Watch Interview with the Assassin For Free

I love this movie so much

Yawn. Poorly Filmed Snooze Fest.

A lot of perfectly good film show their cards early, establish a unique premise and let the audience explore a topic at a leisurely pace, without much in terms of surprise. this film is not one of those films.

Although I seem to have had higher expectations than I thought, the movie is super entertaining.

Well, the title of this review is no more true than the film. Because this is a mocks entry about the man who claims to be the second gunman from the tragic assassination of Kennedy back in November 22nd 1963. This film is made out just like a documentary in style, and is first feature if what wax to become a great film maker, Neil Burger. At least I think so, because he's the director behind Limitless, The Illusionist and The lucky ones. There's most certainly more interesting films to come."I was a sick fu@@ back then" he says, the second assassin, Walter Ohliger, played by Raymond J. Barry. Filmed in Dallas, with the on location spots where it all happened, back in 1963.There is a strange weakness with this film, though, and that is that this was more interesting before the 50 year revival of the whole thing. I just saw all of the other film about what happened, and this fall a bit down as a novelty dud to that. It doesn't add to the alleged mysteries about the case in the same way as it did before all the anniversary. Some of the tension had been taken away from it.The film is very well acted. It's greatly depicted, just like an ordinary documentary would have been. On the other hand the film gets more interesting when it comes to the uncertainty of what's going to happen filming these ins and persons. Because there's more than one occurring.Well done, and a great debut feature, even if it hasn't held the same interest after the anniversary.

It felt real to me I found myself believing every word Walter said. Even if the guy was nuts his skill and knowledge pointed to the fact that he could have killed JFK. He knew the scene of the crime very well ( And I don't mean from a spectators POV) To much evidence proves that he was the second shooter. The way it was shot helped the overall look of the film. I actually felt like I was watching a documentary until the cast credit came up at the end. Then I realized that this was a filmmakers recount on the actual confession. Many other forms of media have been created about the JFK murder but this one really stole the show for me. I also enjoyed the fact that a former American hero of the marines would actually be the guy to secure supreme power by killing the president. I got to say the scene towards the end where Walter is proving he done it by getting a gun into the white house and about to shoot another president was totally crazy in all the right ways.

This film can't help but make one think that perhaps there is such a person as the 'second gunman' still out there today, and that such a person could indeed come forward before their time was up to tell the truth. The film is exceptionally intelligent in this regard, however I wish it had been filmed in the more traditional sense. The use of camcorders pretty much throughout this film is certainly unique and not as bad as my heading might suggest, but to have made this a film in the traditional manner truly would've made it a 'chilling and terrifying' piece of work. Nonetheless, this is a movie that makes you think and proves yet again, that even 40 years later, the circumstances surrounding JFK's assassination still continues to capture the people's imagination.

Why aren't there more comments and viewers for this disturbing little gem? The best conspiracy movie(JFK, PI or otherwise) in may a year hits all the right notes technically and plot wise. Filmmed digitally (SONY PD-150) with such skill that you'll be checking your TV/DVD resolution in the first five minutes, the filmmakers use every advantage and disadvatage of the digital format to their benefit. The camera work begins static, rigid local TV news style then slowly takes on a subtle impressionistic style that blurs the line between docudrama and fiction. Viewers not interested in film as a meta-(self referential) text need not apply. After starting with the formal aspects of the JFK mystery, camera angles, do pictures lie, tamperedevidence and conflicting witnesses the film then seems to turn on the viewer so that we are put in the position of one of those unlucky witnesses who werebribed, intimidated, bullied, framed or killed for seeing just a little too much. The performances are uniformly great, starting with the ballistics man who plays his part so straight I had to mentally check and remind myself this wasn't adocumentary. The ex-wife was brilliant. All the actors were just realistic to the point of surrealism. I'm now babbling, SEE THIS MOVIE