Movies: 18470  |  TV Series: 3282  |  Added today: 0  |  Storage: 65898 GB

Download, Watch online JFK Movie.

JFK
Genres: CrimeThrillerDr
Starring: Jay O. Sanders, Kevin Costner, Edward Asner, Sally Kirkland, Anthony Ramirez, Ray LePere, Steve Reed
Director(s): Oliver Stone
Available Quality: DivX, Hi Def, iPod, Hi Def
Country: USA, France
Year:1991
IMDB Rating: 8

Details the actions of New Orleans District Attorney Jim Garrison, who takes it upon himself to investigate the assassination of President John F. Kennedy in Dallas, Texas, in 1963. Garrison is extremely suspicious of the official story presented by the FBI, and what he already knows and what he subsequently learns lead him to suspect that there is more to the story than the public is being told.

JFK (iPod) Resolution: 480x208 px Total Size: 511 Mb
JFK (Hi Def) Resolution: 852x352 px Total Size: 1226 Mb
JFK (Hi Def) Resolution: 1280x532 px Total Size: 4197 Mb
JFK (DivX) Resolution: 576x240 px Total Size: 1178 Mb

Movie Photos: We have taken some photos of "JFK". They represent actual movie quality.

Visitor Reviews: (20)

17 May 2012

ABYSSMAL!


JFK, Oliver Stone's supposed masterpiece about the Kennedy assassination, probes the abyss of nonsensical conspiracy theory and never emerges from the black hole. Forty years after one of the darkest days in US history, facts now show how poorly done Stone's movie was from a fact standpoint. In November of 2003, the week of the fortieth anniversary of Kennedy's death in Dallas, Peter Jennings tackled every pillar upon which Stone had based his arguments for conspiracy and totally wiped them out. Oswald a poor shot? Nonsense! Oswald achieved marksman status in the US Marine Corps. Not enough time to get off three shots? Rubbish! Jennings' report clearly demonstrates that three shots were more than doable. The final fatal shot came from the front and right? Hardly! Never mind which way Kennedy's body falls in the Zapruder film. Ballistics is the only science that can be trusted here, along with facts from Kennedy's autopsy. Autopsy X-rays of Kennedy's skull definitively show that the point of impact was from behind and above and not from the front. The spot on the back of Kennedy's head could not have been hit by a shot from the grassy knoll unless conspiracy theorists are claiming a "magic bullet" of their own that hung in midair then turned sharply to the right in order to enter Kennedy's head from the proper trajectory. Pristine bullet? Magic bullet? Secret meetings with conspiratorial assassins? Jack Ruby working in a supposed conspiracy? Fiction! Pure unadulterated fiction! Stone's skills as a gifted moviemaker are there in JFK in rich abundance but he falls into the hole when it comes to history.Douglas McAllister

ragingbull 17 May 2012

I can't get this movie out of my head!


What a spectacular movie. Oliver Stone's second greatest work (behindPlatoon), this movie is unlike any other motion picture made before. Amazingstory about the assassination of JFK and the theories surrounding it, KevinCostner delivers a fine performance as do all the other supporting actors.One of the best casted movies from the 90's. This film was robbed at theAcademy Awards, it should of won, in addition to the beautifulcinematography and perfect editing, for Best Picture, Director, AdaptedScreenplay and Original Score (John Williams composes another genius pieceof American movie music). Without a doubt 4/4!

eddresden 17 May 2012

Pro's and cons about Stone's films.


Oliver Stone is undoubtedly a very intelligent man who is verypassionate about the chosen subjects he tackles- Vietnam, JFK, Cubaetc. However, with Stone I often do not feel that I am watching a filmbut more a lecture or some strong political argument/viewpoint.This is not to say Stone is not making very well made films witch oftencontain very strong performances but often it is hard not to overlookthe grandeur of his films or the stunning shots and focus on the factthat you feel like you're dealing with an activist. I feel much the same when watching films by Michael Moore (particularlyfaranheit9/11). As a result one of the feelings I take from Stone'sfilms is a feeling that I am being patronised. Strong and very biasedviews are being hammered into the viewer from the outset. This iscertainly the case in 'JFK' particularly the mesmerising editing in theopening montage scenes which, although brilliant, is clearly biased. Don't get me wrong I generally agree with arguments of Michael Mooreand Oliver Stone I just feel that in 'JFK' and in other Stone filmssuch as 'platoon' and 'born on the 4th of july' we are watching more apropaganda pamphlet than a piece of cinema which has balanced views andmore open debate towards certain issues.

