← Back to Reviews
in
Zodiac (2007)
Mini-summary:
Zodiac is a film based on the very odd serial killings that took place around the San Francisco area in the late 60's early 70's and had many people living in fear of this masked mystery killer. Cops were clueless as to who the killer could be and have yet to identify the true killer. The film stars Jake Gyllenhaal as Robert Graysmith, a cartoonist for the San Francisco Chronicle, who becomes very intrigued by the killer who calls himself the Zodiac. The film also stars Robert Downey Jr as Paul Avery, the crime writer for the Chronicle. Also starring are Mark Ruffalo as Inspector David Toschi and Anthony Edwards as William Armstrong. The film is Rated R and has a run time of about 2 hrs and 40 mins.
My take:
If you're not familiar with the Zodiac killings of the 60s and 70s, take a few minutes to research it just a little. It's really something to think about how all this transpired back when. Having said that, again this is a movie based on the true story of the Zodiac.
The movie, directed by David Fincher (Fight Club, Se7en) makes his return to the director's chair for the first time in nearly 5 years, and if I may say so, it was as if he wasn't even gone. He captured the essence of the 60s and 70s perfectly, all the way down to the tiny details.
The cast is superb in portraying their real life counter-parts.
Now for the bad part...
While the movie is rather long, most of the step-by-step occurances of the Zodiac's cryptic messages and tauntings happens within the first half of the film. The second half, we are left with Gyllenhaal's character Graysmith trying to put the pieces of the puzzle together in order to bring the killer down. In real life, he managed to write two books on the Zodiac and is considered to be an expert on the matter, but that's beside the point. IMO, the movie could've been shortened by at least 45 minutes in order to get to the point a little faster.
I found myself losing interest after the Zodiac stops contacting the Chronicle and the police. Even though the film is based on the book which is based on the true story, I think certain aspects of the book could've been left out in order to fit in more pertinent facts relating to the unsolved case.
All in all, I enjoyed it. Of course, for some reason, I get into the true crime stories, something about them just gets me interested. I suggest renting it if you want to brush up on some of the most terrifying years for San Fran folks.
My score:
4 out of 5
Zodiac (2007)
Mini-summary:
Zodiac is a film based on the very odd serial killings that took place around the San Francisco area in the late 60's early 70's and had many people living in fear of this masked mystery killer. Cops were clueless as to who the killer could be and have yet to identify the true killer. The film stars Jake Gyllenhaal as Robert Graysmith, a cartoonist for the San Francisco Chronicle, who becomes very intrigued by the killer who calls himself the Zodiac. The film also stars Robert Downey Jr as Paul Avery, the crime writer for the Chronicle. Also starring are Mark Ruffalo as Inspector David Toschi and Anthony Edwards as William Armstrong. The film is Rated R and has a run time of about 2 hrs and 40 mins.
My take:
If you're not familiar with the Zodiac killings of the 60s and 70s, take a few minutes to research it just a little. It's really something to think about how all this transpired back when. Having said that, again this is a movie based on the true story of the Zodiac.
The movie, directed by David Fincher (Fight Club, Se7en) makes his return to the director's chair for the first time in nearly 5 years, and if I may say so, it was as if he wasn't even gone. He captured the essence of the 60s and 70s perfectly, all the way down to the tiny details.
The cast is superb in portraying their real life counter-parts.
Now for the bad part...
While the movie is rather long, most of the step-by-step occurances of the Zodiac's cryptic messages and tauntings happens within the first half of the film. The second half, we are left with Gyllenhaal's character Graysmith trying to put the pieces of the puzzle together in order to bring the killer down. In real life, he managed to write two books on the Zodiac and is considered to be an expert on the matter, but that's beside the point. IMO, the movie could've been shortened by at least 45 minutes in order to get to the point a little faster.
I found myself losing interest after the Zodiac stops contacting the Chronicle and the police. Even though the film is based on the book which is based on the true story, I think certain aspects of the book could've been left out in order to fit in more pertinent facts relating to the unsolved case.
All in all, I enjoyed it. Of course, for some reason, I get into the true crime stories, something about them just gets me interested. I suggest renting it if you want to brush up on some of the most terrifying years for San Fran folks.
My score:
4 out of 5