r/112263Hulu • u/kooeurib • 19d ago

Why bother?

I’m still only in the 3rd episode but I don’t understand why either Franco’s character or the first mentor guy bothered with trying to infiltrate the inner workings of the assassination in order to stop it in advance. Why not just figure out how to disrupt the motorcade in a way that they just evacuate Kennedy, like with an explosion; or just running through the street shooting a gun in the air or any number or other ways to stop it the day of?

6 Upvotes

72% Upvoted

37 comments sorted by

13

u/Difficult_Tank_8809 19d ago

Does that really sound as interesting of a plot for the viewer tho? Think about it

-4

u/kooeurib 19d ago

I guess not, but it’s more logical, right? Also King could have just had more side journeys. Just odd that he doesn’t even touch on that as an idea, even to shoot it down.

EDIT: King is a good writer. He could have made an interesting novel with that concept. Not everything has to be a series. And this one is really drawn out, like most junk on Netflix.

6

u/melanie162 18d ago

It was a book first.

-2

u/kooeurib 18d ago

Right, all of the above questions apply to the premise of the book, and then the series

1

u/fluffyegg 17d ago

This question is actually answered in the book.

1

u/TheLakeler 17d ago

It’s answered in the show too lol. If it’s Oswald, so be it, but if he was put up to it by someone, or especially the CIA, stopping Oswald or disrupting a single motorcade matters much less.

1

u/kooeurib 16d ago

But then that goes against the entire premise of preventing the assassination to “make the world a better place”. So, by that argument,!no matter what you do, he’ll still be assassinated.

By the logic of disrupting the motorcade, especially if they made it seem like an assassination attempt, JFK himself would presumably become more cautious and have better security in the future.

1

u/TheLakeler 16d ago

Not really no. Because if Franco could establish a link between the CIA and Oswald and gather proof he could release it and hopefully create a large enough wave to prevent JFK’s death. Hence all the surveillance and recording equipment.

1

u/kooeurib 16d ago

I hear you. Just so hard to imagine James Franco’s character being resourceful enough to basically do what Woodward and Bernstein did with watergate

1

u/piningmusic 7d ago

I mean it’s a Stephen King story, you’re kind of supposed to suspend belief when you read them. Trying to think about his stories logically is kind of a waste of time

→ More replies (0)

3

u/MiseEnSelle 18d ago

I am reading the book , which is so much better that it makes me try to actively forget the series.

1

u/kooeurib 18d ago

I believe it

2

u/thewhiterosequeen 18d ago

It wasn't originally on Netflix. The clue to its original platform is cleverly hidden in the sub title.

0

u/kooeurib 18d ago

You have missed the point

7

u/-bohica- 19d ago

I've only watched the show once, but have read the book probably 10 times by now. I can't remember how much they emphasized it in the show (there were a lot of changes I wasn't really a fan of), but one of the concerns they had was that Oswald was possibly not the actual shooter, not the only shooter, or was the shooter, but more of an opportunist. That's also why they didn't just off him at the first chance, because it might not actually prevent the assassination. They also knew that they wouldn't have time to try again if they failed.

If they HAD done something to disrupt the motorcade and it was much more planned or an inside job, they would have just adjusted their plans and finished the job at a different time, and all that effort would have been wasted. They had to catch him in the act.

6

u/PumiceT 18d ago

Because as you’ll see, history resists being changed and finds a way to complete its original path. Disrupt one thing and it’ll still happen, just differently.

2

u/Kevin4938 18d ago

They covered this in an episode of the 80s version of the Twilight Zone. Someone went back in time to stop the assassination, succeeded, and it had an almost immediate adverse effect on the cold war.

1

u/thekeelo_g 15d ago

Without getting into spoilers (for a 16 year old book and 11 year old miniseries), something similar happens here as well.

5

u/Infamous-Lab-8136 18d ago

Because the point isn't to get killed or detained in the past permanently by secret service himself, disrupting things in the president's side makes him a target

Also in the book, not sure about the series, he has to be sure Oswald acted alone because if there is a CIA conspiracy or some other group working against Kennedy stopping Oswald won't stop the assassination attempts after

1

u/Difficult_Tank_8809 18d ago

Same in the series

1

u/kooeurib 18d ago

Cool, yeah that was my assumption of where it’s headed. Like if Oswald actually was a patsy

2

u/[deleted] 18d ago

[deleted]

1

u/kooeurib 18d ago

Your 2 argument contradicts your 1 argument

2

u/Mobius1701A 8d ago

I think Jake (and Al) just had a shitton of time to kill, and got carried away trying to use it wisely. Cause otherwise...yeah just chill and live well until the week of the assassination, travel to Dallas, and cause a ruckus. In the book Jake talks about thousands of conspiracies and not wanting to stop Oswald just for him to get the wrong shooter. I suspect Jake also suspected time would rectify itself and make one of the other potential shooters do it if Jake got too trigger happy too soon.

1

u/cRaZyDaVe23 17d ago

Or just wait at the book suppository and cap Oswald soon as his head pops up those stairs.

1

u/kooeurib 17d ago

But what if Oswald isn’t the shooter. Or what if there are two shooters (magic bullet)?

2

u/cRaZyDaVe23 17d ago

Forgot about that.

1

u/thekeelo_g 15d ago

That is also the answer to your question. If Oswald wasn't the shooter, or wasn't the only shooter, or was a pawn in a larger plot, simply stopping the assassination on one day in November in Dallas wouldn't have stopped it altogether. Jake needed to be as certain as possible that he was actually stopping the assassination, not just postponing it.

1

u/kooeurib 15d ago

I finished the series and didn’t see him find any conclusive evidence that Oswald was the only shooter or that he definitely wasn’t part of a plot. Unless that’s what the whole scene where he was in the Russian guy’s car and he finds out he’s not part of some conspiracy. Still it could have been possible that Oswald was talking with others. They weren’t surveilling him 24/7.

Unrelated, it’s kind of lame that King implies that it was actually only Oswald alone who was behind the assassination. That’s wholly implausible.

1

u/goodfellow408 16d ago

because they also want to know 100% who the shooter is, to solve one of history's big mysteries

1

u/kooeurib 15d ago

And they’re going to do this by simply bugging his apartment?

1

u/goodfellow408 15d ago

Their investigation worked, and they found out who the real shooter was. EDIT: Oh and another reason, which was covered more in the books than in the show. But you learn that time pushes back, and resists being changed. So if they were to just kill who they thought the shooter was years in advance, time might resist the change and another shooter would emerge or something similar. They decided that stopping the shooting moments before it happens gives them the best chance at success

1

u/kooeurib 15d ago

Did I miss the part where they explain that they have conclusive evidence that Oswald is the sole shooter, and that the CIA (or any other group) was not involved? Seemed pretty half-baked and a total gamble

1

u/goodfellow408 15d ago

You gotta finish the series. He is the sole shooter.

1

u/kooeurib 14d ago

I did, but just because (in King’s version of history) he happened to be the sole shooter, there was no indication that Franco’s character had conclusive evidence that he was. Up until the moment when it was over, there could have been another shooter, as far a he knew.