clocker bob wrote:I never got into it. So slow it was almost ambient at times. And I like slow, if there is a slow rhythm. I don't know if it was the editing or what, but this film had no rhythm. Ruffalo is good, Gylenhall is adequate, Downey was bad ( his diction has gotten so bad, I wanted subtitles ).

Not crap, only when compared to the genre and the overall Hollywood output.

Agreed. Saw it yesterday - this movie was not edited very well.

But Not Crap.

I really want to see this, especially after reading the book by Robert Graysmith (excellent, by the way). Just thinking about the Zodiac murders gives me the creeps and has me throwing glances over my shoulder.

it was ok.

mattw wrote: Fincher's use of "Hurdy Gurdy Man" has been creepin' me out all week.

I just saw the movie today and this is spot on. I don't know why but i think i like the movie a whole lot better just because he used this goddamn song in the credits. It balances out how boring jake gyllenhaal is.

I thought it was great. I have watched it several times now and am never bored. Everything is great.

I have to rent this. Robt Graysmith's book is one of the archetypal true crime books--transcends the genre.

tmidgett wrote:I have to rent this. Robt Graysmith's book is one of the archetypal true crime books--transcends the genre.

I read the book when it came out in paperback 20 some odd years ago. Memory of that book is why I saw the movie, which I thoroghly enjoyed.

I came out of the theater very surprised that 3 hours had almost passed. Rent it.

I rented in a little while ago. I liked. The two girls I was watching it with were both asleep by the end (it was late) but I throughly enjoyed it. I had a bunch of A&E Unolved Mysteries paperbacks as a child, the Zodiac was my favorite.

Not crap!

It was good, then it went on forever, then it ended badly. BUT it has Jake Gyllenhaal so nothing else matters.

I don't like David Fincher. But after reading this thread two nights ago, and following Jay Redline's link, my interest in this film was sufficiently piqued. So I rented Zodiac yesterday.

I don't consider this a particularly insightful or groundbreaking movie, but there were definitely some good moments, and I'd by lying if I said I didn't enjoy watching it all the way through for the first time. (I was barely acquainted with this case beforehand.)

A few of the scenes really stuck out, most notably the initial interview between the three cops and their main suspect. (The actor who played said suspect did an EXCELLENT job, btw -- he was that character.) A couple of the murder scenes creeped me out to the core, too. And I liked the scene in the hardware store near the end.

The incidental dialogue was passable but it definitely betrayed a kind of shallowness on Fincher's part, a lack of what could called high seriousness or poetics. (What I like so much about my favorite directors is the way they can convey a lifetime's worth of knowledge and experience in such simple exchanges, in which it might ostensibly seem as if nothing at all is being discussed.) The film had subtle moments, of course, but I often got the feeling he was using the plot as a crutch. I don't usually rate slick, hyper plot-driven films very highly, and Zodiac is no exception, but since I did enjoy watching it, and it was thoughtfully put-together, I cannot vote CRAP here.

So, NOT CRAP, but with a stack of waffles.