Tim Shaw 16 May 2012

You can't handle the TRUTH!


I know, I know already that that tag-line actually comes from A FEW GOODMEN; it seems apropos however that the filmmaker/script adapter has such alow opinion of his film audience. Not only does Mr. Stone believe thattheAmerican film audience can't handle the twists and turns of that tragicdaywhen President Kennedy was murdered, he believes that he has to MAKE USseeaccording to one scenario. This is a prime example of a biopic thatdevisesits own criteria for TRUTH and REALITY (2001 has A BEAUTIFUL MIND) butsucceeds wildly in its own extravagance. Today in mid-April 2002 Ihappenedon its re-broadcast on a local TV affiliate and was startled how thesanitized dialogue segments seemed kind of like a badly dubbed Chinesekungfu extravaganza. The film's power in images is still highlyrecommendable;go see it on DVD if you're over 18 and fully ready for the script's adultprofanities. It really shouldn't be broadcast without some sort ofWARNINGlabel that it is only skewing toward the TRUTH as we mortals can know it.The re-enacted sequences are still jarring and disturbing for me just asthey were when I saw this film ten years or so ago for the firsttime.

tex-29 30 April 2012

it increases my paranoia


The paranoid message will give more and more, and then it will giveeven more. The entertainment resources of the paranoid message areunrivaled. It offers puzzles, drama, passion, heroes, villains, andstruggle. If the story-line can be tied to an historical event,especially one that involves romantic characters and unexpected death,then fiction, history, and popular delusion can be joined in thepursuit of profit. The story, moreover, need never end. If evidenceappears that refutes the conspiracy, the suppliers of the discreditingmaterial will themselves be accused of being part of the conspiracy.The paranoid explanatory system is a closed one. Only confirmatoryevidence is accepted. Contradictions are dismissed as being naive or,more likely, part of the conspiracy itself.

Erin Cummins 30 April 2012

Kevin Costner's best movie


I just recently rented JFK after seeing FLOTG(For Love Of The Game)whichcaused me to rent some of his recent past films and I rented this becausemyfather recommended it. I have to say though that this film(besides TheUntouchables)was Kevin's best. I thought he did an excellent jobportrayingJim Garrison and in my opinion this will be my all time favorite moviethathe has done. Kevin if you should read this somehow I would like you toknowthat you have a lot of talent and I will always continue to see yourmovies.

foxmulder9889 18 April 2012

JFK: Best Film of the 1990's


Oliver Stone's JFK is a masterful film that captures the corruption andconspiracy of politics very well. Stone injects much passion and fireinto the circumstances surrounding the assassination of John F.Kennedy. Overall, the film is a masterpiece on many levels. On atechnical level, the film is a superb marriage of beautifulcinematography courtesy of Robert Richardson, excellent editing and agreat score by the legendary John Williams (surely one of his mostunderrated scores). The screenplay is well written and the performances, by an all starcast of many, are perfectly nuanced. JFK could have been a tangled andoverwhelming mess due to the large volume of information and eventsthat is thrown at the viewer, but Stone manages to keep everything in acohesive, understandable balance that will keep any viewer riveted tothe stop. Don't let the long run time turn you off, this film will keepyou interested and will fly by (but then again, if you are letting therun time of a film turn you off, then you should re-think your filmviewing standards). JFK is Oliver Stone's definitive masterpiece (how it was beaten by TheSilence of the Lambs at the Oscars, I will never know) and is a filmthat should be treasured and appreciated for many years to come. A+++

17 April 2012

Fact? Fiction? it's riveting, mesmerizing, provoking


The acting is superb. Great cast of actors. The dialogue keeps you on the edge of your seat. How true is it to the facts? Are the CIA and FBI this devious, I mean, assassinate the President of the United States? The Kennedys were a Greek tragedy. Their story is high art. This film captures their privledged world and the high stakes of the underworld as they collide into high drama. I've seen this film at least a dozen times. I feel stunned every time I see it. The assassination is one thing. The cover up, if true, implicates the whole government to some degree. If this film is only fifty percent accurate, that's more than you'll want to believe. You almost want to bury your head when this film is over, but you won't be able to. I strongly recommend this film to anyone who dares to think and be challenged.

