 | |
List Price: $24.95 | | Label: Sony Pictures
Salesrank: 72178
Released: September 2, 2003 |
| Our Price: $24.95 |
| Used Price: $7.96 |
|
MPAA Rating: R (Restricted)
Media: DVD |
|
Editorial Review:
The Mafia needed a patsy. The CIA needed a pawn. And the conspiracy needed a killer. They found it all in Jack Ruby, the Dallas strip club owner who murdered President Kennedy’s assassin, Lee Harvey Oswald, on live television. Stars Danny Aiello.
Ruby Reviews:
Better than I expected...but leaves room for improvement 
2009-10-17 - "Ruby" is John Mackenzie's answer to Oliver Stone's "JFK". Stone dealt with the Jim Garrison case while Mackenzie deals with Jack Ruby and his cohorts.
The movie has decent production values. I was expecting a low budget film. The movie even starts out with a film noir feel. You hear saxophone playing on a dimly lit street. A man is hanging from a hook from a gangland hit. This gives the movie a needed boost in the opening.
Danny Aiello plays that enigmatic assassin Jack Ruby. He's a simple night club owner. He has the several business arrangments with the Dallas Police Department. He's an informant for the FBI. He has ties to Cuban gun runners. If only the real Ruby would stand up...
Ruby meets "Candy Cane" played by Sherilyn Fenn. "Candy Cane" is a composite based in part on "Candy Barr", a notorious exotic dancer and adult performer. Candy Cane shows Ruby's softer side.
The movie shows the title character going to Cuba and getting mixed up with anti-Castro mobsters. An enigmatic figure named "Maxwell" (probably a composite of Maurice Bishop aka David Atlee Phillips) is on the fringes, keeping to the shadows. He seems to know everything about Ruby's business.
The movie gives some interesting meat to chew on. Who was Jack Ruby? What were his motivations? But in the final analysis, these questions go largely unanswered. The creators didn't want to stick their necks out like Oliver Stone did with his magna opus. And this is a fatal flaw.
If more time was spent developing the motivations of Jack Ruby or exploring his ties to organized crime or his ties to the CIA, the movie would garner an extra star from me. If the movie had done all these things, it would have garnered an extra star and a half. This movie is a bit of a let down because it is so close being great.
Had great potential, comes up a bit short, 3.5 stars
2007-09-11 - When it comes to films re-telling the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, or involving characters snared in the events of that November weekend, one is always certain to navigate between fact and fiction, speculation and interpretation, and without a doubt, opinion and controversy. Regardless of where one's interpretation of the events in Dealey Plaza stands (I'm one of those minorities that thinks Oswald did it alone), however, the bulk of the movies that build the body of their plots around this event can be enjoyed on the entertainment level despite their historical inaccuracies.
Much like Oliver Stone's "JFK" and the Mark Lane-inspired "Executive Action," the Danny Aiello vehicle herein falls into the entertainment category. However, in my opinion, "Ruby" is not filmed in a format like the other two, where an obvious agenda for swaying the mind of the viewer is in place. I would instead rank this film with the novels of James Ellroy and Don DeLillo ("American Tabloid" and "Libra," respectively), stories that take a true event and build a fictional approach to the subsequent controversies surrounding it. It is obvious, however, that the screenwriter holds a belief that Ruby was involved in a conspiracy, but I didn't feel his opinion was as prominent as Stone's was in "JFK."
And "Ruby" is decidedly more fiction than anything else, with events like Jack Ruby being a hitman for the CIA/Mob to whack Castro. However, these events are likely inspired by real people and real events, and they have just been incorporated into the film for dramatic license, and to also make Ruby seem like he knew more than we, the people, have been told.
Unfortunately, the historical record--and yes, Ruby's own testimony--indicate he was merely another nut like Oswald, a man thoroughly devastated by the murder of JFK who acted out on another prominent feeling he contained: A desire to be famous. Much has been made of Ruby's testimony before the Warren Commission, regarding his statement that he could tell the truth only in Washington, yadda yadda. However, and as shown at the end, ellipses and selective culling of what Ruby stated frequently ignore the fact that Ruby made repeated denials of being involved in a conspiracy to kill either Kennedy or Oswald. If anything, Ruby was likely showing the symptoms of paranoia he would display later on when making statements that claimed a new Holocaust of Jews was occurring in the US, with some being murdered in the floors below his prison cell. Despite this, the conspiracy believers will likely see this as mere propaganda placed in the historical record by the cover-up artists to discredit Ruby, citing his not-so-mysterious death from cancer as proof he was silenced, despite the fact that Ruby never really had much of anything to say.
