Talk:Zodiac (film)

message: do you know where the zodiaz movie is taking place, where are they filming the movie ???
Jesus, san Francisco—Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.198.67.117 (talk) 06:02, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The plot section reads like a bitch. Chunks of info are missing. Example: at one point is is stated that Paul Avery "again" receives a death threat, but the first occurence is not mentioned. I suppose someone was trying to fix things, but threw the baby out with the bathwater. Someone who knows how to properly do this, please make a fine-reading plot section.  00:59, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I removed the images because the formatting looked terrible with the film infobox.  Please re-insert them if you can make it look decent. -wadems 05:21, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Since the whole scene is pure fiction, I don't rate a goof with the candy in a gumball machine as very important.TL36 (talk) 03:11, 24 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Images 

message: The film's official release title is Chronicles. I don't know how to change this. Can someone with more expereince editing make this switch?Aglie 21:53, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You're going to have to provide some evidence for that. I know that Chronicles was used for a time during production, but I am pretty certain it was dropped. The release date that has just come out was certainly for Zodiac. Rje 08:51, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: http://www.aintitcool.com/display.cgi?id=23688 Aglie 06:08, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Title 

message: There's a lot of redundancy in the References. Check out Help:Footnotes to see how you can compress multiple cites under one reference. —Erik (talk • contrib • review) - 00:55, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the tip. It's been fixed. --Count Ringworm 15:14, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fixing Footnotes 

message: *
Enjoy! Alientraveller 09:59, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citation for use 

message: This pages lists the budget at "more than $60 million" and later as "$70 million". I looked elsewhere on the internet at the figure $85 million (estimated) seems to appear a little more than these two earlier figures, but can anyone confirm the budget, or at least a better estimated figure?
58.169.165.32 13:15, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: New York Times says $75 million budget, but that it was filmed under budget. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 13:22, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Budget 

message: This movie made less than $4 million net, but is on the IMDB Top 250. I'm supposing that this is determined by user rating, and not box office sales? --MosheA 03:24, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The Top 250 is based on user ratings and is completely unreliable.  The Simpsons Movie was on the top 250, so was Transformers, so was 300.  I'd suggest looking to Rotten Tomatoes or Metacritic for a more reasonable critical balance. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 03:34, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  IMDB Top 250? 

message: I changed the information regarding the U.K. Guardian critic David Thompson. It was previously David Thomson, which is a U.S. film critic, while David Thompson is a U.K. film critic.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.117.133.32 (talk) 22:09, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reviews 

message: Pong is seen being played in the boat scene. I have included this reference in a wikipedia page on Pong, but am unsure whether to include in this page. Newbie, sorry!
--Retrodouggy 00:57, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Trivia are generally unwanted. This is a feature article and the mention of Pong would only distract the audience. You did well by mentioning it in the Pong article, though.  00:51, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cross Referencing & Trivia 

message: :GA review (see here for criteria)
#It is reasonably well written.
#:a (prose):  b (MoS): 
#It is factually accurate and verifiable.
#:a (references):  b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR): 
#It is broad in its coverage.
#:a (major aspects):  b (focused): 
#It follows the neutral point of view policy.
#:Fair representation without bias: 
#It is stable.
#:No edit wars etc.: 
#It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
#:a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):  b (appropriate use with suitable captions): 
#Overall: 
#:Pass/Fail: 
*References 18 and 19 don't have a retrieval date and it doesn't say what they are, fix that ;) . Otherwise, good work!, i'm listing as GA. Yamanbaiia 20:09, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the review and the promotion. I have fixed those two References. --J.D. 00:19, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  GA review 

message: Is "a Paramount Pictures and Warner Bros. joint production" really the very first thing that should be said about this film in the lead sentence? I don't think so. I would move that phrase back at least a sentence at minimum, i.e. "Zodiac is a 2007 American film directed by David Fincher and based on Robert Graysmith's non-fiction books Zodiac and Zodiac Unmasked. This Paramount Pictures and Warner Bros. joint production stars Jake Gyllenhaal, Mark Ruffalo, and Robert Downey Jr." --Melty girl (talk) 21:24, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You are absolutely right. Thanks for catching this. I've changed it around per your suggestion. --J.D. (talk) 21:42, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Lead