Greg Treadway 14 April 2012

Excellent Example of Editing


The main reason JFK is considered such an excellent film is thecreative use of editing by the film's director and behind the scene'sco-editor Oliver Stone. The main editors on the film are Joe Hutshingand Pietro Scalia. Of course Hutshing worked with Stone before, notablyon "Born on the Forth of July" - another editor's movie. Scalia was anew choice for Stone and chosen no doubt for his technical aptitude forediting and being new Stone could easily be Scalia's puppet-master andpull the strings.The film in some ways is a throwback to the great epic films that useto come from the studios in the golden age of Hollywood. Stating theobvious, it is based on true-life events of New Orleans DistrictAttorney Jim Garrison and the death of President Kennedy and the onlytrial resulting from the crime. Some might argue that it'sdocumentary-like presentation is at times too much information andslows down the film. For film aficionados this may be the reason thefilm is such a draw for them. Certainly a better film than it's rivalfor the Oscar nod and winner in 1991 "The Silence of the Lambs."With an all-star cast, from beginning to end the film never stalls andspeeds along like a roller-coaster ride. If there is an argument to bemade for where the film might slow it would be the trial scenes. Don'tmention the trial excerpts to any JFK conspiracy for they will tell youthat the trial scenes are not transcript favorable. There is a lot ofartistic license taken and watching this portion of the movie over andover you may be numbed into believing a test after the film may beforthcoming. Decidedly this is an excellent film with fantastic acting, thedirection is expertly applied and the editing is the star of the film.Considered one of Stone's best work, this film is one for the annals ofmovie making legends. If the digits rules allowed it, the award wouldbe more than two thumbs up.

edwardtjbrown 13 April 2012

Who Killed JFK?


This film has always struck me as being weird. According to Oliver StoneJFKwas killed by the Mafia, CIA, right-wing and left wing militants, anhomosexual underground (can we say homophobia?) and it goes on andon.

Boyo-2 04 April 2012

Mesmerizing


This movie is incredible. If you do not like Oliver Stone's moviesnormally, this is the one you will be able to watch and enjoy, because hisfrantic style suits the subject well. He has taken an event that everyoneis aware of, and still brought so much more to the story that you findyourself thinking about the assassination in ways you never have before.The huge cast is flawless, with the possible exception of Sissy Spacek,whose name in the movie might as well have been The Wife.

04 April 2012

Review #2


I had forgotten that I have already reviewed JFK. However, at the time I was a hard core conspiracy buff. I probably watched this movie at least 15 times (just ask my wonderfully patient wife) for the sheer joy of the conspiracy angle. Well, folks, I am now convinced that LHO acted alone. That's not relevant here, but if you want to e-mail me, I'll tell you why. I still believe the movie is of very high caliber with a great cast. I am a fan of Mr. Stone and JFK does not disappoint. I recommend it to anyone who is interested in period work, but please don't take it at face value. It is distorted and not very factual. Do your own research.

cbass-2 28 March 2012

Entertaining, but true?


When I first saw this movie, I was amazed. The case that Garrison presentedseemed incredible and very well done. His argument seemed to leave noquestion as to whether there was a conspiracy in the assassination of JFK. Then, I did some research. I read about Clay Shaw, Guy Banister, andFletcher Prouty (Mr. X). A lot of what Stone presents as fact is completelyfalse. The address on Oswald's pamphlets did lead to an address adjacent toGuy Banister's detective agency, but the entrance listed did not lead intoGuy Banister's office, they are completely different offices, completelyunconnected. Thus the connection between Banister and Oswald is not valid. Also, Kevin Bacon's character was not a real person but combination of threedifferent personalities, and this character never had any evidence whichlinked Oswald, Ferrie, or Clay Shaw. These inaccuracies are prettysignificant when we relate them to Garrison's case.We all have heard about the Grassy Knoll, and the "puff of smoke" that wasseen from it. Stone recreated this shot and we see the smoke rising fromthe rifle, the smoke that Lee Bowers claims to have seen from his traintower. However, automatic rifles do not give off smoke, that is fact. Thisis another significant discrepancy in the investigation.I do not support the single bullet theory, I do not feel strongly aboutwhether or not there was a conspiracy, I just want to know what happened. Ireally enjoyed JFK and I am glad to have seen it because it inspired me todo some research on the subject. I think it did raise some great pointsabout Oswald such as the fact that he was not a great shot, and he alsowould have had better aim had he fired before Kennedy's car made the turn bythe Depository. I think there are still a lot of questions to be answered. For example, the shots were taken over 8 to 9 seconds (Warren Commission). That's a lot of time. Why couldn't Kennedy have been saved in this time,before the fatal head shot?

