Zodiac - Pins you to your seat

[TechSupporter11]

Well-known director David Fincher ("Seven," "Fight Club," "The Game," "Panic Room") delivers yet another masterpiece (yes, masterpiece) in the new film from Paramount Pictures "Zodiac."

I went into this film as open-minded as I possibly could be (as I try to do everytime). I had seen the preview once, actually knew very little about the zodiac killer and the story that follows, and had just seen an overview of what the critics were saying about it...

I watch the film and am pinned to my seat from start to finish for the entire two and a half hours. It was breathtaking; it was hypnotizing since I found my eyes glued to the screen. This isn't a "who done it?" kind of film that teases you from start to finish throwing suspect after suspect at you just so you can spend the entire time trying to figure out the killer and its resolution. Instead, the film centers around four main characters (a cartoonist, a newspaper writer, and two homicide detectives) who's lives are engulfed and unraveled by the serial killer and his letters of confession/provocation. It's a very subtle, dialogue-driven script that produces a wide range of emotions for the viewer.

The story itself is so fascinating that one would think it would be easy to make into a feature film. But given the timespan of the actual killer and the evidence brought about (from the mid-60's to the present), the screenwriter along with Fincher created a very in-your-face, detailed story that does not leave you confused with time or the investigation. Superb directing, great performances, spectacular script, beautiful art direction, and nice cinematography.

Some people might think it's too slow, or too long, or I keep trying to figure out the ending but I can't so I don't like it...this is an intense film from scene to scene that left me wanting to go right back into the theater and watch it again...this was a film that left me thinking about it the whole night (here I am writing a review)...this one will definitely go on my top 10 list of 2007 (and it's only MARCH)...

[Dirtydawg]

Well-known director David Fincher ("Seven," "Fight Club," "The Game," "Panic Room") delivers yet another masterpiece (yes, masterpiece) in the new film from Paramount Pictures "Zodiac."

I went into this film as open-minded as I possibly could be (as I try to do everytime). I had seen the preview once, actually knew very little about the zodiac killer and the story that follows, and had just seen an overview of what the critics were saying about it...

I watch the film and am pinned to my seat from start to finish for the entire two and a half hours. It was breathtaking; it was hypnotizing since I found my eyes glued to the screen. This isn't a "who done it?" kind of film that teases you from start to finish throwing suspect after suspect at you just so you can spend the entire time trying to figure out the killer and its resolution. Instead, the film centers around four main characters (a cartoonist, a newspaper writer, and two homicide detectives) who's lives are engulfed and unraveled by the serial killer and his letters of confession/provocation. It's a very subtle, dialogue-driven script that produces a wide range of emotions for the viewer.

The story itself is so fascinating that one would think it would be easy to make into a feature film. But given the timespan of the actual killer and the evidence brought about (from the mid-60's to the present), the screenwriter along with Fincher created a very in-your-face, detailed story that does not leave you confused with time or the investigation. Superb directing, great performances, spectacular script, beautiful art direction, and nice cinematography.

Some people might think it's too slow, or too long, or I keep trying to figure out the ending but I can't so I don't like it...this is an intense film from scene to scene that left me wanting to go right back into the theater and watch it again...this was a film that left me thinking about it the whole night (here I am writing a review)...this one will definitely go on my top 10 list of 2007 (and it's only MARCH)...

Does the film give the impression that the Zodiac is still alive and killing? I've thought about seeing it, but I don't go to theaters anymore unless it's free or a kid's movie. I wait to rent movies. Back to the question, though. I've seen some stories on the Zodiac, but I want to say that I thought I remembered that most of the profilers etc... think he would be dead by now.

[TechSupporter11]

Does the film give the impression that the Zodiac is still alive and killing? I've thought about seeing it, but I don't go to theaters anymore unless it's free or a kid's movie. I wait to rent movies. Back to the question, though. I've seen some stories on the Zodiac, but I want to say that I thought I remembered that most of the profilers etc... think he would be dead by now.

Not at all...without giving away how the movie handles the key suspects and which parts are accurate to the case files...it doesn't end with you believing that the killer is still alive (even though I did research when I got home where a few of the key suspects are still alive)...

I will tell you that the movie's last scene is in 1991...and after the last scene the film cuts to black and has three screen shots of information about the highlights of the case since then and where the main characters are now...

[CChandler]

Really good movie.

30 minutes needed to be cut off of this thing, however. There's a mini subplot involving a possible identify for the Zodiac character that leads nowhere and is quickly dropped. In fact, said suspect is never even seen on camera. Totally pointless stuff.

Everything else was fantastic.

[dhussdawg]

Really good movie.

30 minutes needed to be cut off of this thing, however. There's a mini subplot involving a possible identify for the Zodiac character that leads nowhere and is quickly dropped. In fact, said suspect is never even seen on camera. Totally pointless stuff.

Everything else was fantastic.

Yeh, I thought it would have been much better had they trimmed some of the fat. It also jumped around a lot for me. I think the movie left no doubt who the killer was in their opinion, especially when the police interviewed him and he was obsessed with many of the same things the Zodiac was obsessed with. When Gylenhall went to that creepy guys house, that was a great part of the movie. It did bore me at times, though. It was okay overall.

[TechSupporter11]

Really good movie.

30 minutes needed to be cut off of this thing, however. There's a mini subplot involving a possible identify for the Zodiac character that leads nowhere and is quickly dropped. In fact, said suspect is never even seen on camera. Totally pointless stuff.

Everything else was fantastic.

The film itself had to have more than one legitimate suspect to give the movie more legs/diversity to create more tension with the plot and the characters...if you go and research the real zodiac killer, there are actually about 5 or 6 prime suspects that were linked to the zodiac...

