search.noResults

search.searching

dataCollection.invalidEmail
note.createNoteMessage

search.noResults

search.searching

orderForm.title

orderForm.productCode
orderForm.description
orderForm.quantity
orderForm.itemPrice
orderForm.price
orderForm.totalPrice
orderForm.deliveryDetails.billingAddress
orderForm.deliveryDetails.deliveryAddress
orderForm.noItems
Elias Koteas, Anthony Edwards and Mark Ruffalo interrogate a suspect in ZODIAC.


originated with the Zodiac watch but it’s actually a fairly common astrological symbol that signifies the center of the universe. Some of the film’s most damning cir- cumstantial evidence against Arthur Leigh Allen is presented without question, when, in real- ity, there is more than reasonable doubt surrounding this same evi- dence. The most flagrant ex- ample of this is the “birthday” call supposedly made by the killer to Melvin Belli, which is used by Graysmith to incriminate Allen even though it was actually traced to a mental patient who had nothing to do with either Allen or the crimes (but who, believe it or not, crashed a press conference held at San Francisco TV station KQED in 1965, during which he asked Bob Dylan some memo- rably odd questions about the musician’s latest album). And, although it is technically not an error, Fincher’s failure to clearly show any of the composite sketches made of the killer be- trays the bias of his film, since showing these sketches would make it obvious that his primary suspect in no way resembles them. While the circumstantial evidence against Allen may ap- pear to be impressive, there is


60


harder evidence pointing away from him, which the film barely touches upon. The simplest ex- planation is that the late Allen, who was no doubt a reprehen- sible human being, probably en- joyed making people think that he was the Zodiac, which is something he would later regret, when many refused to believe he was not the Zodiac.


While it may seem folly to criticize a motion picture for fail- ing to be a slavishly accurate “true story,” the folly to some extent belongs to Fincher and Vanderbilt, who set an impossi- bly high standard of accuracy for themselves and then proceeded to break it when they found it necessary for their story. (Despite an obsessive eye for period de- tail that went so far as to need- lessly require the accurate reproduction of stacks of period newspapers, Fincher sees noth- ing wrong with having Graysmith drive his young son to school in August, or having his characters order a meal he personally likes even though it was not yet in- vented.) At the same time, how- ever, the filmmakers made some anti-climactic dramatic choices in the name of verifiable accu- racy, such as excluding the first


definite Zodiac attack (because there were no witnesses), a rec- reation of what may have been his first murder in 1966 (the con- nection only came to light years later), and what could have been a real nail-biting depiction of the Kathleen Johns abduc- tion (her version of events changed over time). The re- fusal of the film to indulge in flashbacks and RASHOMON- like recreations of events (the approach used so effectively by Oliver Stone in his monumen- tal JFK) is arguably a millstone that ties it to one specific—and thus necessarily flawed—inter- pretation of events. As it is, ZO- DIAC occupies a gray area between “truth” and fiction, de- priving its audience of vicarious (if admittedly ghoulish) thrills on the one hand, and the closure enjoyed by a constructed drama like DIRTY HARRY on the other, all in the name of an historical accuracy that’s simply not pos- sible for any movie to achieve. Having said that, ZODIAC is an excellent and assured film, well worth seeing. It offers no clo- sure, but that’s the point. The truth cannot always be known with certainty and lives can be ruined in its quixotic pursuit.


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84