27 March 2012

So, you don't buy Stone's conspiracy theory?


Whether or not the film answers the questions surrounding the death of President Kennedy, it does boast bravura performances from Tommy Lee Jones, Donald Sutherland, Kevin Bacon, and, in a small yet memorable cameo, Larry Hagman. John Williams also contributes a very subtle yet powerful score, simultaneously ominous and poignant.

kayobee 25 March 2012

Logically and historically ludicrous ... and damn compelling


My review for what it's worth....I wish I could explain my attraction to this film. I'm not an OliverStone fan and I avoid Kevin Costner. I'm no conspiracy buff, but evenif I were, I believe the one rather shakily outlined here would stillbe too absurd for me: it seems to be an agglomeration of most of thevarious conspiracy theories associated with the assassination of JFK,finished off with some shiny new rococo bits dug from Stone'ssubconscious, and all of it pretty much requiring the participation orknowledge of something like 30% of the western hemisphere. I'm franklyannoyed by Stone's portrayal of Kennedy as revolutionary cut downbefore he could perform the great acts he was destined for -- Kennedywas a shallow, self-serving little fellow who had few scruples and waytoo many issues.As if all that weren't enough, I don't like its portrayal of gay men,it has what must be filmdom's longest monologue, and at something like3 hours, it's way over my usual tolerance.So I should hate it, yes? But somehow, despite all of the above, thedamn film **works**.The acting is tremendous (Donald Sutherland plus Kevin Bacon *plus* JoePesci PLUS Tommy Lee Jones ... need I go on?). Even Costner, whonormally leaves me lukewarm, is great. Intentionally or not, there's aperfect creepy undercurrent to his "hero's" obsessive pursuit (somehowquietly emphasized by those damn upright, uptight hornrimmed glasses ofhis).Yes, the plot is ludicrous, but Stone's passionate insistence that*something* was going on leaks through every frame, compelling theviewer to follow the plot's leaps and twists with the drugged sense ofinevitability usually experience in dream logic.That monologue? Done by an actor I don't care for, expounding a theoryI don't buy -- and I was flipping spellbound. The film is just...excellent. Annoyingly excellent, because it's just damn wrong -- butexcellent cinema, anyway.

barrygermansky-1 24 March 2012

When Oliver Stone Still Had His Nerve


JFK is a masterpiece of film assembly. It contains the best editingI've ever seen (documentary footage is seamlessly interwoven with thenew dramatizations). Robert Richardson's photography brilliantlyswitches between different film stocks and colours.For these reasons alone, the film is worth studying frame by frame.Then there is the script and the actors. It is remarkable how well thescreenwriters and the actors are able to articulate entire prosepassages of historical information into easily digestible chunks. AsMr. X, Donald Sutherland comes off as the most impressive, talking amile a minute with some of the trickiest, most complex dialogue everdelivered on screen.The entire cast is a phenomenon. Everyone from Jack Lemmon and WalterMatthau to Kevin Costner and Tommy Lee Jones is here. Director OliverStone's ability to direct them all in different, individualy uniqueroles is an accomplishment that easily makes up for his recent stringof duds.

Knowlege 15 March 2012

One of the most informative movies I've ever seen!


Yes, all their information is based on theories but for someone who has never seen the footage they showed in that movie it made me believe their was a conspiracy! Now I didn't grow up in the 60's so I never saw it on live TV. That incident was 18 years before I took my first breaths but it made me truly believe their was someone on high pulling the strings. Now that's how I judge a movie. If it makes me feel real emotion, then in my book it's a good movie, but JFK was great!

