Oliver Stone never reads "On the Trail of the Assassins"

In 1991 Director Oliver Stone made a movie entitled "JFK" based upon a skewed account of Garrison's 1960's persecution of New Orleans businessman Clay Shaw. While Stone endorsed almost every conspiracy there is regarding the sad event in November 1963 he was inspired to make the film after having read Garrison's flagarantly dishonest account of the investigation he conducted while DA. It is that book, more than any other, that made Stone embrace a big c conspiracy attitude towards Kennedy's death. What if Stone had never been given or come across that book? What kind of film would take its place? I think that there are certain themes Stone was intent on exploring at the time, namely what he saw as the culpability of the higher levels of American government for the tragedy that was Vietnam. Yes the idea of a conspiracy designed to cause that war was a convenient aha moment for Stone both personally and in terms of cinema, but given his past work, Stone will probably still make some sort of film that implicates the powerful in Vietnam, even if it has absolutely nothing to do with Dallas. Maybe I am grossley misreading Stone at that time, but Vietnam seems to have been something he would have continued to focus on regardless of ever having come across Garrison's book. But I do not know what film would have been made.Conceivably, this could impact scholarship on the Kennedy era because there is not going to be the "release the files" movement Stone lead
 
He might go after the Diem assassination, although the trail of the smoking gun was pretty much exposed by the 90s. And it led right back to the Kennedy administration.... was he too much of a JFK fan to go there?
 
I would assume that he just make a film about the Kennedy assassination.

Why would he? By Stone's own account he believed that Lee Oswald was the guilty party until he read Garrison's book. While you can argue that some individuals are prone to believing in conspiracy theories, if he is not exposed to Garrison's book I do not think we can conclude that he would have become interested in the subject. After all he did not seek Garrison's book out, someone gave it to him, almost despite Stone's initial lack of interest.

Also if he is not converted to the cause of conspiracy, there's no way to tie Kennedy's death in with Vietnam, which was always Stone's main focus at least circa 1991.
 
Why would he? By Stone's own account he believed that Lee Oswald was the guilty party until he read Garrison's book. While you can argue that some individuals are prone to believing in conspiracy theories, if he is not exposed to Garrison's book I do not think we can conclude that he would have become interested in the subject. After all he did not seek Garrison's book out, someone gave it to him, almost despite Stone's initial lack of interest.

Also if he is not converted to the cause of conspiracy, there's no way to tie Kennedy's death in with Vietnam, which was always Stone's main focus at least circa 1991.

Yep, very logical.
 
My hypothesis is that Stone would have felt compelled to do some sort of black and white morality play about Vietnam focused on the political rather than military side of things. Maybe he does some sort of Nixon biopic a few years early. Of course, Nixon was still alive, and even if Stone made the film, logustically Anthony Hopkins would not be in the role. Something about LBJ?
 
Top