He said he's not the Zodiac?

Rating: 4/10 (7 October 2007)

I saw this film about three months ago and I kind of enjoyed it or should I say didn't find anything particular wrong in it. Two months later though, something reminded me about this film and I did a recap in my mind about it. Then i realized that this film is totally screwed up.
For starters, Robert Graysmith (Jake Gyllenhaal), who is supposedly the main character, "vanishes" for almost an HOUR screen time!? And then he comes back as if he was never gone and continues to be the main character. And I wish that was the one and only idiotic detail in this movie.
The most fundamental error the writers made in this picture has most definitely got to be the exposure of the Zodiac in, I think, the first hour of screen time (it's a two and half hour film). So Arthur Leigh Allen is being questioned on the count of his fishing mate telling the police that Arthur wanted to become a serial killer by the name of Zodiac (ain't that something)... he is acting very suspicious...then he drops the most idiotic line in movie history (even dumber than "It's not what you think"):"I am not the Zodiac. And if I were, I certainly wouldn't tell you". And as if that wasn't enough proof that he's the Zodiac, aside from being retarded, the inspector noticed Arthur rubbing his watch and asked if he could take a look at it. This request startled Arthur but he gave his watch to the Inspector and what do you know... the watch's name brand is Zodiac. If by now it's not crystal clear to you that Arthur Leigh Allen is the Zodiac killer then you must have slept through the first half of the movie.
So please tell me that I'm not the only one who finds this movie out of order. Although I laughed my ass off after i realized this. "I'm not the Zodiac" he said!?