Paramount Pictures | Release Date: March 2, 2007
8.5
USER SCORE
Universal acclaim based on 612 Ratings
USER RATING DISTRIBUTION
Positive:
548
Mixed:
45
Negative:
19
WATCH NOW
Stream On
Stream On
Review this movie
VOTE NOW
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Check box if your review contains spoilers 0 characters (5000 max)
10
RoscoMay 9, 2011
A work of genius in storytelling by David Fincher in what is a phenominal adaption of the killings of the Zodiac killer. Clever casting for the lead roles leads to some outstanding performances by Jake Gyllenhall, Robert Downey Jr. and MarkA work of genius in storytelling by David Fincher in what is a phenominal adaption of the killings of the Zodiac killer. Clever casting for the lead roles leads to some outstanding performances by Jake Gyllenhall, Robert Downey Jr. and Mark Ruffalo. The film itself is long, some might say to long but the every detail, big and small is so precise and is key to Fincher conveying his take on events and also in showing the effects the Zodiac has on each character. But don't let how long the film is put you off because its so compelling and intense yet intriguing that it keeps you following the story and wanting to see whats going to happen next. Ofcourse the main point of story is based on the murders of the Zodiac killer but the main theme is how the killings affect each character and gradually wares them down with initially, the lack evidence to identify a suspect and then later to make a proper conviction. Downey dazzles as a journalist investigating the murders that brings him new found popularity which leads him down the drugs route due to the frustration and inability to find the man responsible, Ruffalo is is fantastic form and delivers a magestic performance as a cop tasked with finding the Zodiac, Gyllenhall is the surprise of the show for me, his portray of a strange and peculiar yet inspiring cartoonist, Robert, is tremendous, but Finchers choice in John Carroll Lynch as Arthur Leigh Arthur was genius as his depiction of the prime suspect is fabulously creepy and encapsulates the reason why he is the prime suspect to perfection. All in all Zodiac is a truely exceptional piece of filmmaking and something that you simply cannot afford to miss out on. Expand
7 of 7 users found this helpful70
All this user's reviews
9
MovieGuysMar 29, 2014
Knowing the way David Fincher's movies work, I was expecting a twist at the end, and I was disappointed when there wasn't one. However, Zodiac is still terrifyingly creepy, eerie, and its suspense level rises into Hitchcockian territory.Knowing the way David Fincher's movies work, I was expecting a twist at the end, and I was disappointed when there wasn't one. However, Zodiac is still terrifyingly creepy, eerie, and its suspense level rises into Hitchcockian territory. Fincher's refusal to tie up loose ends in the movie as far as leads doesn't seek to confuse; instead, it seeks for the viewer to try to solve this case in his/her head. And for that fact alone, this movie stands out above the average genre fare. Expand
4 of 4 users found this helpful40
All this user's reviews
9
Potter17Dec 10, 2011
Treating James Vanderbilt's screenplay with a natural talent of a capable filmmaker by mixing suspenseful sequences with haunting pauses, David Fincher makes of Zodiac a good addition to the thriller genre.
3 of 3 users found this helpful30
All this user's reviews
10
LDMNov 9, 2011
Incredible film. Suspenseful, engrossing, chilling. Everything about it (acting, script, cinematography, score) is brilliant. Fincher at his absolute best.
3 of 3 users found this helpful30
All this user's reviews
10
ChrisSMar 4, 2007
This movie was amazing. The movie was ver long, but through out the whole movie I never wanted it to end. I was hooked from start to finish. Robert Downey Jr. was incredible. David Fincher is an amazing director (Fight Club is his best This movie was amazing. The movie was ver long, but through out the whole movie I never wanted it to end. I was hooked from start to finish. Robert Downey Jr. was incredible. David Fincher is an amazing director (Fight Club is his best work). This movie was terryfing and suspenseful throught the whole movie. I just watched last night, but I could watch it again today and be just as excited about it. Expand
2 of 2 users found this helpful
8
CRLAug 15, 2011
This is a hard movie for me to rate, for a myriad of reasons. Zodiac is based on a true story; Robert Graysmith's book of the same name. To be able to take such a convoluted story and condense it into a movie is an achievement in itself. TheThis is a hard movie for me to rate, for a myriad of reasons. Zodiac is based on a true story; Robert Graysmith's book of the same name. To be able to take such a convoluted story and condense it into a movie is an achievement in itself. The acting is fantastic from all parties, with Jake Gyllenhaal playing the main role of both naive cartoonist and possessed civilian-detective to a fault. The script is good; it even manages to throw in a laugh here or there, and the cinematography, at some points, is excellent. Then there's the plot, which could easily be separated into two (and a half) parts. There's the beginning, while the