Robert J. Maxwell There is a touch of Richard Condon's dark humor in this exceedingly complex story of a conspiracy to assassinate a Kennedy-like president. The story is confusing enough that I lost track of it before it was half over. In a way, it resembled the detective stories of Raymond Chandler who was fine with his characters and slapdash with his plots. (Who DID kill the chauffeur?) Jeff Bridges plays the Philip Marlowe part and goes from one oddball character to another, bouncing along comically but playing it straight. John Huston as Bridges' ultra-rich father commands the screen whenever he's on it, even if dressed only in crimson briefs and a flowing white kimono. A number of familiar faces crop up in lesser parts, including Richard Boone and, briefly, Elizabeth Taylor who has no lines.It's for specialized tastes. Condon was a hilarious novelist. His prose was thick with impossible lists of, oh, the courses of one of Alfred Hitchcock's meals or the attendants at a funeral. The movie, for the most part, is unable to capture that excess. And, really, it couldn't, because what's amusing in print doesn't always translate well to the screen. If, in the novel, someone's hand is caught in a door that slams, she may "scream like a lunch whistle." How do you transpose that simile to the cinema? You can't.There are amusing moments but Jeff Bridges' mournful presence keeps dragging us back to the serious side of the movie. I couldn't say whether the movie was more enjoyable than not. That judgment is up to the viewer.

haildevilman This was before all of the theories were "known." (hah)Kennedy becomes Keegan, Dallas becomes Philly (my hometown), and 11/22/63 becomes 02/22/60. No attempt made to hide the scenario they were portraying either.I agree that the book was too long and detailed for one film. And hearing about guys we just met getting killed in the next scene only helped a little. It moved the story along but seemed like a cop-out.Jeff Bridges seemed too young to be playing the role. They never made ages clear here. He was still great though. And I never thought much of John Huston as an actor. As a director he's brilliant. As an actor he tends to overplay a bit. He re-did his "Chinatown" role here.The name cameos helped. And I'm glad they didn't go nuts with the flashbacks as films like this tend to do. It makes a great spy thriller but not for conspiracy buffs.Watch for......the mother and kid on the bike ...the wig makers view from the window ...the cat on the mafia don's table ...the maid in the bedroom

MaratSade Winter Kills is a wild, breakneck ride, impossible not to enjoy if you can muster up a two hour attention. Dullards who like to browse or half-watch will be quickly mystified and thus bored, but this film rewards those who make the investment. An excellent, creepy movie--funny and insightful, particularly relevant in these strange and disturbing days. John Huston gives a great over-the-top performance that seems more like a cartoon version of himself than the Joe Kennedy caricature he is meant to be. Tony Perkins is the embodiment of everyone's paranoid suspicions about who really runs things. Karl Rove must have sat spellbound in the theater as a young homunculus, taking notes as he ate his popcorn. Bizarre cameos and way inside references provide the icing on the cake.

Paul With an absolutely amazing cast and crew, this might have been a classic. Instead it is a repetitive paraphrasing of all the conspiracy theories extant in 1979 about the JFK assassination grafted, rather pointlessly, on to a vaguely incoherent plot about the murder of fictitious president Kegan in 1960. Many superb character actors are wasted as they are either not given enough to do - Sterling Hayden or Eli Wallach, for instance, or they are asked to go rather luridly over the top - John Huston. Jeff Bridges and Anthony Perkins do manage to acquit themselves very well, in their very different ways, though.The photography is gorgeous, but does not justify an hour and a half of your life, or the price of the DVD purchase.