Zodiac (2007)
Review of Zodiac (2007), directed by David Fincher
I am completely and utterly convinced that this appeared in my Netflix recommendations because they’ve tracked my cookies. I watched this movie around the time in which a bunch of former FBI agents apparently found out who the Zodiac Killer is (a lot of high-up people are fighting this, however.
I just find it entertaining that if it’s somehow true, the guy who they named as the killer died in 2018, meaning he got to see movies and entertainment made about him). I then started reading a lot about the case and who the victims were of the Zodiac Killer. And when I logged onto Netflix for the first time since doing this research, my top recommend movie was Zodiac (2007). I don’t think it’s a coincidence.
Anyways, I was really bored, so I fell for the recommendation and sat down and actually watched it as a I did my freelance work for the day. And while I had read about the case, it felt like it made a lot more sense to unfold on the screen before me—that’s the power of movies.
They allow us to humanize something that happened decades ago just because we can associate an actor’s face with, say, a victim. I do think, however, making movies about serial killers, especially when they’re recent, can be a bit tactless to the victims and their families. Can’t imagine how it would feel a la In Cold Blood style (the surviving daughters of the murdered family depicted in that film were very against it being a film).
Anyways, let us begin the review, shall we?
The year is 1969 and the Zodiac Killer has begun their murdering spree.
Most Americans, if they’re familiar with crime in the states, know about the Zodiac Killer. A big part of this is the lore behind the killer, because he has not been caught and there’s so many theories about who they are and aren’t. And that’s what this movie feeds into: the mystery of who exactly the Zodiac Killer is.
While certain facts are omitted and history is rewritten in the narrative, we get this same feeling of suspense, although with more urgency as this is the seventies and the killer seems to be striking everywhere you look.
This manifests in Jake Gyllenhaal’s character, who corresponds with the real-life Robert Graysmith. Originally a political cartoonist for the San Francisco Chronicle, the film slowly shifts so he becomes the real protagonist. It’s a subtle technique, because at the beginning of the movie we don’t get a lot from his as a character.
We see him worried for his kid, especially after the killer threatens to shoot up a bus full of kiddies. But Graysmith becomes more and more obsessed with the case, eventually losing two of his marriages, and basically devotes his life to finding the Zodiac. The last portion of the film is his journey to finding out who he thinks the killer is.
Many have described this film as focused, which I tend to agree with. The story is told plainly with little or no surprises; it unfolds naturally in a way that straight-up tells the brutal facts.
Even though many of us know the details behind the story—that the Killer has never been confirmed—we are still left at the edges of our seats, wondering when and how the killer will be found. You cheer as you think there’s a breakthrough, only to wallow in disappointment. Yet, deep down, you’re already aware of what’s going on. But that’s brilliant filmmaking to bring you into this world and suck you in to the point where you leave reality behind.
There’s also a strange mixing on genre that surprisingly works well. This is a film about a series of crimes, but it’s juxtaposed as a police drama along with a newspaper drama.
We have the police investigating the case, then we have the newspaper with Robert Downey Jr's character being the journalist being threatened as he publishes the Zodiac’s letters and investigates the killer, and then we have the random newspaper political cartoonist (Graysmith) going rogue and deciding to solve the case himself.
The killings also literally occur in the first half of the film. Then they go radio silent. But they live on and continue through the obsession of trying to crack the case, which is brilliant in how the tension is set up to still be there. The murderer has gone quiet and is no longer doing his thing, but we’re still obsessed with him. And it’s this obsession that lives on today, even after the killer may have died. We still don’t know in 2007, or conclusively in 2021, who the killer is.
Overall Thoughts
It’s a good film. I will admit, it wasn’t my cup of tea when it comes to genre and content, but it was a very good film when it comes to technique and narrative storytelling. I wasn’t bored during in and I felt like it kept my attention in a way that had me looking away from my other tasks I was doing at the time.
I think that each actor really owned their character to the point where I believed it, especially since some of them got to consult with the actual person they were playing (the ones who hadn’t died yet at the time).
All in all, great performances and solid film. Watch it even if you’re vaguely interested in the plot.