murders are happening and the case it hot, which to me, this is easily the weaker portion of the film. The story at that point is slow and laborious, with too many people saying too many different things each with not enough airtime. The middle (the half part) is the three seconds the film takes to jump four years, during which it becomes a cold case. Then comes the end, which is entirely focused on Robert Graysmith's (Gyllenhaal) hunt for the Zodiac Killer. Not only then does Zodiac become suspenseful, but it almost reaches the Olympian heights of Fincher's other serial killer thriller, Se7en. In the end, the pros outweigh the cons, and leave you with a movie that is a bit too long and just maybe a bit too true... but nonetheless an entertaining and sometimes fascinating film. Expand
2 of 2 users found this helpful20
All this user's reviews
9
Alexander_FredDec 8, 2011
Zodiac is a near perfect film. While it takes on the same manner of story telling as All the President's Men, it does not quite match the classic film's essence, but all in all it becomes something great. It is a rarity to see a film about aZodiac is a near perfect film. While it takes on the same manner of story telling as All the President's Men, it does not quite match the classic film's essence, but all in all it becomes something great. It is a rarity to see a film about a serial killer in today's market not filled with gore and violence for the sake of gore and violence. It also becomes rarer when that film focuses on the characters on the outside looking in: the news reporters, the police, etc. Again it becomes rarer when the actors have the capacity to truly bring out their respective character's persona and do so not just well, but beyond the viewer's expectations. Zodiac manages to do all of this while blending together terrific directing and a pace that just flows with the two and a half hour length so that the film remains an interesting, though all around disturbing, tale of humanity's deepest depths of violence and hatred rather than a sluggish bore, even without a focus on gallons of blood and severed limbs. In the end, this is a film that stands in contrast to Saw, Hostel, and all the other blood baths being pushed in front of us. It is a film that is actually good, perhaps more than good. Expand
2 of 2 users found this helpful20
All this user's reviews
9
cameronmorewoodNov 7, 2012
Zodiac is an ingenious labyrinth of a film that conveniently hits its climax just as we think its slowing down on us. This is great filmmaking from David Fincher, one of the greats of our time.
2 of 2 users found this helpful20
All this user's reviews
10
Compi24Nov 28, 2012
David Fincher delivers a pretty entertaining thriller with "Zodiac". The story follows several men who become obsessed with the infamous Zodiac Killer and his reign of terror over the San Francisco Bay area during the 60s and 70s. The movieDavid Fincher delivers a pretty entertaining thriller with "Zodiac". The story follows several men who become obsessed with the infamous Zodiac Killer and his reign of terror over the San Francisco Bay area during the 60s and 70s. The movie delves deep into what happens to investigators when their cases go unsolved, and how far they'll go to uncover the truth. All in all, I felt that "Zodiac" was a pretty well-crafted film - especially in a technical sense. David Fincher implements a number of convoluted CG techniques to recreate the Zodiac Killer murders and certain areas of San Francisco. Fincher also filmed the majority film using the digital Thomsom Viper camera, something that, at the time, was relatively innovative. The acting was pretty great, I felt that every actor delivered their roles with the utmost accuracty. Also, the script seemed very well written and fairly convincing. As a film, "Zodiac" really does it's job of making you feel as though you are chasing after the elusive killer himself. Expand
2 of 2 users found this helpful20
All this user's reviews
9
SpangleNov 2, 2013
Amazing film. The eerie mood created by Fincher leaves you on the edge of your seat the entire time. There may not be much action, but the story still manages to hook you in and keep you interested for the full 150+ minutes. On that note, itAmazing film. The eerie mood created by Fincher leaves you on the edge of your seat the entire time. There may not be much action, but the story still manages to hook you in and keep you interested for the full 150+ minutes. On that note, it may be 150+ minutes, but it certainly does not feel like that in the least. Expand
2 of 2 users found this helpful20
All this user's reviews
8
theseparatorJan 11, 2014
Now that the criminal mastermind flick has become a set type, widely overdone, this film tends to get easily shrugged off as yet another film about an ultra-intelligent serial killer who is always one step ahead of the cops, yes just likeNow that the criminal mastermind flick has become a set type, widely overdone, this film tends to get easily shrugged off as yet another film about an ultra-intelligent serial killer who is always one step ahead of the cops, yes just like Seven. Still though, this film is quite different. Zodiac has nowhere near as much internal darkness bursting from its seams.

