In the late 1960s/early 1970s, a San Francisco cartoonist becomes an amateur detective obsessed with tracking down the Zodiac Killer, an unidentified individual who terrorizes Northern California with a killing spree.
Harvard student Mark Zuckerberg creates the social networking site that would become known as Facebook, but is later sued by two brothers who claimed he stole their idea, and the co-founder who was later squeezed out of the business.
A serial killer in the San Francisco Bay Area taunts police with his letters and cryptic messages. We follow the investigators and reporters in this lightly fictionalized account of the true 1970's case as they search for the murderer, becoming obsessed with the case. Based on Robert Graysmith's book, the movie's focus is the lives and careers of the detectives and newspaper people.Written by
In the lobby where the screening of Dirty Harry (1971) is taking place, is a full length standee of Clint Eastwood. While Eastwood's stance is exactly the same as the original 1971 standee for the film, in this version he is pointing his famous .44 Magnum downwards whereas in the original he is pointing the pistol outwards at a horizontal level. See more »
(at around 24 mins) The taxi driver picks up his murderer on Geary St. in the theatre district. As the camera follows overhead, trolleybus power lines are visible. However, Geary St. did not have trolleybuses, so the power lines are appear in error. The 38 Geary bus route, one of the longest in San Francisco, was always a diesel route. See more »
Closing disclaimer: This film is based upon Robert Graysmith's books "Zodiac" and "Zodiac Unmasked", actual historical events and public records. Dialogue and certain events and characters contained in the film were created for the purposes of dramatization. See more »
The end credits of the Director's Cut has a more detailed final cast listing. It properly credits many of the actors who were inexplicably left uncredited in the theatrical cut. However, Ione Skye's cameo as Kathleen Johns remains uncredited even in the Director's Cut. See more »
I am tired of people writing comments like this, "Not Fincher's best". Honestly who cares. We all agree that Fincher's best is either Seven or Fight Club, two outstanding masterpieces. There is a big margin between a film like one of those and a terrible film, and people don't seem to realize that. These people even do this with other filmmakers like Spielberg or Scorsese, the fact that these filmmakers don't reproduce Schindler's List or Raging Bull doesn't mean that their new stuff isn't good, or worth seeing. I think it is a stupid way to comment on a film, eliminating the critic's credibility. I was lucky enough to catch an advanced screening of Zodiac last night, and I must say that at first I was discouraged by two things, some of the comments I have read and the running time. However I am glad to say that I enjoyed this film, very much. It is a solid suspense thriller that pins you to your seat. Being a true story adds quite a lot to the experience, and besides, Fincher did a wonderful job is staying loyal to the story and at the same time adding his unique flavor to it. The cinematography, like every Fincher film, is great, the darkness and griddiness of the story are perfectly portrayed in the film's visual elements. I was surprised by the picture quality of the Viper, the digital camera with which this film was shot. Many people have been criticizing this choice, but I respect it, he is embracing a new technology and making it work. Of course its still not a match to 35 mm, but if quality filmmakers don't start experimenting with it, it will never be. Now the reason why this film falls behind Seven and Fight Club, I think, is because of a problem with the characters. They seem to be a little weak at times. The performances were great, especially Robert Downey Jr., but I think that this film falls short, when it comes to a true exploration of complex characters, which is the key to Fincher's previous films.
So... my advice to everyone is to ignore most of the negative comments and see the film yourself. I found it to be a great story told in a remarkable way, very entertaining, with great performances, and wonderful direction.
377 of 539 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?
| Report this