"Parkland" in Comparison to Oliver Stone's "JFK"

[Jim DiEugenio]

Parkland has to be one of the biggest box office bombs in recent memory.

It will end up doing less than a million dollars theatrical gross.

And it will not stay in theaters beyond this week.

Its per theatre average is that anemic. The screens could be rented and the owners would make more money.

I actually think Stone's movie might make more money in its rerelease next month.

[Anthony Thorne]

I saw the truly awful box office figures for Parkland at BoxOfficeMojo this morning. Theater owners will be tripping over themselves to get that turkey off the screens. Very good. Stone's JFK has about a thousand levels of distinction over Parkland, not the least being that it is a tremendous movie. Since two decades have gone by it would be nice if a new younger generation could discover it.

Parkland deserves to be pilloried on Amazon as soon as the listing for it becomes available there. Then it really will be dead and buried.

[Bernice Moore]

Here are a few other photos, taken at Parkland Hospital.......FWTAW...b

[A.J. Blocker]

This evening I have just watched "Parkland" the 2013 movie written and directed by Peter Landesmen.

Firstly the movie states at the beginning it is only dealing with the events of November 22nd, 1963 and the 3 following days. So the facts that we are now all aware of which came to light in the weeks, months and years following the assassination and the warren commission evidence itself...is not a factor considered for inclusion in this film.

It is a portrait of what different people that had close proximity to the assassination thrust upon them experienced. These experiences are shown with some dramatic/poetic license thrown in. Historically in my opinion the movie does a pretty good job....yes there are errors...but it puts us in some of the places we never got to see in any length or detail in Oliver Stones amazing 1991 film "JFK".

As an assassination buff for want of a better word I enjoyed the film. I think mainly because it didn't try to answer any questions or present evidence as to how or why the assassination took place or who performed it.

One scene caught my attention though...Abraham Zaprudar driving alone late at night on the evening of the assassination hands a copy of his developed film out his car window to someone we haven't been introduced too previously in the film( is this supposed to be the FBI, the Secret Service or one of H.L.Hunt's employee's?). Just thought it was a strange scene in the film...and one that interests me.

However the most surprising thing about the whole film i noticed was in the final seconds of the credits.......and i quote:

"The persons and events in this film are fictitious. Any similarity to actual persons or events is unintentional"

WTF?

[Joseph McBride]

I noticed that amazing disclaimer as well. On a related
note, JFK is the only film I've seen without a legal
disclaimer.