Movies Books Music Food Tv Shows Technology Politics Video Games Parenting Fashion Green Living more >

Lunch » Tags » Movies » Reviews » Zodiac (2007) » User review

Zodiac - The Director's Cut (Two-Disc Special

A movie directed by David Fincher

< read all 9 reviews

Obsession and not much else

  • Aug 6, 2007
Pros: Mood and cinematography

Cons: Weak story that went on for far too long

The Bottom Line: I like Fincher and his mood-making is good here, but it is the only thing, so I cannot recommend it.

Plot Details: This opinion reveals minor details about the movie''s plot.

David Fincher is in my relatively short list of favorite directors despite his rather small list of films to date. He is a master of mood and he knows what lighting and set professionals to work with to create these moods.

Unfortunately, Zodiac is all mood and little substance. Despite this, the film is two and a half hours long—Bilbo says before his birthday celebration in Fellowship of the Ring that he feels like butter spread too thin on a piece of bread; this is the problem with Zodiac

A killer that has not named himself yet sends a series of ciphers to, among other newspapers and law enforcement agencies, the San Francisco Chronicle. Cartoonist Robert Graysmith (Jake Gyllenhaal) becomes very interested in this because of the cipher (he is a puzzle lover). He forges a shaky then fairly strong relationship with the crime reporter Paul Avery (Robert Downey Jr.). They work together to try to solve the mystery. This is paralleled by three police partners in three different cities in California where the Zodiac killer picked his victims. David Toschi (Mark Ruffalo) and William Armstrong (Anthony Edwards) are the San Francisco team and the most commonly shown. From 1970 through about 1974, the hunt for the Zodiac killer went from hot to lukewarm; from 1974 to 1983 (when the film concludes) solving it became the obsession of one man, Robert Graysmith.

The film used the real Robert Graysmith book as the armature to for the story, however, if you are not familiar with the Zodiac murders, this film is not going to further understanding, so if you are interested in it then read another book on the murders (or watch one of the A&E documentaries on the subject). If you are familiar with the story, the film is likely not going to please from a story perspective.

I can’t help but think that Mr. Graysmith is not all that different from Jim Garrison. Garrison was obsessed with the JFK assassination and came very late to the party, if you will, and had a political axe to grind; this makes anything he writes suspect. Mr. Graysmith was more closely involved in the Zodiac mystery, but there is no escaping that he was still too intimately involved in the subject (not to forget totally obsessed by it) that if you read his book, keep in mind that it is likely more personal memoir than history (that is how the movie plays out).

Potential spoilers for those who have little to no knowledge of the story

The only truly good thing about the movie is the mood. The connection to Se7en is obvious at times—dingy yellow lighting in most homes, lengthy moments in claustrophobic settings. Zodiac lacked the true grime and visceral fear of Se7en but the nature of the film makes it a mystery not a thriller. And it isn’t much of a mystery.

There is a rather large contingent of A- list actors. Among those already listed are: Brian Cox, Chloe Sevigny, and Dermot Mulroney. The performances are decent but nothing beyond that. I can’t blame the actors here because they have little to work with. Ultimately, I think this story was just a poor choice by Mr. Fincher.

The story is one of obsession. Robert Graysmith becomes so involved in trying to solve the crime that at one point in the film he enlists the aid of his two sons in collating and cross-checking data (they are interested in it, but it is still a mark of just how obsessed the cartoonist is). In this way, it passes into the absurd. The only difference between this obsession and the one in A Beautiful Mind is that Mr. Graysmith doesn’t, in fact, have a beautiful mind and cannot fall back on schizophrenia to explain his issues.

Serial killer movies generally revolve around the who and why rather than just the who. Zodiac is like Jack the Ripper in that there are favorite suspects for many different people, but there is no definitive answer. As far as film is concerned, compare From Hell with Zodiac.

In From Hell, there is almost as much analysis into why Jack commits his murders as there is to the search for who he is. Since you do not know whodidit the film or novel can only rely on the search for so long before it becomes stupid, so you need to focus on motive and psychology—these facets must also be part of the general story because if you cannot determine a likely motive, then you can never really set up a list of suspects.

Zodiac is only about the hunt. There is almost no attention given to motive or the psychology of the killer. The police collect literally tons of paper and information on many suspects, but they never try to explain why the killer kills. The only ‘theory’ is that the killer wants media attention. So Zodiac lacks any compelling story to keep a viewer interested. There is only one moment of fear and it turns out to be a red herring in search of a better mystery/thriller.

If watching people falling apart due to obsession is among your interests, then this will not disappoint. If this is not true for you, then don’t bother, just watch Se7en again, or get it if you haven’t seen it already.


What did you think of this review?

