David Fincher, 2007
I'm always wary of films that use the prefix 'based on true events', it's usually a warning sign in code stating 'yawn fest ahead'. More often or not those films tend to be extremely tiresome with it's fixation of telling it 'like it happened' with little in the way of imagination or artistic license, a simple paint by numbers job and hey presto! Here's your Oscar. Fincher's Zodiac however goes against the norm by creating a hugely watchable, creative and tense thriller chronicling the unsolved 'Zodiac' killings that swept San Francisco in the 60's and 70's; the work of a serial killer who sent ciphers and letters to local newspapers and police, teasing them with grisly facts about murders and inducing panic in citizens with tales of mass homicidal fantasies.
Spanning 30 years, Zodiac covers the original murders, filmed in chilling Fincher style; solidly backed up with careful, meticulous mise en scene detailing the time and space of the era, the gaps between murders and the repercussions that swept up the lead protagonists, detective David Toschi (Mark Ruffolo), reporter Paul Avery (Robert Downey Jr.) and cartoonist Robert Graysmith (Jake Gyllenhaal). Thanks largely to muddled jurisdiction laws, waylaid evidence and incompetence, The Zodiac (a self titled moniker) is able to continue their killing spree and to this day has still not been identified; although a strong lead culprit has heavily been hinted at their is still no final resolution.
The way in which this is achieved is by telling the story through it's living victims, namely our three protagonists, who we watch as the years go by, slowly being consumed by the case until it eats them inside out. Methodically, astutely and with purpose, Detective David Toschi follows lead after lead, knocks on doors, gains warrants and sifts through endless paperwork, believing in the job and that he's only a step away from capturing the man he believes is responsible.
Cartoonist Robert Graysmith, a naive and quiet man, becomes obsessed with the Zodiac to the point where he's deciphering the letters; he works at the local paper where the letters are sent, in his spare time; it's on two of his books (Zodiac and Zodiac Unmasked) which the script is based. Reporter Paul Avery makes his name with the case, becoming something of a celebrity and at one point is said to be a target for the Zodiac, all three become the films unspoken victims, chewed up and spat out, all three destroyed in their persistence of evil.
The more the trio delve into the case the more they become part of it, Toschi's police partner William Armstrong (Anthony Edwards) quits the case just before he gets in too deep by transferring to another department, the reason for the switch, after being such an active part in trying to track down the Zodiac, is hidden behind having to keep himself safe for his young family but the message is clear; get out before this swallows you up. That 'swallowing' is told perfectly through Graysmith who's involvement in the case makes him disregard everything else in his life that he once held dear; a scene in which his naivety leads him to a darkened basement, being one of the films highlights, pinpointing the reckless risks taken for the sake of an obsession.
Maybe Zodiac is a tad overlong but it's certainly satisfactory and I see why it made so many critics top ten list last year, it's a respectful film in the classical sense from Fincher, a picture of maturity and composure. San Fransisco is captured in it's 70's glory in beautiful wide shots, dappled lights and colours fill the skyline, evoking memories of those glorious cop shows from the same era. Fincher's love for the crime genre is evident, he has a real knack for absorbing information and letting it slowly drip feed the audience, we live of scraps for such a long part off the film yet the anticipation is palatable.
Perfectly paced and told, Zodiac shows a true sign of things to come from Fincher, I've found his earlier films, though entertaining, slightly irritating and brattish, with this feature though I think we're seeing a real voice on the horizon. This is a film of ambition and cinematic verve, it's downbeat story may not be to everybody's tastes, with it's unresolved ambiguous finale, yet who can deny its final scene?
"I need to look him in the eye and I need to know that it's him "
Zodiac trailer























11 baring their soul:
Great review. I've been meaning to watch this again after only seeing it in the theater a year and a half ago. With a different release date it could have been in the Oscar discussion, so says me. I loved the production design and the suspense.
Nice review; I really liked it. It should have been nominated for most of the major Oscars (picture / director / supporting actor / screenplay)
One of my favorites from last year. Just curious, did you watch the theatrical version or the director's cut?
I really liked this movie, but I too felt it was a bit too long.
I love this movie and Fincher in general. He's always very original, even though he's telling stories we've seen many times before.
I found it particularly interesting that this isn't even a film, but a video shot with the VIPER camera that everyone is raving about.
Watching it in theatre fooled me. I thought this was an old school picture complete with that 70's look I love so much.
Fincher's newest film, THE CURIOUS CASE OF BENJAMIN BUTTON looks like it may pick up some long overdue Oscar nods. We'll have to wait and see.
Thanks for the comments people.
Daniel - It's a great looking film no doubt and, as other people have expressed the same view point, it was certainly robbed of an Oscar, or two.
Joseph - Thanks, again agree on the Oscar nod.
Michael - After looking it up I now know I watched the director's cut and until you mentioned it I had no idea they had released a shorter version in the cinema. Is their a major difference do you know? Welcome to the site by the way.
Ryne - It felt like it dragged for 10 minutes too much, their were points I felt could have been confined but that was just a small point and didn't really effect my enjoyment of the film.
Joseph. C - I haven't read so much about the VIPER camera but the finished product certainly fooled me as well. I'm looking forward to his next film after the strength of this. Have you seen the trailer yet? I like what I sees.
Yup, you've convinced me to watch it! I always intended to, but I never really got around to it! Nice blog.
:) T
Zodiac is a great film and it saddens me that it was completely ignored at the Oscars, probably due to its March release. Blasphemy! The performances in the film are wonderful. Fincher directs the film with a menacing glee and thrilling interest. Sure, it lost some of its engine near the end, but its final scene is undeniably haunting.
Great review!
I was pleasantly surprised by this film. It's really well made.
Great review, Ib. What does
"brattish" mean?
Seriously, I wasn't as enamored of this flick as a lot of others were. I thought it was over-long and sluggishly paced. I like his brattish "Fight Club" better.
Ohh, extra comments, thanks.
T - Welcome to the site, hope you enjoy the film and thanks.
Marcy - Also welcome, thanks. I agree, it was indeed a good little film, I felt that Downey and Gyllenhaal were especially good. No disagreement with the ending, very chilling.
Marin - Certainly is, hopefully we'll see more of this from Fincher.
Rick - Hello again, Thanks for the comments. As for Brattish (I had my doubts but there it is in the Oxford dictionary as an adjective to Brat). I guess I was going for juvenile but brattish seemed to fit so nicely.
Respect your point, Zodiac did feel a little lumbered towards the end but overall I felt it worked. I honestly got on with it better than his previous efforts. Fight Club just felt a little...brattish to me.
Post a Comment