Rate ZODIAC

[abcdefz]

....curious to see what people will think of this.

I think Fincher's got a hell of a lot of talent but he's really hit or miss; sometimes hit AND miss.

I'll probably see this tomorrow, but I'm sure some folks will see it today. Or maybe have already seen it?

Whadja think?

[kll]

I just read a review of it on msn and they gave it a 5 out of 5 stars.

[Freebasser]

Not "The Zodiacs"?

[abcdefz]

I just read a review of it on msn and they gave it a 5 out of 5 stars.


Some people get into the open-ended, endless procedural dead-end aspect, and some people seem to be driven to distraction by it. We shall see. I bet that if it were a foreign film, people wouldn't come in with that sort of I-want-a-thriller baggage.



Not "The Zodiacs"?


Something called The Zodiac came out maybe a year ago... Is that what you mean?

[icy manipulator]

is this a movie, or the general idea of horoscopes? being an a-z thread i'm guessing its a movie, so fucked if i know. but, the quantum physics student in me is saying if you believe in the stars and the zodiac you're a fucking retard

[kll]

Not "The Zodiacs"?
smartass

[ericlee]

Has this movie been made about 3 times already? Not the same movie but you know, same cases.

I'd like to see it and read the book afterwards.

[Freebasser]

Something called The Zodiac came out maybe a year ago... Is that what you mean?

Nah, hehe, I was referring to a rather amusing thread in Beastie General earlier today. The admins erased it from history though :/

smartass

;)

[abcdefz]

Nah, hehe, I was referring to a rather amusing thread in Beastie General earlier today. The admins erased it from history though :/





Ah.

Well, there was another movie about the Zodiac killer released about a year ago. That one was The Zodiac. This one is just Zodiac.



Has this movie been made about 3 times already? Not the same movie but you know, same cases.

I'd like to see it and read the book afterwards.


Yeah -- four movies, now, if you count Dirty Harry.

Kind of creepy to know that he might be alive, maybe in the audience opening weekend. Hopefully it doesn't prompt anyone to action, Zodiac or not.

[Yorkshire~Rose]

I am really looking forward to seeing it. It's not out until 20 April here though.

[abcdefz]

Well, I saw ZODIAC Saturday. Liked it quite a bit.

The cast is really good. The murders -- particularly one in daylight by a lake -- were pretty horrifying. The attack at the lake made me get all clenched up -- it's really awful.

It does run a little long, since after about 40 minutes it's all investigation and leads and things being rebuffed. Supposedly, it's all done with great attention to detail (though why there's a 1980 calendar clearly displayed in a 1983 scene, I have no idea); if everything went down the way it did in the movie, it seems pretty clear who Zodiac was. It's just so much circumstantial evidence, but what's there is pretty damning.

This is easily the best thing Fincher's done. Fight Club is much more inventive, but I think it's pretty repugnant. Seven is a sham, Panic Room was meh, The Game was all right, Alien 3 sucked.

[abcdefz]

Have you ever seen You Can Count on Me? He was AMAZING in that.

[abcdefz]

Yeah, I don't know about that stuff, but you should rent You Can Count on Me. Ruffalo, Laura Linney, one of the Culkins who can act... funny, funny movie.

Ruffalo is a wayward brother who comes home to his sister and her son (their parents died when they were kids), and basically things are falling apart and this gives him a chance to regroup. Sounds more grim than it is. Anyway, he's like a young Brando in it, but not in some poseur way. The main four actors are fantastic.

Matthew Broderick's in it, too, and he's pretty good. The movie was one of the two or three best that year. Great, great funny heartbreaking brother/sister movie.

[cookiepuss]

I saw it this weekend too and really enjoyed it.
a few things I did not know...one of the murders took place in the exact spot that my boyfriend goes fishing at on a regluar basis (creepy)
and the man that they beleived to be the primary suspect lived in a trailer park right here in my home town right around the year I was born!:eek:

I also thought it had a good cast...Ione Sky was a total surprise.

Skye said Mark ruffalo = hot and I agree.

[abcdefz]

I saw it this weekend too and really enjoyed it.
a few things I did not know...one of the murders took place in the exact spot that my boyfriend goes fishing at on a regluar basis (creepy)
and the man that they beleived to be the primary suspect lived in a trailer park right here in my home town right around the year I was born!:eek:




Yeek.

[Documad]

I enjoyed the movie. All of the actors were great and it wasn't distracting even though many of them were recognizable. Did the reporters and police detectives really attend the same showing of Dirty Harry? That seems too weird to be true.

