Although, many of them surfaced with slanted hypotheses and responses, there has been no exact ending of the assassination of JFK. In the course of their studies however, they have significantly subjected the way the Americans think what had occurred during the JFK murder through their prejudiced interpretation similarly.
Past sequence of events whether published or in cinema cover same the features - as they all are prone to the analyses of the history writers; the explanations of the whole story and incidents; naming of the hero and villain; and they all are predisposed to the common reception of the public. That's why, any sequential part of storyline is helpless without a hodgepodge of representation (or the communication) and the reception (of the communication) by the public.
In its place there are some logicians who are vigilantly prejudiced in the curiosity of the psyche of the publics. Therefore these theorists are more worried about the past exactness and portrayals of the historical incidents - they are the same who consider themselves that are in charge of bearing a "great civilization" to the next generations. The countless films and published stuff created by them not only have created the resources of knowledge of the past but also a support to accept the incidents they present as our right inheritance. They maybe named themselves as the "makers" of narrative accounts but how do we evaluate their alleged "genuineness" One of the leading ways to evaluate is to study expert views regarding a specific event and then ponder on the end results of it. For instance, in Mark C. Carnes (1995) "Past Imperfect", the author summarized this very reality by spelling out a variety of past episodes evaluated by professional views. He interviewed sixty two renowned historians, press, and other establishment to remark on past movies that pat upon their field of skills. Convinced that past movies have become "a great storage area of past awareness in this U.S. of Amnesia," these professionals evaluate the movies' past exactness and scrutinize how their portrayals of past incidents and figures compare with modern historiography.
However, through the professional views one can not only evaluate of the accuracy of the specifics represented in "selective past papers" but also whether the exact representation had strayed the interviewer's insight too. As said by Carla Rahn (Mark 1995, p. 60), though many academics have pursued the past stature of Christopher Columbus yet only the 1949 movie version by Frederic March looks like to fit the whole story relating to his personal life. In history movies therefore, past exactness is evaluated by the change in literary incident, transcendence of the legend into myth, analysis of the history as well as the strength of the history that may make the reality.
Even though it's an observable fact that people who are not au fait with the history are liable to trust history writers to wean past information so as to re-enact the specifics and incidents (p. 64). Take the incident of JFK's murder for instance; several would believe that, Lee Harvey Oswald, is a psychopath and a nuts held guilty for JFK's shooting while there are others who are significant of the whole story and experiences adjoining the shooting. As David Lubin