The "Other" Zapruder Film

[Paul Rigby]

A thought kicking around the minds of several people I interact with is perhaps the �Zapruder movie� was prepared way in advance of the attack and all that was used from Zapruder�s film was just the background spectators...

Not so. The version of the film we have is remarkable for the Elm Street spectators it omits. This is precisely what one would expect of a film (either) prepared in advance and/or subject to extensive revision.

In other words, the faces of the real attack victims could have been added to actor�s bodies filmed in a similar vehicle (or a portion of a similar vehicle) prior to the attack. Hollywood and Madison Avenue does this all the time, using stunt doubles and morphing faces and bodies. Bits and pieces of what Zapruder captured would then be merged into a finished illusion that was falsely portrayed as the �Zapruder film�.

Use of "doubles," back-projection, etc? Routine Hollywood and Madison Avenue practice well before 1963. Point well-made.

Why would this be done in advance? To have a quick propaganda film for the public and to fund the operation through magazine and newspaper sales. Exclusive massacre photos and film sells; sales equate to fat wallets.

And that was precisely the intention, early on at least. If you listen to Rather on CBS on November 25, there's no suggestion that the version of the Z-fake he'd just watched was intended for anything other than broadcasting. Other sources attest to the first version's distribution on the same day.

It�s easily realized that whoever ambushed JFK didn�t just happen to show up at the kill zone out of the wild blue a couple minutes before the shooting and just happen to have assault weapons in their possession; that location was picked well in advance and the attack probably rehearsed in advance as well. It�s not unreasonable to suspect the Zapruder filming was also prepared in advance.

I agree.

All in all, an incisive and thought-provoking post.

Incidentally, by far the strangest position is that of the pro-conspiracy anti-alterationists, who invite us to believe that the plotters were sufficiently bold and powerful to kill the President in broad daylight, but too timid and socially unconnected to move against the pieces of celluloid we are invited to believe blew their carefully nurtured fables out of the water. Now that really is weird; and is a powerful pointer to just how topsy-turvy is much of the exhausted assassination consensus.

Paul