I personally would of sat there for another 2 and 1/2 hours watching the story unravel even more...

[Dirtydawg]

The film itself had to have more than one legitimate suspect to give the movie more legs/diversity to create more tension with the plot and the characters...if you go and research the real zodiac killer, there are actually about 5 or 6 prime suspects that were linked to the zodiac...

I personally would of sat there for another 2 and 1/2 hours watching the story unravel even more...

I can't wait for it to come out on video. This is a movie that I think I will like as I've read about this case some in the past and found it intriguing that they never caught the person. He just quit. Because of that, several experts think that it was somebody that was caught for another crime and imprisoned where they think he probably died or still sits today or was incarcerated for so long that when released was unable to continue with the killings. I know that there were some frustrated cops over this.

[dhussdawg]

The film itself had to have more than one legitimate suspect to give the movie more legs/diversity to create more tension with the plot and the characters...if you go and research the real zodiac killer, there are actually about 5 or 6 prime suspects that were linked to the zodiac...

I personally would of sat there for another 2 and 1/2 hours watching the story unravel even more...

Really? I think that would have made the movie more intriguing to me. The movie makes you think it was that one guy, without giving any backbone to any of the other possibilities, except for the creepy old guy that wrote the poster.

[CChandler]

I'm sorry, but if I'm director David Fincher, I don't even bring up Rick Marshall as a possible suspect if I'm going to half-ass it and dismiss the character in 30 minutes, not to mention never even showing him on-screen. You're better off just ignoring the angle all together.

It's poor filmmaking, and Fincher's better than that.

[dhussdawg]

I'm sorry, but if I'm director David Fincher, I don't even bring up Rick Marshall as a possible suspect if I'm going to half-ass it and dismiss the character in 30 minutes, not to mention never even showing him on-screen. You're better off just ignoring the angle all together.

It's poor filmmaking, and Fincher's better than that.

Yeh, I hated that part. You kept hearing the name, but you never got a face with it and never got any legs to it. The deputy said he thought Marshall was the guy at first, but yet no mention of the guy until the end of the movie nearly. They could have planted seeds at the beginning of the investigation with Marshall, but failed to do so. It made him seem like an arbitrary suspect by the end.

[Dirtydawg]

Yeh, I hated that part. You kept hearing the name, but you never got a face with it and never got any legs to it. The deputy said he thought Marshall was the guy at first, but yet no mention of the guy until the end of the movie nearly. They could have planted seeds at the beginning of the investigation with Marshall, but failed to do so. It made him seem like an arbitrary suspect by the end.

You sure you used the correct term?

[dhussdawg]

You sure you used the correct term?

Well, DD, since I never saw him with my own eyes that is the only reasonable conclusion I could come to. I never sensed him, so he must be arbitrary. Get your axioms and faculties right!!

[TechSupporter11]

I'm sorry, but if I'm director David Fincher, I don't even bring up Rick Marshall as a possible suspect if I'm going to half-ass it and dismiss the character in 30 minutes, not to mention never even showing him on-screen. You're better off just ignoring the angle all together.

It's poor filmmaking, and Fincher's better than that.

But you have to think though, the Rick Marshall character was A) a real suspect in the search for the zodiac killer B) the fact that you never see him is only an extension of symbolism, or who knows, maybe the guy you see was Rick Marshall

In order for a suspense thriller of this kind to work and to blend in actual facts from the real cases...you have to have more than one suspect to create doubt and the overall theme of the real life story (the fact that no one was ever convicted for such crimes and that, to this day, no one will ever know who the real zodiac killer was)...the Rick Marshall character was more of a symolism to me complimenting the theme of the film...I think the screenwriter, editor, and director got it totally right...

The film would of been too straightforward if that addition to the film would of been left out...one suspect for a serial killer film doesn't cut it...

[dhussdawg]

But you have to think though, the Rick Marshall character was A) a real suspect in the search for the zodiac killer B) the fact that you never see him is only an extension of symbolism, or who knows, maybe the guy you see was Rick Marshall

In order for a suspense thriller of this kind to work and to blend in actual facts from the real cases...you have to have more than one suspect to create doubt and the overall theme of the real life story (the fact that no one was ever convicted for such crimes and that, to this day, no one will ever know who the real zodiac killer was)...the Rick Marshall character was more of a symolism to me complimenting the theme of the film...I think the screenwriter, editor, and director got it totally right...

The film would of been too straightforward if that addition to the film would of been left out...one suspect for a serial killer film doesn't cut it...

Yeh, but the way they presented the film left no doubt who it was in my opinion. I liked the Rick Marshall add in, but it should have been developed more. He just seemed like a name they threw out there to try to throw you off, but they didnt give it any backbone. The only one that had backbone was the creepy guy in the house whose handwriting was on the movie poster. If they could have given those three suspects their due in the movie, I think it would have been better. In the end, the movie points to one suspect over the rest and doesnt seem to leave much room for speculation.

[TechSupporter11]

Yeh, but the way they presented the film left no doubt who it was in my opinion. I liked the Rick Marshall add in, but it should have been developed more. He just seemed like a name they threw out there to try to throw you off, but they didnt give it any backbone. The only one that had backbone was the creepy guy in the house whose handwriting was on the movie poster. If they could have given those three suspects their due in the movie, I think it would have been better. In the end, the movie points to one suspect over the rest and doesnt seem to leave much room for speculation.

Nevertheless, we can agree that the film was great...for the time frame and the facts the filmmakers had to cover (while also keeping the movie from going 3 hours plus, you have to imagine though that they wanted to give the majority of the attention to the suspect who was the primary target as the real zodiac killer...not exactly an easy thing to do, especially from a screenwriters perspective...