Yesterday's Guardian magazine had a two page history of Abraham Zapruder, whose famous film of the Kennedy assassination remains one of the most important pieces of evidence in the case.
Entitled "The Man Who Shot JFK" in the hard copy, for some reason the online version has a different title "Abraham Zapruder the man behind history's most infamous home movie". Journalist Steve Rose gives a good history of the film, what happened to it, and how it has been used and abused over the years. Amongst those quoted are academic Dr Clare Birchall, Alex Cox and Peter Landesman. He is behind a new JFK movie, Parkland, with a particular focus on events in the Dallas Parkland hospital after the shooting. .
Rose's article makes one slight stumble when discussing perhaps the best known Kennedy movie - Oliver Stone's JFK. He states the film "pieces together a vast conspiracy involving Lyndon Johnson, the CIA, the military-industrial complex, the gay community, possibly the Dallas Cowboys - it gets confusing". There is plenty of critical points that could be made of a film based on the work of Jim Marrs, a long time US conspiracist who has waxed lyrical on everything from UFOs to 9/11.
But only The Guardian though could make the mocking accusation that the 'gay community' is seen as part of the conspiracy to assassinate Kennedy. Firstly because it is hard to imagine too many people in Texas in the late 1950s and early 1960s talked about, or saw themselves as part of, a distinct gay community. Secondly that is not what Stone was actually focusing on at all - his concern (rightly or wrongly) was about a group of right wing Texans who were obsessed with Cuba. Several of whom, such as David Ferrie were gay.
Am I reading too much into Rose's slip, or is he critiquing Oliver Stone's film through Guardian tinted spectacles?