In the sign of the Seventies

Rating: 8/10 (7 June 2007)

If you're expecting another SE7EN from David Fincher you'll be disappointed. ZODIAC is not a conventional thriller, in fact, it never shocks at all. Knowing that the real Zodiac-crimes where never solved and knowing that Fincher would never fictionalize a true story makes it difficult to move towards a climax.
It's actual strength lies in the almost perfect citation of early 70's movie making. This works on three levels: The "outer", meaning the look of the film. The colors are reduced but heavy, the camera-movements are as slow as is the editing.
The "inner"-level - the designs, the cars, the hair-dues, the phones, the clothes - makes you feel, you're watching an episode of "Kojak".
And finally, the "perceptional" level: As a moviegoer of the 21st century you are constantly faced with what it must have felt like to see a film in, let's say 1971. When someone gets killed, it's in a long, torturing shot - no "bullet-time" here folks! It's a blessing for a change.
Of course, when you think of San Francisco and Crime you think of DIRTY HARRY. And he actually appears in ZODIAC. As the film ZODIAC can't be. Because it's heroes - unlike Harry Callahan - go by the book. Interestingly enough that the character "Scorpio" in DIRTY HARRY was influenced by the Zodiac-killings.
The other movie that seems to be heavily influential on ZODIAC is ALL THE PRESIDENT'S MEN. Because most of the crime solving here also takes place in an editorial office. At a time when there was no internet, no cell phones and even faxes where rare it becomes obvious that the main problem to find the killer is not the evidence but the communication amongst the observers.
That's the center of Fincher's film: To show that in real live police-work is as vulnerable to human mistakes as is an argument amongst married people. And that serial killers are no psycho-geniuses, just every day lunatics.