Zodiac

More than two and a half hours of spellbinding precision filmmaking, from the flawless evocation of the atmosphere of the 1960s and 70s, for which I have a soft spot, to the inventively staged Zodiac murders, where Fincher, with one exception, avoids explicit violence (and yet gave me chills like I hadn’t felt in a long time), to the pleasure of watching great actors. And if I were a manufacturer of "drinks for a slim line" with a professional deformity, I would gladly exclaim: “And zero clichés!!!” Undoubtedly the most entertaining conversational film in recent years and a treasure for all those whose first priority is the story and only then the flashy tinsel, so typical of recent films. And certainly a disappointment for those who like crime movies with everything presented on a golden platter like in Columbo. Acting-wise, I was very surprised by the great Mark Ruffalo, but everyone is rocked by Jake Gyllenhaal, whose enthusiastic, headstrong character, driven by a desire to "I need to know who he is", is one of the most likeable in recent years for me. And I think the best audience marker for this non-mainstream and boldly narrative film for our times is the fact that after it was over, I had a terrible urge to read Graysmith's book and learn more about the phenomenon called the Zodiac Killer. Not since at least Stone's JFK has there been a film with an investigative theme this good. Bravo, Mr Fincher!!! PS: The comparisons with Se7en are stupid! Fincher has made a distinctive work, and he didn't set out to create some silly clone. (17/07/2007)

David Fincher is simply incapable of making a bad film. Zodiac is not the most typical example of his work, and won’t become my favourite, but it’s still a very well made movie. (17/08/2008)

It’s long, but not long-winded. There are conversations, but it’s not chatty. Fincher is a genius at letting actors stand in front of the camera for two and a half hours and talk about a single subject. However, without a single directorial excess, with only the stylish atmosphere of the 1960s - 1980s span and a very austere Zodiac rampage, the film keeps a steady pace throughout the runtime, and the viewer eventually gets the feeling that the biggest action consists of copying ciphered letters or writing Graysmith's book. Given his previous work, this is a 180° turn, and yet it proves all the more that Fincher's range of skills still offers (especially in the future) many pleasant surprises for the audience. (21/07/2007)

A captivating mosaic of facts that lacks the limiting features of the thriller genre and literally redeems the viewer in one of the most mysterious cases of forensic history. The only thing I would criticize is the long runtime; otherwise I liked everything essential – the stylization, music, acting, conception of the characters. Zodiac is simply a very unconventional look at an attractive substance, which most directors would turn into a thrilling idyll with an ending, where the killer gets it in the chest and it’s over. Fortunately, Fincher stuck to the facts and created a documentary, a civil and somewhat of a retro spectacle that I personally truly enjoyed. If you are expecting something attractive in the style of Seven, you are better off not going to the movie theatre. (14/06/2007)

"There's more than one way to lose your life to a killer". It’s been a long time since a movie has had such a fitting slogan. Zodiac is something completely different to your regular mystery thriller. The classic thriller scheme creates a space for the characters involved with the investigation and their obsession with their detective work, with attention to catastrophic consequences that this line of work inevitably has on them and those around them. You just can’t help comparing Zodiac to the South Korean Memories of Murder. Which is a bit of a paradox, since the latter at that time was presented somewhat disrespectfully and inaccurately as a dark thriller in the style of Se7en. And nothing could be further from the truth. Zodiac is crying out to be compared to that Asian picture; they are extremely similar to each other in some ways. Despite the intelligent and interesting screenplay (even for those who are familiar with this particular case), tight production design, perfect stylization and absolutely convincing actors, in the end the atmosphere is the strongest ace up Fincher’s sleeve. He manages to wring a thick atmosphere out of every scene, so you don’t even notice that you have been watching three hours of dialog… P.S.: In collaboration with Vanderbilt, Fincher proves again that he is a master of “unfilmable" adaptations. Here, they succeeded with flying colors. They made a movie is a even better (and more relevant) than Graysmith’s book. (08/06/2007)

Fincher is simply good, and his version of the investigation of the legendary murder series in the American West, whose perpetrator yearned for fame and manipulated the media, has undeniable tension, a long runtime, a good pace, and I hardly find any weaknesses to criticize Fincher for. For me, Zodiac holds a higher place than the artificial cult thriller Seven. Perhaps only due to the enormous amount of facts, evidence, characters, and witness statements that Fincher tried to fit into his film, making it difficult for the viewer to orient themselves. In the end, I am inclined to give it only 4 stars. Most importantly, Fincher shows a clear distinction between the fictional world of crime stories and detective tales and the grim reality where investigators are confronted with poor resources, incompetence of superiors, stupidity, and the sensationalism of many pseudo-witnesses. On the other hand, they are required to irrefutably prove the guilt of a suspect based on evidence, so that the jury cannot acquit them. Overall impression: 85%. By the way, in two scenes where he deviates from the documentary style toward thriller tension, the director demonstrates his expertise. The scene with the mother in the car on the night highway and, above all, the visit to the old projectionist and the joint trip to the underground spaces of the house have genuine horror tension and atmosphere. (18/11/2012)

