Not a single memorable moment in the whole thing!

Rating: 4/10 (28 January 2008)

ZODIAC has achieved what few films of its stature have ever achieved: during its long 158 minutes running time, there isn't one single memorable scene that comes to mind. Not one! I honestly cannot understand how this could be possible. The film has an excellent cast and a more than competent director so how come I cannot remember anything from it after just seeing it last week? It's not bad per se but still, how was it possible for such a big production to have not a single great moment? It's mind boggling.
The only thing I remember is the blah color scheme, the inaccurate wardrobe and the awful digital photography and FX. Because of the digital photography and lighting, some scenes where so processed or slick that they ended up looking like they were created with a computer. And speaking of CGI, practically all of the scenes taking place inside cars where obviously shot in a studio, with the background being keyed-in badly. This usually wouldn't be a big problem with most films but ZODIAC has several scenes which take place inside a car and the bad FX were extremely distracting. I've seen less fake looking car background shots in a Doris Day/Rock Hudson film than this.
The film's quasi-obsessive (read: anal retentive) attention to details about the Zodiac case should not be mistaken as greatness. Fincher did his homework, yes, but forgot to deliver a compelling film.
BTW, the film reportedly cost $65 million. Where did the money go, I really don't know.