message: Here is a link to an interview that has potential info to be integrated into the article:
* David Fincher Didn't Want To Make 'Another Serial-Killer Movie' ... Until 'Zodiac' Came Along 
* David Fincher and Quint talk about everything from A(lien3) to Z(odiac)!!!
* Top Ten Lists
* David Fincher Discusses Zodiac's Rising Star  —Preceding unsigned comment added by J.D. (talk • contribs) 15:41, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Headlines

message: Although I'm not particularly familiar with the technical aspects of filmmaking, I believe this is a contradiction:
*The introduction of this article claims that the film was shot entirely digitally: “During filming, Fincher employed the digital Thomson Viper Filmstream camera to shoot the film. This was the first time this camera was used to shoot an entire Hollywood feature film”
*In the section titled “Principal Photography”, we learn that there were parts of the film NOT shot digitally: “Contrary to popular belief, Zodiac was not shot entirely digitally; traditional high-speed film cameras were used for slow-motion murder sequences.” The author of this statement cites the DVD itself.
So what is going on here? Can someone shed some light on this situation? Notecardforfree (talk) 03:43, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for spotting this. I've fixed the Lead paragraph to reflect the accurate statement in the Principal photography section. --J.D. (talk) 20:21, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

text: The film doesn't say "NOT eliminated" but instead states Arthur Leigh Allen is still the leading suspect which is a complete falsehood.  In fact, the San Francisco Police Department initially dismissed Mr. Allen as a suspect way back in 1971 due to fingerprint comparisons and handwriting analysis. But there wouldn't have been a bestselling book or movie if they had started out with that fact.  This film is a work of fiction inspired by actual events and not a documentary.TL36 (talk) 22:05, 23 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Contradiction

message: There is a part about the casting process, however a final list of the full cast is missing. This should be added.  01:00, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The official cast list for this movie is REALLY skimpy. I don't know if it's because it has a HUGE cast, or what...but even the actress Ione Sky (who has a recognized professional name, and a very visible supporting role as one of the Zodiac victims) isn't on it. So I don't know how an actual cast list would be assembled. What I'm saying is, the cast list that played in theaters/is on DVD etc. is extremely sketchy, and doesn't really reflect the film. So someone has many sleepless nights ahead of them in compiling an accurate one... Codenamemary (talk) 21:30, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, I added this to the casting section, anyway: << The finished film has an unusually large cast of characters. In a May 15, 2007, film review, Variety noted, "Performances and casting are impeccable down to the smallest role." >> I don't know how to mark citations, but the Variety review is HERE: http://www.variety.com/index.asp?layout=awardcentral&jump=review&reviewid=VE1117932879&query=zodiac+review  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Codenamemary (talk • contribs) 23:15, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Casting / cast list 

message: :Please add to the list references that can be used for the film article.
*—Preceding unsigned comment added by Erik (talk • contribs) 14:40, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: References to use

message: "Fincher had previously worked with director of photography Harris Savides on Seven (he shot the opening credits)."
I am baffled by the parenthetical: Se7en's iconic opening credits were created by Kyle Kooper, as is available here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kyle_cooper  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.182.96.208 (talk) 19:10, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Harris Savides 