[saz]

although the production values and acting were terrific, the movie is 100% bullshit and is based on robert graysmith's book about the zodiac killer, in which he made things up. the most glaring error with this film, and graysmith's book, is that they perpuate the notion that arthur leigh allen was the zodiac killer. not only did dna analysis and testing, fingerprints, and a lie detector test complete rule allen out as the killer, but allen simply did not match the physical description of the killer (http://www.forensicartist.com/history/zodiac-killer-sketch.jpg): the killer was tall, fit, wore thick-rimmed glasses and had a crewcut. allen meanwhile was a fat, burly, and bald. local, state, and federal law enforcement also suspected that the killer had previous intelligence and military training. allen was not a trained military intelligence officer. allen was also a convicted pedophile, and all of the zodiac's victims were not touched, fondled, or abused in that manner. allen was hounded by the media after the release of graysmith's book, and vehemently refused that he was the killer to the day he died. also, fincher conveniently did not include the physical description, or police composite of the killer in his film.

fincher's movie started off good, but after the first forty-five minutes or so, it turned into a really boring, contrived, robert graysmith hero wank fest. graysmith's book, and fincher's movie portray him as some sort of naturally advanced investigator, who uncovered all sorts of clues and leads about the case, crimes and killer, which graysmith simply made up in this book. he was nothing more than a cartoonist and extremely amateur sleuth, who aggrandized himself in his book, with fincher's movie continuing the lies.

2005's 'the zodiac' (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u8KPw95bkNQ) was much better. i highly recommend it over fincher's propaganda. sure, it didn't have the great production values as fincher's film, but the film really focussed on the zodiac, displaying his intelligence, criminal genius and sick cold blooded nature. the filmmakers also understood that the killer wasn't insane, but was a cold, methodical, and calculating killer. it also really conveyed the mood, feel, and atmosphere of that time period, and particularly the terror that the residents of the bay area felt during those years.

[Documad]

I don't think that you and I agree on anything regarding movies. :p

I don't care about the true story at all, I just judged it as a movie. But if I saw a movie about something I know a lot about and if it was completely wrong on the facts, I'm sure I wouldn't enjoy it either. I sort of felt that way about the John Lennon movie, because the movie made it look like Lennon had some kind of impact on ending the Vietnam War and of course he didn't. :rolleyes:

It's usually the lawyer movies that get to me. That John Travolta movie (A Civil Action) bugged me because the main character is such a HORRIBLE lawyer who spent a ton of money his firm didn't have on a case that wasn't worth it. I didn't even see North Country because the book was so dreadful. The Verdict turns on Paul Newman committing an ethical violation and getting away with it. :mad:

[DipDipDive]

I thought this movie was excruciating. There was way too little character development for the length that it was, and good acting can never redeem a poorly executed script.

I gave it a 2, and I was being generous. Jake Gyllenhaal and Mark Ruffalo were all that got me through the last hour and a half.

[kll]

The b/f fell asleep and I preferred the documentaries on the various cable networks leading up to the release of this movie over the actual movie...

[roosta]

Excellent
Excellent
Excellent

One of the strongest films i've seen this year, I was gripped from beginning to end. Not only did it look and sound like a 70s movie, but it felt like a 70s cop movie.

Good stuff.

[icy manipulator]

it's on it's last legs in the cinema's here so i went and saw it tonight. great film. loved the outfits.. only complaint is i wish i didn't already know that the case was never solved :(

[abcdefz]

I'm glad you got to see it in the theater. I know everybody in the world has a bigger TV screen than me, but seeing a movie like this LARGE is usually way better than at home.

That scene by the lake still haunts me.

As far as I can recall, this is still my favorite movie of the year so far. (y) Maybe I'm forgetting something.

[abcdefz]

it's on it's last legs in the cinema's here so i went and saw it tonight. great film. loved the outfits.. only complaint is i wish i didn't already know that the case was never solved :(




...where do you live?


Months back, the police department supposedly was getting new DNA tests from letters the film's producers had retrieved from storage, and back then, testing was supposed to take "a few weeks." No idea what's happened since then. :confused:

[icy manipulator]

brisbane, australia!

same city as gday joel :(

[abcdefz]

Hopefully Brisbane is big enough for the two of you. :D


Nahh... even I've heard of Brisbane, so it must be a good-sized city, right?

Kind of surprised you guys got the movie at all, really. It flopped here, and it's a pretty American subject, and the stars aren't really international stars...

[icy manipulator]

even tho we both live on the north west side of town he's still a good 20km's away :D but yeah it's the 3rd biggest city in the land down under after sydney and melbourne, got a good 2 million ppl here

as for the movie, it was never heavily advertised here. my friend and i have a tradition of seeing horror movies so it was a choice between Zodiac and Hostel 2. kinda an easy choice :p

i tell you tho, if didn't know about the zodiac killer i wouldn't have even noticed the movie. even tho it was in it's last days in the cinema here there was only 8 ppl in the film including Dayna and i, so i dont think it would've gone too well here.

surprised to hear that it flopped in the state considering the cast that it had. sure as hell wouldn't have been cheap

[abcdefz]

Yeah, plus it's Fincher, which adds about 400% to any production cost.

I think the movie cost about $80 million plus. It probably made less than $30 million.

[abcdefz]

Hmm... according to Box Office Mojo:

Domestic Total Gross: $33,080,083

Production Budget: $65 million

Domestic: $33,080,083 44.6%
+ Foreign: $41,100,000 55.4%
= Worldwide: $74,180,083



Wikipedia:

Reviews for the film have been highly positive but it has not performed strongly at the North American box office, but has performed well in other parts of the world with a box office total of $65,580,083 worldwide, well below its reported budget of $75,000,000.



New York Times says $75 m budget, too.