But Zodiac is dark, just not Seven dark. Even though Zodiac is still a murder-thriller, it’s tone compared to Seven, is a like a lovely ray of sunshine. Being that this storyline is all loosely based on actual events, enacting the film out in the time period during which it occurred, the late 60’s-early 70’s gives the film a freshness, a nostalgia that seems to come with those decades.

The plot: In an age before mail bombs and anthrax scares, a killer toys with his pursuers by leaving complex clues just above their tracker’s radars, just out of reach of their capabilities, the chase then becomes perpetual, the madness wide spread- reporters, cops, victim’s families, all exposed to the madness. Society engulfing.

The lighting, the darkness, the shadows, the string dissonance, and the rain of course: all hugely important to Fincher’s work, perhaps his most important set of tricks, perhaps they could even be called Finchinian, or would it be Ficheresque? They pop up in all this films.

In the real tense bits we get close, claustrophobic shots, bare-bones dialogue, tense body

language, the potential victim’s fear seeping almost literally thought the screen, then BAM! Scene complete. No sentimentality.

None of Fincher’s tactics in creating suspense come across as clichés. These are textbook lessons in how to frame a successful suspense scene. In a thriller the actor is a part of the puzzle. Like a part of complex musical arrangement, all the players need to play their parts perfectly.

In thrillers the character is thrown into an extreme situation, an abyss created by the filmmaker, and Zodiac, unlike Panic Room, is a bottomless abyss. Great performances are made by the actor’s that find the rawest, ravenous ways to claw their ways out, even if the character fails.

During Zodiac, Jake Gyllehaal was still coming up in the ranks. He had not fully moved on to the badass action hero roles he plays today and in his underling position in the film, as a cartoonist constantly getting in the way of the “real” reporters, he becomes an interesting underdog of a main character, even though he’s not supposed to be the main attraction. A pleasure to watch, we know, and he knows, he is in a subservient role and he never breaks out of it .

Thrillers are the king of film as the symphony is king of music. Great symphonies are difficult to execute. So many elements, so many moving parts, everything must align perfectly, so when that moment of suspense is created, in both thriller and symphony, whether scene of movement, we stand in awe.

Zodiac has those moments.
Expand
2 of 2 users found this helpful20
All this user's reviews
7
sreekanthsnairFeb 17, 2011
A good movie....
climax is not up to the mark...
well narrated... every fincher fan may be disappointed at last with such an end...
but based on a true story..only this could be possible...
1 of 1 users found this helpful10
All this user's reviews
10
RavenousMay 22, 2012
This isn't your typical Hollywood drivel dominated by special effects, and it's not a film for your typical short-attention-span-moviegoers; instead, it's a riveting analysis of the most definitive evidence in the case. I guess some peopleThis isn't your typical Hollywood drivel dominated by special effects, and it's not a film for your typical short-attention-span-moviegoers; instead, it's a riveting analysis of the most definitive evidence in the case. I guess some people found it lacking in the typical blockbuster flash, but in my book that's a really GOOD thing. The characters are all very well-acted, and the screenplay was quite good. As they say, the truth is stranger than fiction, and this presentation of the Zodiac case is truly as compelling as they come. Excellent job. Expand
1 of 1 users found this helpful10
All this user's reviews
9
StevenR.Mar 5, 2007
Excellent film. The atmosphere and attention to detail effectively recreate one of the most interesting and unsolved serial killer cases in U.S. history. Fincher did an excellent job with the story.
3 of 4 users found this helpful
10
devo-ncJan 22, 2014
Written and flows to pure perfection as good as anything. Performances are top-notch and fincher's exquisite storytelling is dramatic sizzles of fun that involves you in it's business until Zodiac no longer becomes a suspect, it becomes theWritten and flows to pure perfection as good as anything. Performances are top-notch and fincher's exquisite storytelling is dramatic sizzles of fun that involves you in it's business until Zodiac no longer becomes a suspect, it becomes the poetry of determination, charismatic orientation and discussion that rambles without insanity. You don't want it to end; Zodiac reminds us of how movies should be made, and that sums up the best film of 2007. Expand
3 of 4 users found this helpful31
All this user's reviews
10
DawnAMar 3, 2007
Definitely a great movie. One of the best that I've seen recently. Accurate on the facts, suspenseful. Definitely a must see.
1 of 2 users found this helpful
10
MattKAug 1, 2007
Excellent movie, one of the best i've seen in a long time. FIncher is back! Only complaint is that there are no special features/bonuses on this dvd.
1 of 2 users found this helpful
10
MarcosF.Aug 16, 2007
One of the best American movies of recent years, a deep regard into the United States after the September 11th (even if it runs in previous decades)
1 of 2 users found this helpful
7
spadenxJan 1, 2012
I thought it was good and it did keep your interest through out the film. Yet it didnt offer anything new to the legend that is the Zodiac. Just was really just a re-telling of an old theory that was fitted for the big screen. The starI thought it was good and it did keep your interest through out the film. Yet it didnt offer anything new to the legend that is the Zodiac. Just was really just a re-telling of an old theory that was fitted for the big screen. The star studded cast definently raised this film above what it should have been and the acting was solid through out. Overall it was worth the watch if you want to understand the Zodiac more but if you are familiar with it then chances are you wont learn anything new. Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
7
oxanaAug 28, 2014
This movie is based on a true story - and acts much like one.