I tip my hat. David Fincher proves once again that he is one of the best. I haven't seen such an atmospheric crime detective story since Se7en. Great directing, excellent acting and an outstanding screenplay make Zodiac one of the best films of the year. An EXCELLENT soundtrack, by the way. And I'm not huge a fan of '70s music. (18/07/2007)

Not nearly as progressive and daring as one would expect from the David Fincher. After several visually brilliant downers, he puts us to sleep in a perfectly balanced and “cinematic” film about a mass murderer, where there are very few murders, but a lot of talking, and just the right amount of atmosphere. The plot is linear and not at all complicated, which is truly a miracle, because with similarly executed films, you usually lose track of the names appearing on the screen after just a few minutes due to the director’s incompetence. But here it's different, everything is clear, we know what is happening, we know how it's happening, we just don't know who the real killer is. Several scenes are expertly escalated and fantastically performed, but several shots are like an eyesore (incredibly obvious and awkwardly styled digital shots of the city, inappropriate to the atmosphere of the 1970s). And so the film essentially just mumbles, and the viewer goes on their way. It's a nice watch, but too long and not dynamic enough. It certainly can't be considered a textbook film. (04/02/2008)

Fincher is a master of atmosphere, no doubt about it. I enjoyed Zodiac exactly the way I was supposed to... But if I hadn't read the book, a lot of things would probably have remained a mystery to me, and the film might have seemed too muddled and maybe even boring, for all I know. Fortunately, I did read it. Five stars for a perfect transfer from paper to filmstrip. (05/06/2010)

A fascinating deconstruction of a procedural detective investigation that manipulates with the expectations of the viewer in the same way the “elusive” killer plays with the characters. Fincher is again very impersonal, using the heroes like moving filters of information that shift the attention of the viewer whenever there is some clear progress, only to negate it a moment later and subject them to further filtering. As with all his other films, in Zodiac Fincher does not dwell on redundant scenes to generate atmosphere (perhaps only when they follow the taxi, which represents the overall detachment), but drops one morsel of information after another and confidently alternates the chronological space-time, but does it in a spirit of continuity so, despite omitting those redundant scenes and thanks to the clarifying titles, we always know who is acting, why and where (usually speaking). The first act takes place largely in a newsroom and is more or less focused on a killer who provides limited clues, but it gradually goes on to alternate between the investigators Toschi and Graysmith, who drastically narrow the circle of suspects, repeatedly giving the impression that they are about to catch the perpetrator, while the viewer becomes concerned about the case-obsessed characters who receive personal letters or anonymous calls from Zodiac. By the end, the only investigator remaining is caricaturist and innocent boy-scout Graysmith, whose obsession has become almost paranoia, which the viewer also feels thanks to the growing frustration and the constant rewrite of the evidence, therefore perfectly covering Fincher’s depressive clash of good vs evil and increasing the tension, culminating in the scene in the cellar, where you can hardly catch your breath (because the suspect can now be basically anyone). What’s more, the ending doesn’t release the viewer, it leaves them with more questions than answers, something both the viewer and the characters have been struggling with throughout the story. Zodiac is an uncompromising alternative to the detective genre that refuses to provide satisfaction and whose antagonist inflicts blows not only to his victims, but also to the system as a whole and to everyone moving within it who watches the news, reads newspapers and listens to the radio (three media that are an important element of communication). A masterfully directed and acted two and a half hour long delight for cinephiles. 95% (24/03/2020)

Zodiac has only one thing in common with Se7en, and that's that I could dissect both films scene by scene like a rather large book. If the former is harmed in anything by its longer running time, it's because by the finale you may have forgotten how the scenes at the beginning were handled. There are things that don't sit well with me. I was sorry to see the departure of Fincher's previous court cinematographer Darius Khondji and the leaning towards digital, and somehow I kept repeating in my head that if I had to take a shot anytime someone sits on someone else's desk, I'd be shit-faced after an hour. But I'm willing to forgive a lot of things here. When else have you seen a crime drama that ends in failure after an hour and a half, and then the next hour just deepens the frustration of that failure? A truly patient ode to obsession, even if it is crowned with unfulfillment. If you pay attention though, you'll enjoy most of the scenes with all their detail and well fleshed-out characters (note what they eat, what they pick out of their food, what they smoke, on what occasions, etc. etc.). Fincher's attempt to achieve objective truth through dramatization worked. The viewer will feel incomplete at the end, as do the protagonists. But the film Zodiac itself couldn't be more complete. (10/03/2011)

Zodiac is definitely not a "typical Fincher film", but instead a masterfully constructed whodunit, in which David Fincher dispensed with his exhibitionist ways (which I love otherwise, of course) and kept the whole thing (by his standards) quite civil. The story itself sees to the tension and the stiffening of the blood in the veins, which is also excellently developed by the storyline of his own obsession and the gradually consuming and self-destructive desire to discover the truth. (01/11/2010)