message: In the "Cast" section, there should be some mention of why there are multiple actors playing the (singular) role of the Zodiac Killer.  This needs some clarification.  I suspect that IMDb is not a reliable source, but this is what is stated in IMDb (in its FAQ section): 
::: "Why are multiple actors credited as playing "Zodiac"?  The different actors were employed to match the varied physical descriptions of the Zodiac Killer by eyewitnesses and surviving victims. For example, the suspect seen at the scene of Paul Lee Stine's murder was described as quite heavy, and is here played by Bob Stephenson, while the man indicated to be Zodiac (although never positively correlated with the Zodiac killings by the police) and who threatened Kathleen Johns was described as rather slighter and smaller and is here played by John Lacy. For that reason, the Zodiac's first confirmed murder at Lake Herman Road (referenced several times in the movie as having occurred just prior to Christmas 1968) was not shown because there were no survivors or eyewitnesses that could give a description of the murder scene. Interestingly, John Carroll Lynch, who plays Arthur Leigh Allen, the man who's ultimately accused of the Zodiac killings by Robert Graysmith (a theory seemingly supported by the film), was not used in recreating any of the crimes of the Zodiac Killer."  
It was odd, but notable, to see Barry Livingston (Ernie from "My Three Sons") in a non-speaking, background role in the Chronicle meeting room.  
Thanks.   Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 22:45, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cast 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Zodiac (film). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added  tag to http://www.premiere.com/Feature/Fincher-vs.-the-Zodiac-Killer
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://readingeagle.com/article.aspx?id=18855
*Added  tag to http://www.premiere.com/Feature/Fincher-vs.-the-Zodiac-Killer
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070629152955/http://www.cineaste.com/articles/review-zodiac.htm to http://www.cineaste.com/articles/review-zodiac.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:56, 30 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Zodiac (film). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140414081812/http://www.focusfeatures.com/article/paul_schrader_on_bob_crane_and_auto_focus/print to http://www.focusfeatures.com/article/paul_schrader_on_bob_crane_and_auto_focus/print
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080718035636/http://www.villagevoice.com/2007-02-20/film/to-catch-a-predator/ to http://www.villagevoice.com/2007-02-20/film/to-catch-a-predator/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120115035621/http://www.metacritic.org/film/awards/2007/toptens.shtml to http://www.metacritic.org/film/awards/2007/toptens.shtml
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080111225021/http://www.filmlinc.com/fcm/poll/2007pollcritics.html to http://www.filmlinc.com/fcm/poll/2007pollcritics.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:02, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Zodiac (film). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081026044446/http://mixonline.com/sound4picture/film_tv/audio_unraveling_sound_zodiac/ to http://mixonline.com/sound4picture/film_tv/audio_unraveling_sound_zodiac/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:58, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I removed a bit of leading text from the release section.  It insinuates that once a film grosses more than its budget, it passes some meaningful benchmark of success.  This is not true.  See this article from The New York Times about film grosses.  It explains how a film can gross more than its budget but still be a net loss for the studio.  By phrasing it the way we were ("it grossed more than its budget"), we're leading people to a potentially wrong conclusion.  See also Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Film/Archive 66#How to report box office performance. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 18:47, 13 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Box office gross vs budget 

message: I am concerned about the notability of Zodiac (soundtrack), currently a separate article. None of the songs are originally intended for the film; they existed very long before it. I intend to duplicate the soundtrack track listing, i.e. merge the soundtrack article, into the parent article but can leave out the track listing of the score per MOS:FILM#Soundtrack. BTW, what about additional songs used in the film but not included in the soundtrack album? George Ho (talk) 22:49, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: The soundtrack article doesn't establish notability, and also contains a lot of original research. I think merging whatever useful + sourced information exists in that article into the main Zodiac article would be a good idea. Popcornduff (talk) 10:27, 17 December 2017 (UTC)

text: I concur that merging is a good solution here. As for the additional songs, I would check to see if there are any reliable third-party sources that list them. Right now they do not seem noted elsewhere for Wikipedia to follow suit. Erik (talk | contrib) (ping me) 21:14, 17 December 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with the two above. While the Allmusic source is reliable, but it's still only one. And as Erik says, whether or not third party sources take note of somethig (like a song), is often the rule of thumb for determining whether this sort of thing warrants inclusion or not. Sergecross73 msg me 13:15, 18 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notability of [[Zodiac (soundtrack)]] 

message: Now that Zodiac (soundtrack) is merged into this article, what to do about the current state of the "Soundtrack" section? I directly transfer all track listings, including the tracklist of the film score album (normally discouraged by WP:FILMSCORE, but I used my common sense to make an exception per WP:GUIDES). I figure that the "Soundtrack" may need some copyediting. Not only copyediting, the section also needs some more inline references to cite information. So does the "Accolades" section. I'm unsure whether the article has very few or too many details. Also, the article has been a Featured Status for (almost) ten years since its promotion in 2008. It needs either some re-evaluation or some cleanup right away. George Ho (talk) 09:12, 22 December 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: You're right. I've begun cleaning up this article to ensure it stays inline with FA. L150 18:42, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Current status as Featured Article