The story moves in plunges, which reminded me of a possible investigation of a crime like this: there are often silent, slow moments before things move on again with driving
This movie is based on a true story - and acts much like one.

The story moves in plunges, which reminded me of a possible investigation of a crime like this: there are often silent, slow moments before things move on again with driving madness.

The end is left mostly open, even while it does mark the conclusion for some of the characters.

And the characters are what makes the movie really click. It is not clear who they are, exactly, because none of them really land on the limelight, but it is easy to perceive what they represent, and what they are there for, in terms of invetigation and story-telling. They strive to reach the truth is almost self-destructively.

Nice portrayals from a soft-voiced Mark Ruffalo, Jake Gyllenhall and always awesome Robert Downey Jr.
Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
0
MikeDec 28, 2007
I like movies where I have to think. but this movie was just soooo boring!!! After an 1 hour of watching this borefest, I had enough!!
1 of 3 users found this helpful
0
BorisGJan 16, 2008
What a horrible movie. Me and my friend just sat there waiting for it to end. This was the most boring film I have ever seen, par none. It felt like it was 6 hours long.
1 of 3 users found this helpful
4
EliasK.Mar 13, 2007
They should have paid me to sit through that bullsh.t.
1 of 3 users found this helpful
5
RobertRSep 13, 2007
It feels more like a Private Eye-tutorial doc than an artsy movie. And that's a compliment, since its comprehensive detail is overly impressive--to the point of a BBC/PBS doc or an Atlantic/Harper's article. Yet its dexterity to It feels more like a Private Eye-tutorial doc than an artsy movie. And that's a compliment, since its comprehensive detail is overly impressive--to the point of a BBC/PBS doc or an Atlantic/Harper's article. Yet its dexterity to tell a compelling and purposeful story is absent--the characters are self-indulged in Zodiac-obsession, the characters only do Zodiac-related talk, things exemplified are too-plot concerned. Expand
1 of 3 users found this helpful
0
JohnH.Mar 4, 2007
This movie kicks off with a bang and then it is sooooo freeaaaking boring.
2 of 7 users found this helpful
4
GS.Mar 9, 2007
BORING! Gotta say, I'm a huge Fincher fan, but he missed the boat on this one. Not enough plot, no real suspense, and I didn't care for any of the characters after the first 30 minutes. The acting was great, but this movie seemed BORING! Gotta say, I'm a huge Fincher fan, but he missed the boat on this one. Not enough plot, no real suspense, and I didn't care for any of the characters after the first 30 minutes. The acting was great, but this movie seemed to take itself too seriously. Fincher did a great job of condensing all that info into a movie that people could follow, but it would have been better served as a documentary on the case rather than a feature movie. Seems like there was no real need to make this movie. Expand
1 of 4 users found this helpful
0
AnonymousMCAug 16, 2007
Oh my god, total snorefest. I wish I would have spent that two and a half to three hours doing something productive instead of watching this piece of junk. You watch a guy read books and talk to people for 99.9% of the movie, the other 0.1%Oh my god, total snorefest. I wish I would have spent that two and a half to three hours doing something productive instead of watching this piece of junk. You watch a guy read books and talk to people for 99.9% of the movie, the other 0.1% is seeing the actual killer do something. Expand
1 of 5 users found this helpful
2
EricW.Mar 9, 2007
As a huge fan of Se7en I couldn't wait to see David Fincher's latest film, Zodiac. After over two and a half hours of the movie I walked out of the theater stunned
1 of 5 users found this helpful
3
[Anonymous]Apr 3, 2007
The movie is too long and there is no action. The story is too confusing, though Robert Downey Jr. is a GREAT actor, and becuase of him we didn't fall asleep in the cinema.
1 of 5 users found this helpful
8
WillieGreenMar 7, 2007
***may contain slight spoilers if not familiar with the subject matter start to finish***

pros: masterfully executed, easily among the best work to date from primary cast & crew (downey, ruffalo, fincher), great suspense during the sparse
***may contain slight spoilers if not familiar with the subject matter start to finish***

pros: masterfully executed, easily among the best work to date from primary cast & crew (downey, ruffalo, fincher), great suspense during the sparse moments when it's allowed to creep in, was rather painless to watch despite the running time (save for a few flinching scenes), and engaging start to finish

cons: not as cohesive or gripping as I had hoped, most will find it a bit too long, the built-in realities leave viewers aching for more progress and closure throughout, meanders a bit in some spots, and ultimately I think it remains to be seen whether zodiac becomes the instant classic that all the short-term praise would seem to suggest

well done, but ultimately less memorable than something like se7en (or lambs) due to a lack of several essential hooks you'll find among the instant classics in the genre - the great news is I can say that I look forward to more work like this from both the director and some cast members
Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful