JFK is one of those people from near history that have attained an aura beyond their true standing. He was not betrayed, stabbed by the senate in the Roman sense or misled in any way by advisors. He was a glamour President, but President none the less, all events portrayed pertain to his final decision. Did he want peace, yes, but he was quite prepared to wage war by proxy. Bay of pigs and early Vietnam were his choice At the start he was a novice, sometimes a little naive in regard to Realpolitik, but he learned. His greatest hour will always be the Cuban missile crisis. But remember he was supported and advised at that time by many who this lopsided documentary suggest betrayed him. He had potential to be a great President, unfortunately he became a legend instead.
7 Reviews
Documents Revealed Are The Importance Here
DKosty1238 July 2018
Warning: Spoilers
There is no way a totally balanced documentary of JFK can be presented. JFK was too complex and complicated for that to be done. I mean, there are more legends and hoaxes about JFK to present him properly in any possible way.
For example, the film P.T. 109 tells a story that represents that the PT boat being hit by a Japanese War Ship and cut in half caused his famous back problem. Years later, it has been found out that the real cause of his back is a child hood disease that was treated with steroids, years before medicine knew anything about these drugs side effects, degraded his back before the war, permanently and for life.
Yet other legends are out there about him with this bad back being some kind of sex machine, with women who were not even born yet claiming to been beded by JFK. Some of the affairs he had might be true, but it is doubtful they all are.
What this documentary does do is present documents and evidence about what he was trying to accomplish, and what he did accomplish. The film does a good job of keeping public opinions of JFK out of the script. For this they deserve a lot of credit. They present to document evidence about getting out of Vietnam, not the opinion of whether he would have. They present documents about meetings about nuke war. They present documents about meetings that were policy JFK Initiated.
This ends very strongly with the evidence of a meeting on November 22, 1963 that when he was shot, his representative was meeting with Fidel Castro about opening normal relations with Cuba. If JFK had lived that day, it is very possible the anti-Castro Cubans might have killed him later for even starting such meetings.
As it is, the complex questions around the complex person JFK was still remain. There are still sealed records about JFK the government will not reveal in 2018. Why does this "ghost" still haunt our officials? Maybe we should ask the folks since who with "Free Trade" have endangered our existance by screwing up our environment even more than 2 World Wars, Korea, & Vietnam did, and are still trying to prevent free trade from going away because they do not give a damn about people?
Man made climate change has sped up because of free trade. Free Trade has fundamentally weakened the US by destroying our labor force, causing a baby bust in the US, and all the current real statistics on drop outs, drug addiction, and many other measures have gotten worse than when free trade started 30 plus years ago. The policy has endangered the government and social security as well. All so some International Corporations CEO's could profit, at the expense of the entire world.
This documentary proves that there is a path leading to our current problems, and it started here. Amazingly it could have ended in the 1960's too, but somehow we muddled through. We are still muddling.
For example, the film P.T. 109 tells a story that represents that the PT boat being hit by a Japanese War Ship and cut in half caused his famous back problem. Years later, it has been found out that the real cause of his back is a child hood disease that was treated with steroids, years before medicine knew anything about these drugs side effects, degraded his back before the war, permanently and for life.
Yet other legends are out there about him with this bad back being some kind of sex machine, with women who were not even born yet claiming to been beded by JFK. Some of the affairs he had might be true, but it is doubtful they all are.
What this documentary does do is present documents and evidence about what he was trying to accomplish, and what he did accomplish. The film does a good job of keeping public opinions of JFK out of the script. For this they deserve a lot of credit. They present to document evidence about getting out of Vietnam, not the opinion of whether he would have. They present documents about meetings about nuke war. They present documents about meetings that were policy JFK Initiated.
This ends very strongly with the evidence of a meeting on November 22, 1963 that when he was shot, his representative was meeting with Fidel Castro about opening normal relations with Cuba. If JFK had lived that day, it is very possible the anti-Castro Cubans might have killed him later for even starting such meetings.
As it is, the complex questions around the complex person JFK was still remain. There are still sealed records about JFK the government will not reveal in 2018. Why does this "ghost" still haunt our officials? Maybe we should ask the folks since who with "Free Trade" have endangered our existance by screwing up our environment even more than 2 World Wars, Korea, & Vietnam did, and are still trying to prevent free trade from going away because they do not give a damn about people?
