Ask any true movie buff and they will tell you that films are not what they used to be. I must say that I agree with this to a certain extent. Being that
Wild Hogs debuted in the #1 spot this weekend, it is no wonder that more crap is consistently churned out as audiences keep asking for it. However, it is imperative that I do acknowledge the filmmakers out there who still strive to craft quality cinema. Like the subversive and ground-breaking directors of the French New Wave or the American Golden Years of the 1970's, these filmmakers are more concerned with paying homage to the masters before them while introducing their own signature styles. One of these directors happened to have a film debut this weekend against Wild Hogs. That man is David Fincher and the film is
Zodiac.
Many may affiliate Fincher with his previous thriller
Se7en, or his cult action piece
Fight Club. Both of these films are memorably gritty and violent, and this has contributed to Fincher's still-growing fan base. After announcing that his next project would focus on the still-at-large Zodiac killer, it was assumed that the director would construct a graphic masterpiece of blood, twists, and slick camera effects. These are, after all, motifs from his prior classics. However, instead of giving audiences what they expect, David Fincher has done something entirely different. Clocking in at 2 hours and 40 minutes,
Zodiac is a detailed and dialogue-heavy crime film that pays tribute to classic crime films of the 1970's while making room for Fincher's modern direction techniques. The result is, hands down, one of the best films of 2007.
It is the 1970's, and the San Francisco Bay area is riled up over the Zodiac killer. The faceless man has claimed the lives of several victims in the area, and has not left nearly enough evidence for identification. To make matters worse, he continues to taunt authority figures by sending letters and making phone calls to the San Francisco Chronicle.
How could a man who commits spontaneous killings and pursues the attention of the police be so hard to bag? This is exactly the question that the main characters ask themselves. Robert Graysmith (Jake Gyllenhaal) is a cartoonist for the Chronicle who takes an interest in the killer after decoding some of the cryptic letters that he sends to the paper. Paul Avery (Robert Downey Jr.) is a wiseass reporter for the paper who also wishes to get to the bottom of the killer's identity. Meanwhile, police inspectors Dave Toschi (Mark Ruffalo) and William Armstrong (Anthony Edwards) also neglect their real lives to put an end to the murderer's reign.
Rather than following a single protagonist,
Zodiac revolves around these four main characters. Toschi and Armstrong frustratingly work with other police jurisdictions where the Zodiac has left behind corpses. While they receive numerous tips and leads, the cops repeatedly find themselves in the dark when one small piece of evidence doesn't factor into the equation. Avery and Graysmith also open up their own investigations, with Graysmith sometimes digging up more than the cops could salvage.
All four of these men set their sights on the Zodiac and become fascinated with his elusiveness. Their interests turn into life-consuming obsessions, which become the basis for this film.
Zodiac may be a film about the notorious killer, but it is primarily about how some things in life tend to hold on and never let go. While watching these men become consumed by the Zodiac case, I could feel their unrelenting fixation from start to finish.
Zodiac could be categorized as many things. Sometimes the audience bears witness to the grizzly murders committed by Zodiac, which makes the film a definitive horror film. Other times, we follow the main characters, as they jump through every investigative hoop from matching handwriting samples to identifying fingerprints. Much police procedure is involved here, but do not expect an episode of
CSI. Fincher does away with "look-at-me" camera trickery to create something more detailed and psychological.
One of the major highlights of the film are the performances from its main characters. Robert Downey Jr. comes through as...well...the same scenery-chewing character that Downey Jr. has portrayed over the last few years. Yes he is predictable, but I still can't get enough of the man. Jake Gyllenhaal does some growing up here as Robert Graysmith, who penned the novel on which this film is based. The actor still brings with him a boyish naivety, but he accurately portrays obsession well. The same can be said for Mark Ruffalo as a conflicted cop who, even after closing the book on his investigation, can still not sleep at night.
While most critics favor this film, I heard moans and groans from certain audience members who clearly anticipated a slash-em-up package from the
Fight Club auteur rather than a lengthy crime saga. The film does require patience, but it is worth every minute. I realize that viewers eat up every clichéd Hollywood moment where the cop always gets his man, or the killer is unmasked in a clever twist ending.
Zodiac is neither of these things. It is both drawn-out and ambiguous, and that is exactly what makes it work. What makes serial murderers so frightening is that they sometimes never give a sense of closure. They continue to prowl the streets while law enforcement obsessively wonders where they will strike next. Considering that the Zodiac was never nabbed, the format for this film is quite fitting. If you can handle an intelligent, chilling, and precise crime film, then I strongly urge you to see
Zodiac. David Fincher has once again proven himself as one of the most innovative filmmakers today.