Zodiac is a 2007 film based on the real life Zodiac killing that happened in the late 1960’s. Directed by David Fincher, and starring Jake Gyllenhaal, Mark Ruffalo and Robert Downey, Jr, the film will take you through the investigation process that happened during that time, as well as viewing the Zodiac killer’s murders, through the eyes of an invisible bystander. The entire film is well made, but ends up being too long and dull to want to finish. If you know how the Zodiac case went in real life, the film closely follows that sequence, including an inconclusive ending.
That ending was not the only thing that was wrong with Zodiac. After about half way through, the main threat of the movie disappears, this removes any tension or excitment from the film. At that point, it ceases to be interesting enough to maintain the audience’s attention, and instead becomes boring. At that point, Robert Graysmith (Gyllenhaal), a political cartoonist, begins his own investigation into the Zodiac killings. The film is highly centered on dialogue, as the actual action on screen if often times very lax. Sure, the film opens with a very exciting scene, and for the first hour manages to keep that energy up. The two and a half hour film slowly runs out of steam, despite very good acting by the two of the three main actors.
The majority of the film is carried by Jake Gyllenhaal and Mark Ruffalo, with Robert Downey Jr. thrown in every now and then. For the most part, the acting is above average, and that is a very good thing. Without above average acting, Zodiac would have been even more boring, especially during the second half. Ruffalo plays a police detective, who ends up working on the Zodiac case for years, before seemingly giving up. Gyllenhaal ends up re-invigorating the case later on in the film, and attempts to keep things moderately interesting. Downey Jr. plays a reporter for The Chronicle, who seems to be working on the Zodiac case solely for his own purposes. He is one of the more prominent actors for the first half of the film, yet takes a convenient hiatus for the second half. He was the most interesting character as well, so that disappearance coupled with the murders being halted really slows down the film’s pace.
The plot, while an accurate depiction of the actual Zodiac killings, jumps from point to point too often for the timeline to even matter. During the course of the film, the story will jump ahead in time over and over again. Each time it does this, a title slide will appear letting the viewer know how far ahead we are this time. After a certain point, they don’t matter anymore, and might as well say “In the future”. These jumps ahead make you get lost a little bit, especially if you are trying to remember each date, thinking it’ll help you later on in the film. Here’s some advice; don’t try. Just ignore the cards, and just remember you are ahead in time. You will likely have a slightly better experience. The soundtrack does attempt to add in the element of suspense, especially when the main characters take any risk, and that was a nice touch to see. People say that a good soundtrack is one that you don’t notice, but in this case, you notice it, and it is good.
To put it bluntly, Zodiac doesn’t really focus on the Zodiac killer. The main point of the film is one man’s determination to catch the murderer. While the audience is expected to understand the reasoning behind this quest, it never is really explained. There is even a scene where Gyllenhaal’s motives are questioned, and his basic response is “Because I have to”. This does not help the audience connect with the character, nor make them want to see him succeed. The reason you do want to see him succeed, is due to the killer’s identity always being in question. That is something that you would want to know from watching a trailer, or even the first scene of the film though, so the protagonist’s determination is not the driving force in this desire.
Zodiac is a film that started out with an interesting idea, a lot of steam, yet ended up having to grind out about another hour of screen time for little reason. The first half of the film was well done, with there being an actual menace in it, but loses steam after this threat no longer is threatening. Gyllenhaal, while not being great, manages to do a decent job carrying the majority of the film, but seems out of his league when compared to Ruffalo and Downey Jr. Ultimately, the film ends up being dull, and even once you go through that dull period to get to the conclusion, it is not ever concluded. It stuck as close to the actual scenario as it could, and that hampers it in the end. It could have been more exciting had it deviated from the already pre-established plot. The production, acting, and soundtrack are all there, but the narrative was too boring to want to continue to watch.
I believe that this was yet another David Fincher MASTERPIECE with all of the elements signature to his style. The opening credits were spectacular, something we’ve come to expect from the seasoned director, and his portrayal of a relatively overdone topic was fresh, new, and interesting, in my opinion. He took the idea of doing a movie based on true events surrounding a serial killer (Black Dahlia, Ed Gein, Monster, Helter Skelter, Boston Strangler, etc) and gave the idea a new approach. He delved into the minds of the investigators and the drama in the lives of those people, instead of making the movie cliche, like making it a horror/ thriller or about the life of the serial killer him/ herself. I thought it was poignant and thoughtful, as well as interesting and intelligent. All of these things we hold Fincher in high esteem for. And his cinematographer is a fellow music video guy, Harris Savides, whose sharp, clean imagery intensifies the watching experience. Savides is not new to quality film, either; his works include American Gangster, Last Days, and Birth. So, everything was very crisp to the eye, and sharpened the mind as well. A very intellectual and thought-provoking film.