I was in high school when I saw the last twenty minutes of a cable TV special (I think it was on HBO) about serial killers. This final segment of the show was devoted to California's Zodiac killer, which I thought was fascinating. I had no idea anyone had written a book about Zodiac until ten years later in 1988 when I saw Robert Graysmith's book in a used bookstore in Memphis (where I lived at the time). I took it home and read it in one night. I also didn't get much sleep that night.
Ever since then I'd hoped that one day someone would put together a good movie about Zodiac. Could David Fincher's new Zodiac be that film?
Zodiac is more a spotlight on police procedures than a conventional horror or thriller film. Don't get me wrong, there's plenty of suspense and tension, but much of it is sustained through the characters - the police, the newspapermen, the families, the surviving victims - and the passage of time as the Zodiac manhunt progresses. Critic Richard Roeper said it's like looking at Silence of the Lambs through the eyes of Scott Glenn's FBI character. Procedure is a big part of Zodiac and it's handled smartly.
One of the reasons Zodiac works so well is that Fincher knows what not to do. He doesn't spend too much time on the crimes themselves. (Many of them don't even occur onscreen.) He doesn't have the killer make long, stupid speeches or show some crazed nutcase pouring over plans in his basement at 3:00AM. The audience pretty much learns what the police/journalists learn as it happens.
Of course the problem with this is - unless you're new to the story - you know what's going to happen. But knowledge of the case did not hinder my enjoyment of the film one bit. In fact, I was impressed with how closely the film followed the book.
There's a lot to like about Fincher's version. The film is nearly three hours long but never seems like it. The acting is excellent. I can't stand Robert Downey, Jr., but I have to admit his performance is superb. (And Gyllenhaal is quite good too.) And the attention to period detail must have been painstaking.
Don't be surprised if you read several negative reviews of the film. I think that comes from Fincher fans expecting to see another Se7en or Fight Club. Those are different films and it's unfair to compare Zodiac to them. Zodiac focuses on a different kind of fear, a different type of terror. What Fincher does so well is show that those who were attacked by Zodiac were not the only victims. The slow grind of seeking information, of following dead ends, even of looking over your shoulder when you get into your car at night --- all of these things add up and affect the characters and their families. It's fascinating to see how one crazed maniac could cause such widespread fear and how people react to it. Fincher knows this and knows how to convey it.
4 comments:
I hate Fincher and all his works.
He seems to believe in a malevolent universe, in which human beings are helpless children, manipulated by unstoppable evil forces. Heroism is impossible and pointless. Intelligent, principled action is useless and pointless.
I believe that is immature, self-indulgent nonsense.
I hated how Fincher vandalized the Alien franchise.
I thought that Fight Club was a pack of lies. The liberating effect of violence? Utter bullshit. Come to my ER, Mr. Sophisticated Film Director, and I'll show you the effect of interpersonal violence. It's not pretty, it's not romantic, it's not liberating. It's just a bunch of drunken, emotionally immature idiots pounding on each other. I despise Fight Club's admiration of Theodore Kaczynski's romantic agrarianism through violence.
Fight Club is a morally bankrupt film.
I certainly respect your opinion, John, especially in light of the aftermath and consequences of violence you see at work on a daily basis. And I share your thoughts on Fight Club. You're talking to someone who thought the film was quite disturbing, one I won't watch again. I have not read the novel, but I have to believe that based on some of his other works I have read, part of your criticism should be directed at Palahniuk.
And I agree with your assessment of Fincher's take on Alien.
But you said you hate Fincher and all his works, yet only mentioned two. Maybe you've seen more – The Game, Panic Room, Se7en, etc. And if you've seen those and found them offensive, I truly believe you would see something different in Zodiac.
A seemingly unstoppable evil force is at work here, but Zodiac shows that heroism is not impossible or pointless. Yet it also shows (which many current films do not) that heroism sometimes carries a high price for both the hero and those in his corner. That's what makes the crimes even more heinous: not only do the victims suffer, but so also do the journalists, police detectives and the families associated with them all. The psychological and emotional destruction caused by Zodiac never seems to stop in the lives of the characters and I think showing this is one of Fincher's goals. He's not so much trying to convey that we live in a morally bankrupt world, but that there are people dedicated to catching madmen like Zodiac. These are the heroes of the film, not Zodiac. But again, being a hero carries a price.
Yes, Zodiac is morally corrupt to the core and the film only hints at the reasons and motivations (although they're clearly spelled out in the book). But Zodiac is never glorified by Fincher. Just the opposite. Zodiac is clever, but not someone you would in any way admire. Zodiac is only onscreen in a few scenes and although three of the killings are shown, the violence is not in any way glorified. Fincher could have made the violence much more graphic. In fact, I was quite surprised by his level of restraint.
I can understand, John, how Fincher's previous films may have set up an expectation that you're going to get another Fight Club or Se7en, but what he delivers with Zodiac is far different from his other work that I've seen.
I have seen Se7en, and while I admired Fincher's film-making abilities, I didn't like the film. Haven't seen Panic Room. It got mediocre reviews. I hadn't realized it was by Fincher.
Post a Comment