By Tina Alexander
Genre: Thriller and Crime/Gangster
MPAA Rating:
R
Distributors:
Warner Bros. Pictures International, Paramount Picture
Year: 2007
Web
HISHE

Previous Reviews
Zodiac

 The film Zodiac is based on a book written by Robert Graysmith, who is also a main character in the movie played by Jake Gyllenhaal.  While it was an interesting and well made film, it left something to be desired from the excellent director David Fincher. 

 This movie has a very different look and feel from every other Fincher film.  That’s not necessarily disappointing, just different.  However the story is not as tight or tricky as his other films either and that does seem a little disappointing.  Basically, if you’re coming to see a wicked Fincher film like The Game or Fight Club…you are not going to get what you expect.

 Perhaps it’s the subject matter.  The first 30-45 minutes of the film are fairly violent but then, parallel with the real story, the killings stop.  What really made the Zodiac Killer so intriguing is that he was never brought to justice and made a lot of people obsessed over several decades.  It’s that destruction that the film focuses on…and for almost 3 hours!  The preview audience did seem involved in the movie until the end though, and everyone was very chatty walking out of the theater.

 So How Does It End?

 Well, the Zodiac Killer is never caught.  Hopefully you have this knowledge when you go to see the movie, or you might feel like you invested 3 hours for nothing.  I was curious how they were going to end it (and for awhile if they were going to end it J).  Basically Graysmith (Gyllenhaal) is convinced that the identity of Zodiac is Arthur Leigh Allen, which is somewhat satisfying even though they can’t prove it.  Amazingly we also get 3 screens full of text to explain that most of the murders are still open cases and where everyone is today.

  

This is an interesting film and definitely worth the rental if you enjoy true crime stories.  Unfortunately as a Fincher film I found it a little disappointing and lacking his usual intrigue.  I give it 3 out of 5.