schweinway 15 March 2012

Proficient, but not really persuasive


Oliver Stone's `JFK' is a frustrating little movie. Kevin Costner turns inone of his better performances, which nearly breaks the mold of hislimitedcapabilities as an actor, as Jim Garrison, the D.A. who tried to prove incourt that Lee Harvey Oswald didn't act alone shooting JFK on November 22,1963. Other, better actors turn up in and out of the three-hour movie;GaryOldman is cutely sinister as Oswald viewed in black and white flashbacks,Joe Pesci is an agitated leader of one of the botched Cuban refugeetrainingprograms (prior to the Bay of Pigs) who may or may not have known whokilledthe president, and Tommy Lee Jones is the Southern businessman Clay ShawwhoCostner accuses of having secretly worked for the CIA in the time of theassassination. Donald Sutherland, Jack Lemmon, Vincent D'Onofrio, KevinBacon and Walter Matthau all turn up in quaint cameos as well, but theonlyreal constants in the movie's progression (meaning, flashbacksnotwithstanding) are Costner and Sissy Spacek as his wife.The picture is spectacularly shot and edited, and won deserved Oscars inboth categories. All the actors do a fine job, particularly Pesci andCostner, who like I said, almost gets past his creative rut of playingfrowning, naïve boy scouts (see Field of Dreams, The Untouchables, etc).Stone offers a menu, if you will, of conspiracy theories behind theassassination - to generalize, you can pick from the Cubans, LBJ or theMafia. While these little vignettes are sensationally delivered, none ofthem really propel the story forward, but rather provide interestinginterludes in the main plot, which is fairly thin: Garrison wants to provethat Oswald either didn't do it at all, or didn't act alone, and ends upbringing Tommy Lee Jones to court because of it. His obsession with thepresident's death provides a little rocky domestic territory, as hismarriage and home life get pushed out of the way, but this too ispresentedas being unimportant in the big picture.What is the big picture? Aside from some potentially convincing ballisticsinformation, such as a technical breakdown of Arlen Specter's `magicbullet'theory, Stone didn't really convince me that the JFK assassination was anintricately developed plot to serve an ulterior political motive - maybethat there was a second shooter, at best. His offering of theories,insightsas to why the Cubans might have done it, etc, in exchange for evidencesupporting the arrest of Oswald didn't sway me rationally like he may ormaynot have hoped it would. One does not get the opportunity to rethinkhistory, but rather to look at it and try to tie it together as possiblewith what limited information they have. I guess my point is that some ofthe proposals in this movie are a little too far-fetched for their owngood.As a movie? Well, it makes for an almost exciting, definitely watchableinvestigation, moving at a grueling dramatic pace that holds the viewer'sattention very neatly - until the bizarrely flat final act of the movie.Costner's Garrison makes a staggering speech in the courtroom to prove notso much that Clay Shaw was involved in the assassination, but simply thatthere's more to the killing than meets the eye. This is a dramaticallypotent scene, I guess, but it's uneven in comparison to the rest of themovie and makes it more of a tidy presentation and less of a film; as ifthetwo were mutually exclusive. `JFK' is most worth watching due to its cleanand engaging management of information, its performances, and itstechnicalproficiency, but not for its quality as an artistic or especiallygalvanizing motion picture.

steve-darnell 12 March 2012

Ok, it may not be all true, but memorable nonetheless


It's a film that despite it's length is a "quick" film.Living in the UK, I sense that I miss a certain sense of historical import(after all, in Europe we're so used to killing off all our leaders andheadsof states, it's not quite a memorable for us !)Many things spring to mine when watching the film, and always I'm thinking"how much of this is true". The directing is strong. KC plays areasonablepart, but there are some doubts about other actors (was that the guy fromJurassic Park ??). I'm sure a lot of films have controversial subjects,andthis one is no exception. Oliver Stone is pulling a lot of people'splonka's - he knew that the right blend of drama tinged with a heap of"faction" will keep the debate alone for another couple of generations -smart move chappie

Fran Robins 12 March 2012

A classic in.........


JFKDIRECTION ˜%Visually more stimulating than looking at top models for fashion magazineswith added style and grace that drives you deeper into conspiracywonderland.ACTING ‘%Powerhouse central performance and others support verywell.EDITING/SPECIAL EFFECTS ™%Editing of this quality is rarely seen because it often disorientates thewatcher. However in the hands of a surgeon of the camera you will go on asafe ride through intrigue and a profusion of storylinesPLOT ™%Splendid and grand in design. Shows class with overlaying storylines withoutconfusion and immense intrigue and drama.STRONG WORDS AND VIOLENCE ETC ‡%Plenty going on here to add to the drama.MUSIC w%Rises the tension.SOUND „%With the speedy editing comes sounds hitting you through voices and othersurprises.HOOKABILITY †%Understanding the real case helps greatly!LASTABILITY –%With fast moving storylines merging from the neither, keeping up with theplot can be as difficult as litening and understanding rapmusicOVERALL 93%A classic in film production and design with immense tension anddrama.

© 2009-2012 TheWoodMovie All rights reserved