Man made climate change has sped up because of free trade. Free Trade has fundamentally weakened the US by destroying our labor force, causing a baby bust in the US, and all the current real statistics on drop outs, drug addiction, and many other measures have gotten worse than when free trade started 30 plus years ago. The policy has endangered the government and social security as well. All so some International Corporations CEO's could profit, at the expense of the entire world.
This documentary proves that there is a path leading to our current problems, and it started here. Amazingly it could have ended in the 1960's too, but somehow we muddled through. We are still muddling.
Important, "Must See" viewing.
robert-259-2895431 May 2014
This was one of the most significant documentary films I've ever seen, ever. I've always had so many questions regarding the life of JFK, some accurate, but much missing. This incredible piece of filmmaking brought to light aspects of this great man that have increased my respect and admiration of this great president to levels that before I could not have imagined. Only now do I fully realize and appreciate the degree of courage he had facing down the most brutal powers of the 1960's, a decade of decision that not only formed the basis for the absolutely necessity of negotiation if public and international affairs, but a quality seemingly lost in politicians of this generation. Had the Military Industrial Complex of today been in power in Kennedy's day, we would have inevitably gone to war, an atomic conflict that would have destroyed every civilized country on earth. This is JFK's legacy, one for the ages.
A 'must see' for anyone who loves history or JFK
dawnakaufmann10 February 2014
This documentary, written and directed by Cory Taylor for Agora Productions, with narration by Morgan Freeman, is one that anyone with an interest in the presidency of John F. Kennedy or American history should see. It's nothing short of brilliant. With a declassified memorandum, top-flight experts commenting on the background of JFK's administration and the Cold War, and combined with memorable film clips, it makes a compelling argument that Kennedy's quest for world peace made him a target of enemies within our own government. Kennedy wanted to trust his gut and find ways to extend an olive branch to Russian premier Nikita Khrushchev, but received terrible advice from his hawkish colleagues. JFK: A President Betrayed will stand proudly among all other respectable and responsible journalism on the subject.
A poor evaluation of what IS and what are thoughts.
david_barker24 February 2020
I watched Ken Burns' Vietnam, and this was a documentary over 20 hours long, and they used a large team of people to do the research for that documentary, and went into depth what different presidents thought, and what they did, and every president involved with Vietnam thought exactly the same thing, and are in fact recorded in conversations with different people, some in their cabinet, and others with different political leaders.
This is the consensus, among ALL the presidents, with the exception of Eisenhower, who wasn't in power long enough to see how badly this was going to go, but from the very beginning even he saw problems with taking Vietnam over from France.
We don't like it, it's an unwinnable war, but if Vietnam falls to Communism, other Southeastern Asian countries are going to fall, and we will appear weak.
There, that was the thought of EVERY president, as recorded saying exactly that, over different conversations, or as reported by those around them, and JFK was no different. In fact he said we should pull out, but he felt he would lose the 1964 election by doing so. He also repeated the same thing about other countries falling to communism if Vietnam did.
So, my feeling of this documentary is, it wasn't researched well enough, and there was a bias when going in to make it, and that bias never changed, which means they were looking for certain data, and not anything else. You listen to good documentary makers, and you often hear that they started to make a documentary on one thing, and as they were going along, they knew the documentary had to become something different. I don't know the details of the research that was done for this, but I have a lot of faith in Ken Burns, who's done MANY great, well researched, and very thorough documentaries, so I trust the information in that one more than this. Trying to say he was GOING to pull out of Vietnam isn't backed up by ACTUAL moves on his part, while in fact the opposite is true, in that he sent in more troops than was already there. It's not the same as what Johnson did, but Johnson's situation was different, as the situation in Vietnam changed over time. Without a FULL understanding of all the events that surrounded Vietnam, it's too easy to walk away from a doc. like this in full belief of what the authors wanted you to think, so I would highly suggest watching the 20+ hour documentary on Vietnam by Ken Burns. It's the most complete documentary on the topic, and will give you all kinds of insight to the tragedy that was Vietnam. But, information comes at you fast and hard, so that 20+ hour documentary will quickly overwhelm your brain if you aren't ready to pay close attention. I had to go back and watch quite a few parts.