Despite it's obvious knack for speculation in lieu of historical adherence, this film is actually pretty good, though far below the entertainment standards of Stone's film (which likewise is thoroughly inaccurate and speculative, but is very impressive and quite a technological marvel). Danny Aiello, while not physically resembling Jack Ruby in many ways, gives a fine, emotionally charged performance. One can only wonder how amazing he would have been had he been playing the Ruby character that historians have come to know, as Aiello hits the mark as an emotionally high-strung man with a penchant for violence and occasional gentleness in measure. Arliss Howard is also especially fun to watch as the mysterious "spook" Maxwell, a CIA agent who snares Jack in the darkness brewing in the time period. Sherilyn Fenn is amazingly gorgeous on screen, playing a composite character who seems to be a combination of Beverly Oliver ( a claimed associate of Ruby who claimed to have filmed the Dallas motorcade, but is deemed unreliable by many researchers) and Judith Exner (a supposed liason between the Mob and Jack Kennedy). However, her role didn't give her much to work with, other than being eye candy (coincidentally enough, her act name is Candy Cane. Go figure) and eventually, the damsel in distress. Her character could have been far more interesting had it been developed further, but then again, we're watching a film called "Ruby," not "Candy Cane." The scene-stealer to me, however, was the always-mysterious Tobin Bell as David Ferrie, managing to look ten times more bizarre and frightening than Joe Pesci's take on the character in "JFK." Here, we see a Ferrie who cackles at serving up a man he has known for years as a fall guy, a man with an intense voice and a penetrating gaze. One can only wonder how Bell would have handled the part in JFK had Stone offered it to him.
The movie moves a bit slow in the start, but once Jack starts becoming caught up in the intrigue with Maxwell, things liven up a little. A solid musical score gives the film a noir-ish feel, and the set design and camerawork capture the feel of the 60's and the dirty seedy underbelly of the American Dream. This movie feels like an Ellroy novel in so many ways to me.
My kudos have to go to the filmmakers for their rendition of the assassination scene, managing to create a subtle yet shocking re-creation which looks quite good. The addition of the song "Amazing Grace" while the bullets are fired packs an emotional wallop, especially considering how good the costumes and adherence to detail from photographs looks. It's quite impressive, almost like a less glossy and underproduced version of what Stone did in his film. Thankfully, the filmmakers opted not to have a six-bullet scenario like Stone, which ranks this interpretation a little higher on the Sanity List in my opinion, this in spite of my disagreement with a shot from the Knoll. I digress, however, from my main point: It's well-achieved on screen.
The film lost a few points from me in the way it doesn't go into detail about some events of November 22, 1963, such as the death of Officer JD Tippit, but this can also be chalked up to the fact that Ruby likely had no knowledge of them. Thus, the film sticking to what he saw (or would come to learn eventually) gives the movie a feel of being the Jack Ruby portrayed herein, which gives the movie a good emotional hook to invest in.
It's not the greatest thing I've ever seen, but it's decidedly underrated and underappreciated. Give it a try!
[One and a half out of four] Poor followup to 'JFK', done to smear JFK! 
2006-06-29 - Italian-American Danny Aiello gives
heartfelt performance, but those of
us who have done any research into
Jack Ruby, JFK, et, al know, he was
nowhere near like man portrayed in
here! And Aiello is about 6'2", 260
lbs., and the real Jakob Rubenstein
was about 5'8" and 185! Also, this
movie and publishers squib on back
cover make out like Oswald REALLY
DID kill JFK, which anybody knows
DIDN'T happen! Plus, there is no
such person as 'stripper' Candy
Kane! Movie made by Hollywood
Khazars to exonerate Zionist
and Masonic connection to JFK's
killing, with willing dupes play-
ing supporting roles. This Revis-
ionist Reviewer was not fooled!
I am curious Rubenstein 
2004-06-23 - since one-half of my lineage is undoubtedly related to Jack, I am curious about all things Rubenstein, and this just came on The Box so I'm cking it out...but I have a beef...why does Hollywood persist in casting non-Jewish actors as Jewish characters, esp. Danny Aiello (in this and at least one other, which title I dis-remember, it's about Jewish widows in Pittsburgh(?)) are there NO jewish actors available to do this schlock and who can bring to the role, at the very least, an authentic rendering of "schmuck" and "schlmiel"? Aw schucks, this whole thing schux! Aiello is just not believable when he says "I'm Jewish"!
zei gesundt, mit latkes, Shalom, Alex
muddled but fascinating 
2003-08-13 - There are spoilers in this review, but you should already know the historical details anyway.
"Ruby" isn't a good movie, but it *almost* was, and long stretches of the movie show us glimpses of the great movie it could have been. These portions of the movie are good enough to be worth owning the DVD for (especially if you enjoyed Oliver Stone's "JFK" for the look and feel of it rather than factual analysis).
The story takes what little is known about Ruby's shady life - that he was a burlesque club owner who had connections to organized crime and the CIA - and riffs on this entertainingly. However, the idea that Ruby's motive for shooting Oswald was "to expose the whole thing" makes absolutely no sense whatsoever, especially knowing that he made no great revelations about the conspiracy after he thrust himself into the public eye. How do you expose a conspiracy by silencing a key conspirator?
For some reason, the director chose to portray the mobster Santos Trafficante under the transparent guise of a character named Alicante. The fictional character of Candy Cane is rather pointless, especially since she seems to be a total fabrication and not based on any of Ruby's actual strippers. The infamous Jada is nowhere to be seen in the film, which is one of the biggest disappointments for me.
The look and feel of the film is great, though. It's an enjoyable immersion in gangsters, burlesque, spies, and politics, in late-50s-early-60s surroundings. Their period portrayal of Cuba is extremely well done, but rather than recreate Las Vegas, they simply pillaged stock footage from Elvis Presley's "Viva Las Vegas". This perfectly illustrates the film's uneven level of quality.