Fun to Read
Post a Comment
More Zodiac (2007) reviews
review by . November 06, 2010
Zodiac – A killer undetermined yet we feel so satisfied
4 Stars out of 4      David Fincher's Zodiac is not about a killer but what surrounds a killer. Most of the film is addressed through nuanced, subtle, and ponderous banter about characters trying to connect-the-dots but always drawing square circles. The Zodiac Killer was a tease; he got what he wanted - infamy, power, and control - and regardless of his motives, he got away with his killings. Zodiac, therefore, punishes our expectations: we sit through this almost …
review by . March 16, 2011
I will probably get excessively noogied over the internet for saying this, but I didn't think Zodiac was all that great a movie. I tried really hard to like it, but I just didn't like it as much as I was assured I would. Don't get me wrong, I still liked it a bit, I just don't think it's worth all the eighties and nineties it's been getting on RT. I knew absolutely nothing about the case of the Zodiac Killer before viewing this film, but I found the case to be quite interesting …
review by . April 03, 2009
posted in Movie Hype
Pros: great pacing, good acting ensemble     Cons: none for me     The Bottom Line:   “We Shall Fear Nothing  Demand The Impossible  Dream Your Destiny  Defy The Logic Of Alphabets  I Slayed The King Of The Wolves  Nothing Is Impossible”  ~Wolfchild Speech     This was kind of like sending Clark Kent, without his alter ego, off to fight evildoers. You couldn’t …
review by . November 16, 2008
I watched a film today, oh boy   About a quiet man who wrote a book   And though the book did rather well   No one had time for laughs   They saw the photographs   Of people shot dead in their cars   They didn't know at first the killer's name   A group of letters soon appeared   He said he'd killed them all   Nobody was really sure if he was just leading them on     I saw a film today, …
review by . July 10, 2008
The SF Chronicle reported that DNA from saliva under a postage stamp has cleared Arthur Leigh Allen, the favorite suspect in San Francisco's most celebrated serial murder mystery. Artie Allen may or may not be gratified - he died, after all, twelve years ago - but I find the news disquieting. Though there's no reason for the cops to have my DNA on file, I've long been expecting suspicion to shine my way. The profile fits. I moved to the Bay Area in 1968, in time for the first killing at the pumping …
review by . January 09, 2008
posted in Movie Hype
ZODIAC is director David Fincher's finest film to date. All of the preparatory exercises in violence and horror he served so well in such films as FIGHT CLUB and SEVEN now are even more terrifying because of the manner in which he internalizes the events of the infamous Zodiac killer of the 1960s and 1970s and allows us to see how the murders and lack of proof of the perpetrator destroyed the personal lives of those bound to reveal Zodiac's identity. The story of course is true, as documented in …
review by . July 26, 2007
David Fincher knows how to go straight to the bone, whether that be by grisly effects or wearing down the psyches of his audience. In ZODIAC he traces the very long investigation of the serial killer in the 1960s and 1970s in the San Francisco area who was never found and has managed to mimic that interminably long yet fascinating exploration by taking close to 3 hours to unravel the bits and pieces of evidence that were to confound the police and the press alike. Based on the book by Robert Graysmith …
review by . July 24, 2007
posted in Movie Hype
There's nothing quite like a mystery. Lately, we have gotten a lot of films involving investigative puzzles. (`The Davinci Code,' `Inside Man,' and `National Treasure,' come to mind.) Such is the case with `Zodiac,' except this film is a true-to-life crime story about a serial killer who stalked victims in Vallejo and San Francisco, CA starting in 1969. It was unprecedented at the time because the police success rate was good until then, and the "Summer of Love" was a not-too-distant memory. Gripping …
About the reviewer
Paul Savage ()
Ranked #57
I name and describe everything and classify most things. If 'it' already had a name, the one I just gave it is better.
Consider the Source

Use Trust Points to see how much you can rely on this review.

Your ratings:
rate more to improve this
About this movie


Closer in spirit to a police procedural than a gory serial-killer flick, David Fincher'sZodiacprovides a sleek, armrest-gripping re-invention of the crime film. It surveys the investigation of the Zodiac killings that terrorized the San Francisco Bay area in the late -60-early -70s; Zodiac not only killed people, but cultivated a Jack the Ripper aura by sending icky letters to the newspapers and daring readers to solve coded messages. But the film's focus isn't on the killer. We follow the reporters and detectives whose lives are taken over by the case, notably an addictive crime writer (a sartorially splendid Robert Downey Jr.), an awkward editorial cartoonist (Jake Gyllenhaal), and a hard-working cop (Mark Ruffalo). Fincher and his brilliant cinematographer Harris Savides are deft at capturing the period feel of the city, without laying on the seventies kitsch, and James Vanderbilt's script doles out its big moments to major and minor characters alike. Fincher's confidence is infectious; the movie glides through its myriad details with such dexterity that even the blind alleys and red herrings seem essential. The well-chosen cast includes unexpected people popping up all over: Anthony Edwards as a lunch-bucket homicide cop; Charles Fleischer as a mysterious suspect; Elias Koteas and Donal Logue as small-town policemen whose districts are hit by Zodiac; Chloe Sevigny as Gyllenhaal's sweet-natured wife; Brian Cox as the media-friendly lawyer Melvin ...
view wiki


Director: David Fincher
DVD Release Date: January 8, 2008
Runtime: 157 minutes
Studio: Paramount
Polls with this movie
First to Review

""Methods to His Madness""
© 2014 Lunch.com, LLC All Rights Reserved
Lunch.com - Relevant reviews by real people.
This is you!
Ranked #
Last login
Member since