Here Comes The Roly-Poly Roly-Poly Man

Rating: 7/10 (17 October 2009)

An unsolved case doesn't stop director David Fincher from constructing an absorbing and clever puzzle picture around the investigation into the identity of one of northern California's most notorious serial killers, the Zodiac.
I don't know who Zodiac was, and I don't think Robert Graysmith does, either, despite the latter's attempt to pin the blame on one suspect. Reading "Zodiac" the book was like listening to a potty uncle rant about FDR and Pearl Harbor. Though based on the book, the movie is quite different. Zodiac was known to have killed five people and injured two in 1968 and 1969. Most of the attacks are featured in the film, but despite Fincher's reputation for violent fare, his film is more interested in delivering context than bloodbaths, and the murders are depicted in a non-exploitative way.
More time and energy is spent on the whirlpool of suspicion around the case, and how it comes to consume what might be called three other Zodiac victims: Graysmith (Jake Gyllenhaal), reporter Paul Avery (Robert Downey, Jr.) and investigator David Toschi (Mark Ruffalo).
All three actors deliver fine performances, especially Ruffalo. His Toschi is a masterpiece of mellow intensity, as his focus narrows gradually to one suspect he refuses to rule out because of a handwriting sample. As the years go by, Toschi can't let go of Zodiac, even though he knows he should, his career suffering as a result.
Downey's not nearly as subtle, but riveting all the same, his Avery a grandiloquent reporter who seems as addicted to the electricity around the case as he is to the various substances that keep him going. His scenes with Graysmith the Eagle Scout cartoonist give the film much of its emotional content, his cynicism ("What do you want out of this...This is good business for everyone but you") contrasting starkly with Graysmith's gentle naiveté.
The texture of "Zodiac" keeps me watching the film. It's like "Mad Men" meets "CSI" with a touch of "Boogie Nights" thrown in. Even when you see the film and know where the shocks are, the creepy vibe Fincher sustains is riveting. Also powerful is the soundtrack. I'll never hear Donovan's "Hurdy Gurdy Man" the same after how it plays over the opening scene, maybe one of the most intense openers since "Jaws".
What doesn't keep me watching so much is the plot. Fincher does very well with what he has, to a point. But perhaps because he wants to tell the story in a factual-as-possible way, we get dealt a good deal of blind alleys and red herrings, especially with all of Zodiac's most notorious crimes out of the way less than 30 minutes in. To say "Zodiac" doesn't need to be 160 minutes long isn't to deny Fincher makes it interesting. It's just that a half-hour less would have given what's left a stronger focus.
Still, it's good to have a film that puts as much attention on look as "Zodiac" does, and presents such a fine all-around cast in moments both suspenseful and funny. Anthony Edwards is still a wingman 20 years after "Top Gun", this time as Toschi's less emotional partner William Armstrong. Brian Cox is hilariously over-the-top as celebrity attorney Melvin Belli, whom Zodiac apparently phones at one point.
"He didn't leave a number," Belli adds.
"He's kind of crafty that way," Armstrong replies.
I watched "Zodiac" the first time expecting Rob Zombie, and found something closer in spirit to Hitchcock. Pretty good Hitchcock at that. Consistently effective, often brilliant, "Zodiac" is a psycho killer film that does less to scare you than to make you care.