Much can be said about "Parkland". Good that most of these comments ends up on the better side of the fence. In fact, it takes us to a side of the JFK assassination most forget - the secondary people that are as affected as the primary individuals involved in the ever-scandalous event. But the biggest grievance for "Parkland" is the question of the world really needing it to be made. Put simply, at the end of the day, we are hard-pressed to see "Parkland's" significance and the way it plodded through the narrative and its characters was something that it needed to improve by a mile.
Parkland is the tale of a handful of ordinary individuals suddenly thrust into extraordinary circumstances: the young doctors and nurses at Parkland Hospital; Dallas’s chief of the Secret Service; an unwitting cameraman who captured what became the most famous home movie in history; the FBI agents who were visited by Lee Harvey Oswald before the shooting; the brother of Lee Harvey Oswald, left to deal with his shattered family; and JFK’s security team, witnesses to both the president’s death and Vice President Lyndon Johnson’s rise to power.
"Parkland" presents a unique take on the JFK assassination rather than concentrating on JFK, Jackie or even Lee Harvey Oswald, the film wants to showcase the secondary characters that are as much affected. This, in our opinion, is the biggest asset of "Parkland" and for the first few minutes or so, it delivers, but ultimately falters due to a weak and convoluted narrative. The narrative in fact flew by at a quickened pace and never did we feel that these secondary characters had a strong story to tell except for Robert Oswald's story. If it's any indication, the film's running time was actually around the 90 minute mark and considering there are more than 5 main characters, you can just imagine how underdeveloped most characters are. Although this we have to say, the film is gripping at times with a solid showing from its cast. The best performance would be James Badge Dale and it clearly shows as his character stands out among the rest. Paul Giamatti is a close second. Overall, "Parkland" presents an interesting take to the JFK assassination but never gets too telling it properly.
Rating: 3 reels
Why you should watch it:
- interesting take on the JFK assassination
- solid acting from its cast
Why you shouldn't watch it:
- the narrative is told at a quickened pace and characters feel underdeveloped
- conspiracy theorists will be disappointed for sure
Much can be said about "Parkland". Good that most of these comments ends up on the better side of the fence. In fact, it takes us to a side of the JFK assassination most forget - the secondary people that are as affected as the primary individuals involved in the ever-scandalous event. But the biggest grievance for "Parkland" is the question of the world really needing it to be made. Put simply, at the end of the day, we are hard-pressed to see "Parkland's" significance and the way it plodded through the narrative and its characters was something that it needed to improve by a mile.
Parkland is the tale of a handful of ordinary individuals suddenly thrust into extraordinary circumstances: the young doctors and nurses at Parkland Hospital; Dallas’s chief of the Secret Service; an unwitting cameraman who captured what became the most famous home movie in history; the FBI agents who were visited by Lee Harvey Oswald before the shooting; the brother of Lee Harvey Oswald, left to deal with his shattered family; and JFK’s security team, witnesses to both the president’s death and Vice President Lyndon Johnson’s rise to power.
"Parkland" presents a unique take on the JFK assassination rather than concentrating on JFK, Jackie or even Lee Harvey Oswald, the film wants to showcase the secondary characters that are as much affected. This, in our opinion, is the biggest asset of "Parkland" and for the first few minutes or so, it delivers, but ultimately falters due to a weak and convoluted narrative. The narrative in fact flew by at a quickened pace and never did we feel that these secondary characters had a strong story to tell except for Robert Oswald's story. If it's any indication, the film's running time was actually around the 90 minute mark and considering there are more than 5 main characters, you can just imagine how underdeveloped most characters are. Although this we have to say, the film is gripping at times with a solid showing from its cast. The best performance would be James Badge Dale and it clearly shows as his character stands out among the rest. Paul Giamatti is a close second. Overall, "Parkland" presents an interesting take to the JFK assassination but never gets too telling it properly.
Rating: 3 reels
Why you should watch it:
- interesting take on the JFK assassination
- solid acting from its cast
Why you shouldn't watch it:
- the narrative is told at a quickened pace and characters feel underdeveloped
- conspiracy theorists will be disappointed for sure
Comments
Post a Comment