat at a restaurant on Easter.
Don't get your history from Hollywood. Beyond that entertaining film but Stone didn't let the facts get in the way.
The movie was financed by Israelis.
That explains why Quantum Leap Creator & Producer Donald P. Bellisario didn't like Oliver Stone's JFK and why he wrote the episode of Lee Harvey Oswald and James Whitmore, Jr. Directed It
Great success. Post this movie I read books and watched hours of other opinions on the assassination and period of time. That alone shows the power of this movie. You will not regret watching it whether you agree with him or not.
This is a great film from oliver stone.
"Too Purple for my taste" What does that mean?
Siskel used the word "purple" a lot in that context, so many times that I had to look it up lol. As an adjective "purple" means excessive or full of exaggerated elements.
+The032387
thanks for clarifying
Hello, Newman.
I’m pretty sure that if you told people “This part actually didn’t happen”, 99.9% of them would believe you.
Oh, definitely, and Siskel made that point.
His comments preceded my revised policy, which does not apply retroactively.
'Who killed the President?"
"Have you interviews KM?"
Good point, well made!
Siskel and Ebert do another big segment on JFK and interview Costner in this episode that aired a few weeks later: czcams.com/video/uAjj5S9WIY4/video.html
The hell was that Pesci performance?
Did Ebert say "Zapp Ruder"? Hah
A young Gordon Gekko shot JFK
?
JFK was a excellent film, practiclly flawless, except for certain things like, the kids never aging, but when this film is on like The Godfather our Goodfellas I simply have to watch it
great movie love it
i didn't see the description. alright my bad. sometimes i just can't help it. but yeah i wont.
I freakin love this movie a true masterpiece
I hope Oliver will make a movie someday about the crazy stuff going on right now with the Trump Federal indictment and the Biden crime family bribery scandal.
Maybe for a year or 2 after its release. Then I think most people just did what they would've done before the movie came out.
One of the best films of all time, one of the most important films of all time. History needs to be revisited, when its not transcribed as it should be.
lol, half of Joe Pesci's words are missing
When they try to convince you this hard it was just Oswald you know something is wrong. If it was just Oswald nobody would care. So hard.?
1:07, clearly Merle Dixon from The Walking Dead.