This is the consensus, among ALL the presidents, with the exception of Eisenhower, who wasn't in power long enough to see how badly this was going to go, but from the very beginning even he saw problems with taking Vietnam over from France.
We don't like it, it's an unwinnable war, but if Vietnam falls to Communism, other Southeastern Asian countries are going to fall, and we will appear weak.
There, that was the thought of EVERY president, as recorded saying exactly that, over different conversations, or as reported by those around them, and JFK was no different. In fact he said we should pull out, but he felt he would lose the 1964 election by doing so. He also repeated the same thing about other countries falling to communism if Vietnam did.
So, my feeling of this documentary is, it wasn't researched well enough, and there was a bias when going in to make it, and that bias never changed, which means they were looking for certain data, and not anything else. You listen to good documentary makers, and you often hear that they started to make a documentary on one thing, and as they were going along, they knew the documentary had to become something different. I don't know the details of the research that was done for this, but I have a lot of faith in Ken Burns, who's done MANY great, well researched, and very thorough documentaries, so I trust the information in that one more than this. Trying to say he was GOING to pull out of Vietnam isn't backed up by ACTUAL moves on his part, while in fact the opposite is true, in that he sent in more troops than was already there. It's not the same as what Johnson did, but Johnson's situation was different, as the situation in Vietnam changed over time. Without a FULL understanding of all the events that surrounded Vietnam, it's too easy to walk away from a doc. like this in full belief of what the authors wanted you to think, so I would highly suggest watching the 20+ hour documentary on Vietnam by Ken Burns. It's the most complete documentary on the topic, and will give you all kinds of insight to the tragedy that was Vietnam. But, information comes at you fast and hard, so that 20+ hour documentary will quickly overwhelm your brain if you aren't ready to pay close attention. I had to go back and watch quite a few parts.
Betrayal??
mornow27 February 2016
Warning: Spoilers
Far too much weight is given to JFK's "intentions". The perceived Camelot memorialized (literally) by the President's death carries far too much weight. JFK historically is a Rorschach Test for the power of celebrity on it's viewers, and this documentary of the subject's purity is poor history.
There is no context provided for "our hero" with respect to his plots to assassinate foreign leaders, ties to mob leaders, his womanizing (including potential foreign agents), his dishonesty over his health, the possibility that he abetted election fraud in Illinois, the source of Kennedy wealth (crime),his "arranged" marriage. Should I go on? Yet, we are encouraged to believe that his soaring rhetoric was what would have translated into policy decisions. Where is the commentary on his willingness to circumvent the "advise and consent" process of government? It seems he was better at secrets than governing.
His brief tenure was indeed very sad and left possibilities of accomplishment, but there is as much evidence that he could have overseen some disasters. In fact, I could make a pretty good case that he was Nixonian in many ways. Sadly, it was only his movie star good looks and tragic death that make him iconic. The "fanboy" treatment being perpetuated on new generations is disappointing at best and dishonest at worst.
There is no context provided for "our hero" with respect to his plots to assassinate foreign leaders, ties to mob leaders, his womanizing (including potential foreign agents), his dishonesty over his health, the possibility that he abetted election fraud in Illinois, the source of Kennedy wealth (crime),his "arranged" marriage. Should I go on? Yet, we are encouraged to believe that his soaring rhetoric was what would have translated into policy decisions. Where is the commentary on his willingness to circumvent the "advise and consent" process of government? It seems he was better at secrets than governing.
His brief tenure was indeed very sad and left possibilities of accomplishment, but there is as much evidence that he could have overseen some disasters. In fact, I could make a pretty good case that he was Nixonian in many ways. Sadly, it was only his movie star good looks and tragic death that make him iconic. The "fanboy" treatment being perpetuated on new generations is disappointing at best and dishonest at worst.
Nonsense -- not supported by the peer reviewed work, and using cherry picked documents
random-707781 December 2019
Fact is JFK was one of our most hawkish and militaristic presidents, certainly more so than Eisenhower before him or Johnson or Nixon after him. His own writings show this, including everything released to date. JFK wanted to ramp invade Cuba, ramped up Vietnam, put McNamara in place, and he certainly did not want to work with" Nikita Khrushchev.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
