Zodiac: Review

Serial killer movies are often difficult to discern from one another, marred by the numerous entries of slasher flicks of the 80's. When one ends up feeling original and successful, it is often a case to take notice, a film that is simultaneously creepy and intelligent, traits that seemed to avoid the aforementioned horror films. Such is the case of Zodiac, David Fincher's newest concoction, one that eclipses all that he has done prior and stands as an effectively chilling and interesting examination of the murders that gripped the San Francisco metro area in the late 60's and early 70's. Fincher, who showed a great deal of promise throughout the mid to late 90's creating thrillers such as Se7en, The Game and Fight Club here displays a maturation into a more subtle form of filmmaking, devoid of the sensationalism that has plagued his previous efforts.

Zodiac takes place over the course of a decade, beginning in the late 60's and concluding in the late 70's, and charts the often times frustrating investigation into the mysterious and gruesome killings of at least five victims, possibly numbering dozens more. The murders, which were seemingly unrelated with the exception of the continuing stream of letters from the supposed suspect, paralyzed the city of San Francisco and its surrounding areas and in the process, dominated the thoughts and psyches of a number of people, determined to find the killer before he could strike again. As the police investigation falters, unable to determine the identity of the killer, the trail is picked up by Robert Graysmith (brilliantly played by Jake Gyllenhaal), who wrote the book upon which the film is based. Graysmith allows the case to consume his life and even as his marriage crashes to the ground, he continues with his overzealous pursuit of every conspiracy, convinced that they will end with the killer's identity. Since it is based on a true story, one in which the killer was not found, the film's ending may disappoint some but there is enough suggestion that there is some resolution.

The cast is universally good with each of its leads, Gyllenhaal, Robert Downey Jr. and Mark Ruffalo, stealing their scenes. Gyllenhaal is truly one of the more interesting talents today, unafraid of artistically ambitious yet commercially questionable features. His performance here is nothing short of wonderful. With each passing scene, his frustration with and devotion to the case grows unequivocally. The two seem to be linked for Graysmith as each wrong turn or false lead only drives him harder, provides more inspiration to determine the truth. Downey Jr., who continues a solid string of work with Kiss Kiss, Bang Bang, Good Night and Good Luck among others, once again proves why the public has stuck by him with such vigilance, despite his numerous run ins with the law. He possesses an undeniable charisma that effortlessly translates onto the screen, his character a frantic, confident reporter who gets swept up, much like Graysmith in the labyrinth that the case quickly becomes. Finally, Ruffalo, who has found recent success with Michel Gondry's sublime Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind and Michael Mann's Collateral, is stellar as David Toschi, the true life cop who (actually) taught Steve McQueen how to walk and talk like a cop for Bullitt. Toschi, whose integrity was called into question when it became unclear whether he had written some of the Zodiac letters, completes the trio of men who allow themselves to be consumed by the case and it is their inability to separate themselves from its sinister allure that drives the film.

It is that drive that may be lost on audiences. Zodiac is not focused so much on these murders, three of which are featured (all rather graphically), as it is on the effect that these murders had on both these individual men as well as the larger society. Much like 2006’s The Black Dahlia, which dealt with another unsolved killing, this film seems less concerned with scaring during the kill than the scares that happen as a result of the kill. Luckily, Zodiac never devolves into a cheap horror film, rather riding out its status as a solid thriller up until the closing credits. Many found The Black Dahlia to be a disappointment, a confusing mess that juggled a number of major characters without providing adequate emotions and motives for each, a result of a poor adaptation of a complex James Ellroy novel. While Zodiac is much more cohesive than Dahlia, it does suffer from its ambition, leaving characters off screen for major gaps of time while it focuses on another. When the characters are not on screen, they aren’t missed but when the character appears again, it is a bracing realization that they have been gone for so long and detracts from any suspense that may be building. It is a minor fault and quarrel with a film that is more often successful than not in its character development.

That’s not to say that this film doesn’t have style because it absolutely does. Shot using the Thomson Viper, the same camera that Michael Mann and Dion Beebe used to shoot both Collateral and Miami Vice, the images that Fincher conjures are crystal clear, not quite as breathtaking as Mann and Beebe’s work in the two aforementioned films but impressive none the less. Where as Mann mixed more traditional digital film with the HD Viper, Zodiac has the distinction of being the first film to be shot entirely on the Viper and if it’s a taste of what to come, audiences should be pleased. Say what you will about Fincher but he has always been a distinctly visual director his entire career, dating back to this work on Madonna’s music video for “Vogue”, and Zodiac ranks with his finest achievements. The 70’s style is efficient but never overbearing, allowing itself to set the stage for the film but never takes away from the narrative. I have to admit that I was skeptical about the use of digital film, scared it might take away from the magic that the warmth of film allows. However, through Mann and now Fincher’s work, I can wholeheartedly say that digital filmmaking is an important and necessary evolution that opens up new avenues for filmmakers. When used correctly, it is an artistic and technical breakthrough that will revolutionize cinema as we know it.

Zodiac clocks in at over 2 hours and 40 minutes and there are moments in the middle hour when it feels like its length. As the initial shock of the killings wear off and prior to the concluding revelations, there is the drag and frustration that the investigators went through. I’m convinced that Fincher purposefully made this area slow and methodical but it doesn’t change the fact that it’s difficult getting through. Once you hit the two hour mark though, buckle up and be prepared to be dazzled with masterful filmmaking that makes you wish the whole thing could be paced like that. It isn’t and it suffers as a result. As it stands, the film is an undeniable achievement, a visual marvel that looks deeply into the effects these killings have on the film’s characters, all of which are masterfully portrayed by some of the best actors of the day. Its admittedly slow, maybe too much so for some tastes but for those willing to sit through it, they will be amply rewarded by a creepy epic.

****