Based on the actual case files for one of the most intriguing unsolved crimes in America, "Zodiac" tells the story of a serial killer that terrified the San Francisco Bay Area, taunting police with his ciphers and letters. The case becomes an obsession for four men as their lives and careers are built and destroyed by the endless trail of clues.
Zodiac is a chilling and captivating tale of one of the most infamous serial killers in world history. Comparable in notoriety to London's Jack the Ripper, the Zodiac killer brought panic to the San Francisco area in the 1960s and 1970s. The Zodiac movie is based on the best-selling account of the events from Robert Graysmith, played by Jake Gyllenhaal in the film. Graysmith was a cartoonist at a newspaper who got involved in the investigation after the police department had backed off their to find him.
The Zodiac was never found, but the movie explores some of the key suspects and presents Graysmith's account of the horrendous story and delivers his thoughts on the killer.
Zodiac was a good movie that suffered from its own length. The movie wanted to make the suspense that it was banking on a hell of a lot longer than it needed. I still believe that it was well done, with a very interesting story, some great acting(especially at the hands of Robert Downey Jr.), and some wonderful cinematography.
The story of Zodiac is about an unsolved string of murders in California. It follows the story of the detective assigned to the murders Marc Ruffalo, a reporter for the newspaper Robert Downey Jr., and the cartoonist obsessed with solving the puzzle of the killer Jake Gyllenhaal.
Like I said the movie was very good. If it would have been edited more efficiently I would have probably given it a perfect review. However; I give it four stars.
Zodiac is a long movie, about a serial killer in the San Franscico area during the 1970's.
Basically, I felt the movie was good. Unlike most movies based on a true story, i would know what the real story is before I watch the movie, but for Zodiac, i didn't. All I knew was that it's still an open case. But the movie still didn't dissapoint.
It leads the viewer down a long road with many dead ends and when you think they get a great lead to whom the killer may be. . . nope, now here's another story line.
But this works for the movie, throughout the 2 and a half hours it keeps you on the edge of your seat with some awesome performances by jake Gylenhal and Mark Ruffulo, i know the spelling is off but you should know who they are.
The movie is more of a detective story than a serial killer movie because i felt that there weren't enough murder scenes, but the movie makes up for this because the murder scenes were very brutal and looked very real.
I probably won't buy this movie but If i get the chance to see it again for free, i would. I recommened anyone who knows anything about movies to see this movie. Although it may be a frustrating movie to watch, it has many tense moments which makes this movie well worth the 8 bucks.
Director David Fincher has delivered some of the more intensely dramatic movies of the last 10 years. Se7en, The Game, Fight Club and Panic Room all come to mind. This fact alone would be enough to lead us to believe that his latest serial flick, like Se7en before it, would be a rollercoaster of twists and turns leading up to a shocker of an ending. It turns out that Zodiac, based on the real life killer that plagued San Francisco in the 1970s, is anything but a shocker. In fact, we already know how it is going to end, but that doesnÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t mean that we wonÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t want to watch it anyway.
Zodiac stars Jake Gyllenhaal (Brokeback Mountain) as Robert Graysmith, the San Francisco Chronicle cartoonist who would eventually go on to write a few best selling books about the infamous Zodiac killer. The story follows GraysmithÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s journey from looking over the shoulder of crime beat reporter Paul Avery (Robert Downey Jr.) to working with Inspector David Toschi (Mark Ruffalo) years later as he worked to uncover the true identity of elusive Zodiac. The elusiveness of the Zodiac was only heightened by the fact that he would taunt the public of the Bay area by writing letters to the papers or calling into television talk shows to profess his love for murder. The spectacle was enough to put the entire city of San Francisco into a state of terror for over a decade, its denizens cautiously awaiting the next sign of the Zodiac, or worse yet, the dead body.
It seems odd to make a film about a real life serial killer whose case is still open and to this day remains unsolved, but David Fincher pulls it off as only he can. The tension of the film continues to build from one letter to the next, one murder to the next, and while we know it doesnÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t lead to anything we are intrigued nonetheless. FincherÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s style is also unmistakable in the film. Visually he uses long, slow pans over the city and some cool camera angles (birds-eye view in some spots) to give the film a constantly fresh feel, helping to dilute the fact that the flick is almost 3 hours long. Also complimentary is the score, which has a funky, light beat that gives the film a much needed rhythm. These things are signs of FincherÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s immaculate attention to detail, a trait that sets him apart from your average director.
Another sign of his attention to detail and ultimately another reason why the film succeeds is some superb casting. Robert Downey Jr. steals much of the film despite the fact that his character fades away toward the end. He is as erratic as ever, displaying a sharp wit that gives the audience something more than just Jake GyllenhaalÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s boyish good looks. Gyllenhaal, an actor of whom I am not normally a fan, plays the naÃƒÂ¯ve Robert Graysmith quite well. Graysmith was the boy scout to AveryÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s spastic attention whore, and Gyllenhaal nails it with a sense of innocence that seems natural even though it is at times a bit of an annoyance. The rest of the cast falls into place very well, including Mark Ruffalo and Anthony Edwards, who have great on screen chemistry as the pair of inspectors tasked out to find the Zodiac.
Ultimately my only problem with a film like this is a two-fold affair. On one side, the film is painfully long at 2 hours and 40 minutes. If you have an self diagnosed case of ADD like myself you will find your eyes burning and your mind wandering as the film wears on. But despite the length of his film, Fincher pieces together a story that does not loiter, it just has a lot to say. Sadly based on much of the story, this film could have been longer. Heaven forbid they ever come out with a DirectorÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s Cut a la Oliver StoneÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s Alexander.
The other inherent problem I found with Zodiac is that it is hard to get behind a film which you know has no real ending. We know that they are not going to catch the killer, we know that the case is still a mystery today and yet we are somehow interested in it anyway. Could it be that we are so enamored with real life serial killers, or is it that we just want to freak ourselves out that the real Zodiac may still be out there? No matter what your reason, I would recommend giving this one a look. Just donÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t plan on being home early.
By: Neil Miller