It might be an entertaining film, if it were not so full of BS. So full of BS is this movie in fact that there is a book written about it titled 'Reclaiming Parkland: Tom Hanks, Vincent Bugliosi, And The JFK Assassination In The New Hollywood' by James DiEugenio, and I totally 100% recommend it! 'Parkland' movie gets an F, and the Parkland book gets an A-.

There are films that narratively documents the aftermath of a nation’s continuously occurring darkness of enforcing bleakness, but going off fresh just as it happened provokes a powerful grip with brilliant, harrowing gravitas and chilling details across shifting dramatic thrills. (B+)

Having a vivid memory of the events of that weekend… And an interest in the details of the rapidfire events… I found it to be a well done and completely engaging movie.

Apparently niether the critics nor the common audience are intelligent enough to appreciate this movie. It's an excellent rendition of the facts.

There's nothing wrong with the film as far as the acting, direction, camera work, etc., and it's all based on mountains of historical evidence, but it's impossible to condense 4 days of constant activity into a 90 minute movie. There's just so much left out of the film from Bugliosi's 400 pages of source material that detail the murders, the investigations, and the funerals that it leaves one feeling a bit empty - everything was given just a very superficial once over and it leaves the viewer dissatisfied. It would have been better as a mini-series where everyone involved gets the attention they deserve. Still, it's not cheesy or poorly made, so it's worth an hour and a half of your time, especially if you're into U.S. history.

I am partial to this type of movie, i.e., a documentary style, closely based on relevant historical events. I hope the movie was historically accurate; I have no way to know whether it was. I would have preferred a movie that explored one or more of the conspiracy theories, because I myself believe that Oswald was not the assassin. I found the movie very difficult to watch through continuously and had to pause it and spread the watching of it over a number of days. I believe this is because the events are painful to confront plus the unrelenting pain throughout the movie plus the style of the story telling of the movie caused me to want to pause the movie frequently.

You won't learn anything new historically, but it does tell the stories of some of the other players: Zapruder, Harvey's family, the doctors. It doesn't go into deep details - but that's not what makes this a really good movie. Instead, you get a feel for just how fast and how crazy the events directly after Kennedy's Assassination went. I found myself putting myself into the shoes of these various people and asking myself what I would have done if confronted with these events. And on that front, it was really great.

Loved it. Graphically portrays the OR when JFK is being worked on.

Texas Governor John Connely, who was also wounded during the shooting , has been written out of the story. This is a substantial revision, and it will offend sticklers, but the rest of us should be put on notice that we're not going for accuracy this time, or to sell or debunk any conspiracies. This is straight-up drama, and while Dallas, 1963 may seem done to death, I don't remember ever seeing this take before, and for me, it works. The focus on secondary characters allows us to get a feel of what this was like for ordinary people. I was five years old, so I really wouldn't know, but to me it feels real, and that feeling is what they're going for.

Had the director, and screenwriter actually studied the assassination, which I guarantee they haven't, they would find that the evidence against Lee Harvey Oswald has so many contradictions, and inconsistencies that it doesn't add up at all. Fact of the matter is, the JFK assassination was a conspiracy, and its easy to prove so. That is if you analyze the evidence on both sides of the debate unbiasedly. Once you do, you'll find that the evidence for a conspiracy is so overwhelming, and that Oswald was framed for the crime. Not mention this film is based on the book by former prosecutor Vince Bugliosi, who has written many books on the assassination, all of which regurgitate the same "Oswald did it" lie. Bugliosi only became famous because he prosecuted Charles Manson.

A Powerful and interesting different take on the JFK assassination.

Some interesting side stories about people caught up in the assassination. But it doesn't tell us anything we didn't already know. Disappointing.

Though the acting was quite good,Parkland fails to tell a significant story. Wanting tell many solo aspects swirling around JFK's death and how it had impacted them emotionally and physically, it fails at making a concrete attempt to draw much out in that aspect. So it got pretty boring. And as always with most new directors wanting stand out on how they present us with their ‘masterpiece' this movie suffers from the usual pretentiousness with tedious camera movements and angles, special effects, etc.

Maybe because I was old enough to know all about this, being 15, but not too interesting to me. Perhaps younger viewers will like it better.

It was a let down for me. With a great cast but such a lame film.

Being a fanatic when it comes to everything JFK and being in the medical field, this movie had me extremely excited at the concept. For some reason it just seems hastily done. You pretty much see Kennedy's face for all of 5 minutes in the movie. Something about it leaves a lackluster feeling.

Delivered to commemorate 50th anniversary of the JFK assassination and based on Vincent Bugliosi's Four Day in November, this ensemble historical drama revisits the grievous days from lesser-known perspectives of the traumatised civilians compounded by the tragedy to let on about sympathies, ironies and disquieting minutia never before told.

Otro relato de la muerte de Kennedy,es la historia que nos sumerge Landesman,Otros puntos de vista logran recrear un episodio que marca al pais de los estados unidos,Siendo este la capa menos mencionada de este evento.

The first 20 minutes were interesting and that's about it

Very scattershot and bitty in its approach but the different perspectives are refreshing, and whilst not focusing on any particular individuals, you do get a general sense of what those few days did to everyone who witnessed it