Not nearly as good as they say...

Rating: 5/10 (9 April 2010)

I beg to respectfully disagree with Ebert on this one (and for once, I seem to be in agreement with the Academy, which didn't even give this movie a single nomination). I tend to agree with Berardinelli's review, but I think he rated the movie far too high... I found this movie to be nothing more than average, not gripping at all, and far, far too long. This coming from someone who normally likes very long movies (none of my favorite films are shorter than two hours), but in order to sustain a long duration, you need plot, dialog, etc. In other words, you need quality... Unfortunately this film doesn't have it, or better, doesn't have nearly enough.
Having said that, the film also has one major disadvantage, and that is the topic itself, it is totally anticlimactic. By the time this movie was made, almost everybody already knew the story of the Zodiac killer and its ending (or lack thereof), which takes away a large portion (if not all) of the suspense. Under such circumstances it is very difficult to make a movie that will keep the viewers' attention for 160 minutes...