Wednesday, 27 November 2013
Tagged under: Assassination, Billy Bob Thornton, Conspiracy, JFK, Kennedy, Lee Harvey Oswald, November 22nd, Parkland, Paul Giamatti, Zac Efron
PARKLAND
SYNOPSIS – The Kennedy assassination told from the side-lines
One of the most infamous days in world history, the assassination of President Kennedy has been the focus of the big screen before. Oliver Stone’s JFK (1991) came at the events from a conspiracy/political point of view and felt like a big scale detective noir movie.
Parkland comes at things from a very different angle - don’t hope to see any new revelations about the shooting itself (which is dealt with in the first five minutes) - but looks instead at the aftershock on the lives of various individuals. Effective use of a quality ensemble cast means that the lack of a sole main protagonist doesn’t derail the narrative; instead it gives a feel of the scope and scale of the event’s consequences.
Some of the narrative strands are more effective than others, the strongest link is definitely Robert Oswald (James Badge Dale ) a man caught between his natural love for his brother and the horror at what he has done. Abraham Zappruder’s (Paul Giamatti) gives Giamatti plenty of opportunity to deliver an emotional performance that perfectly captures the shock and horror of the average man on the ground. Zac Efron also stands out as one of the doctors who struggle to save the President’s life.
The film’s high point is its coverage of the infamous day in question (it covers from the Friday to the Monday). The sense of everything that was once solid and safe and suddenly spiralling into chaos and confusion works to great effect, whether it be the fight over legal points on what to do with the body or Robert Oswald’s reaction on hearing the name of the arrested suspect. The assassination itself is treated extremely realistically, Oswald’s shots are muted and, despite knowing what is going to happen, still shocking. Effective use is made of the Zappruder film to avoid any tasteless reconstructions.
Problems begin when the film gets into its third act, once things calm down the script loses some of its intensity. Once we get into the investigation its starts to feel a lot more like a detective story that we already know the solution to. There is some attempt to put in some new revelations at this point but, though intriguing, they feel a little flat. It might have been best if the film stuck to coverage of the 22nd and some of the burning intensity could have been sustained without slowing.
FINAL VERDICT 6/10 despite this third act slouch the film still boasts good performances and is a respectful dignified look at tragic events.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
0 comments:
Post a Comment