Fascinating concept, that is if it wasn't used for such a dubious and pathetic purpose. I guess King belongs in the same booby hamper as Tom Hanks.
What King should have done is changed the plot to preventing the CIA coup. A much more accurate and interesting story.
I wonder if King was inspired by this New Twilight Zone episode from the mid-80s? The actor who plays Kennedy here is Andy Robinson, who played the psycho killer in Dirty Harry.
What a mind-bender. Well done.
There's a minor flaw in passing-off the professor for JFK at the death scene.
But it still places the rifle in Oswald's hands...
That was as stupid as the King/Abrams mini series.
Also, the first Twilight Zone was rocket miles above the second.
Makes me want to swear off all sci fi for awhile.
Getting back to the King Abrams fiasco, its really more like a pulp fiction magazine novel.
Can the book be that bad? Like I wrote in my review, I did not read it.
There was a Rod Serling lecture at UCLA in 1966 or 1967 where he was asked about the JFK assassination, and he said he was reading a couple of the critical books, and was open to the possibility that the WC was wrong. I think it's on YouTube. Of course, Serling also wrote the screenplay for Seven Days in May.
I have heard that and its really interesting.
He comes off sounding like a real skeptic about the WC.
I read the book. I haven't seen the series. The one scene in the previews aired months ago of our hero James Franco running thru Dealy Plaza with his love interest didn't actually happen in the book.
As I believe I posted in the other DPF thread about this mini-series, the book isn't really about the Kennedy assassination. The hero has inherited a way to travel back in time to 1963 (which the previous user used merely to obtain an endless supply of cheap hamburger meat for his burger joint). He decides, at one point, that stopping the killing is a worthwhile goal. However, he falls in love with a 1963 woman, whose life he cannot save if he pursues Oswald. In the end, his repeated trips to the past, and attempts to change the past, threaten to destroy spacetime. The story is kind of a cross between Langoliers, The Butterfly Effect, Back to the Future, and the Warren Report.
It's no more a story about JFK than the rhetorical question "If you could go back in time and kill Hitler,...." is about Hitler. I find it a shame that people have used the opportunity to engage in renewed discussion about the actual event as an opportunity to push their pet theories, usually with some sort of commercial gain in mind, but I suppose that simply must be.
The Twilight Zone was pretty good. JFK volunteers to die to save humanity. They got that part right. Only he didn't know the professor took his place in the limousine and sent JFK forward to the year 2172 to take his place because only the professor could go back and set Dealey Plaza right. Patched history corrected after being broken.
Jim DiEugenio Wrote:That was as stupid as the King/Abrams mini series.
Also, the first Twilight Zone was rocket miles above the second.
Makes me want to swear off all sci fi for awhile.
Getting back to the King Abrams fiasco, its really more like a pulp fiction magazine novel.
Can the book be that bad? Like I wrote in my review, I did not read it.
The book is actually pretty good....IF you read it purely for the fun of reading fictional prose. But if you're looking for any "truth" in it, this excerpt from the book's afterword should tell you all you need to know:
"Probably the most useful source-materials I read in preparation for writing this novel were "Case Closed", by Gerald Posner; "Legend", by Edward Jay Epstein (nutty Robert Ludlum stuff, but fun); "Oswald's Tale," by Norman Mailer; and "Mrs. Paine's Garage," by Thomas Mallon. The latter offers a brilliant analysis of the conspiracy theorists and their need to find order in what was almost a random event."
The last sentence King stole directly from page 2 of the LN Book of Talking Points. As you can see from his "research material," the man truly had no chance.