I may be the only one, but I'm pumped about this Friday's release of the movie Zodiac.
First, I'm a huge true crime fan. I've read books about almost every significant serial killer out there. But the book that this movie is based on is the one that got me into it. Robert Graysmith is the author, and the book, Zodiac, and it's sequal, Zodiac Unmasked, are two of the bestselling books in the history of the genre. I've actually read the original more then once, and have read pretty much everything of value that can be gotten without too much work.
Surprisingly, the reviews have been good so far. I say surprisingly, because over the years, the books have been proven to be wrought with at best inconsistencies, and at worst, flat out lies. Seeing as the case has never been solved, I also figured it would be difficult to make a movie for which there can be no resolution.
However, it is directed by the very talented David Fincher (Seven) in a subject that should be in his wheelhouse. It also has a capable cast including Robert Downey Jr. and Jake Gyllenhall. I guess it shouldn't be too surprising the reviews have been good. There's even one out there claiming it harkens back to the large ensemble character driven dramas of the 70s, even envoking thoughts of The Godfather.
Just saw an advance screening of this. I'm a big fan of David Fincher and this movie was a definite departure from his visual style. It was shot in HD with the Thomson Viper, which looked absolutely beautiful. It was an amazingly well-structured story considering it was based entirely on case materials. It's about two and a half hours long and I didn't think the story picked up enough until the last half hour or so, but it was worth it in the end. I was disappointed to see such a "normal" movie come from Fincher, but I recognize and appreciate that the subject matter wouldn't have been appropriate for the grittiness and chaos that he usually injects into his storytelling. The acting was all very good, especially Robert Downey Jr., and the scenes were realistic enough to make me feel like I was watching a documentary re-enactment of actual events, but dramatic enough to keep me interested and entertained.
Not quite on the same level as Fight Club or Se7en (his two best films, in my opinion), but for what he had to work with, I think he did a superb job, and I continue to look forward to his future work. I think that rabid fans of Fincher's style will be disappointed, but anyone who appreciates an interesting and engaging story that is well-told won't be.
That sort of reinforces all my concerns but heightens my expectations at the same time. I'm curious to see if my knowledge of the subject affects my view. I'm sure it will, I'm just not sure in which direction.
Saw it last night. Pretty happy with it. Especially considering how much I knew about the topic going in.
Very well done. The frantic quality Graysmith gets as the movie goes on can really be read in his book. It felt like a cross between "All The Presidents Men", with the newspaper setting and all, and Silence of the Lambs, due to the creepy investegatory atmosphere.