User Score
8.1

Universal acclaim- based on 396 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Negative: 19 out of 396
Watch On

Review this movie

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. May 9, 2011
    10
    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 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 onA 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
  2. Mar 29, 2014
    9
    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 inKnowing 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
  3. ChrisS
    Mar 4, 2007
    10
    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 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
  4. CRL
    Aug 15, 2011
    8
    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. 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.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. 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
  5. Dec 10, 2011
    9
    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.
  6. LDM
    Nov 9, 2011
    10
    Incredible film. Suspenseful, engrossing, chilling. Everything about it (acting, script, cinematography, score) is brilliant. Fincher at his absolute best.
  7. Dec 8, 2011
    9
    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 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 onZodiac 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
  8. Nov 2, 2013
    9
    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, it may be 150+ minutes, but it certainly does not feel like that in the least.
  9. Nov 7, 2012
    9
    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.
  10. Nov 28, 2012
    10
    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 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 thatDavid 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
  11. Jan 11, 2014
    8
    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 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
    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 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
  12. May 22, 2012
    10
    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 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 screenplayThis 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
  13. Feb 17, 2011
    7
    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...
  14. StevenR.
    Mar 5, 2007
    9
    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.
  15. Jan 22, 2014
    10
    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 the poetry of determination, charismatic orientation and discussion that rambles without insanity. You don't want it to end; Zodiac reminds us of howWritten 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
  16. DawnA
    Mar 3, 2007
    10
    Definitely a great movie. One of the best that I've seen recently. Accurate on the facts, suspenseful. Definitely a must see.
  17. MattK
    Aug 1, 2007
    10
    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.
  18. MarcosF.
    Aug 16, 2007
    10
    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)
  19. Jan 1, 2012
    7
    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 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 toI 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
  20. Aug 28, 2014
    7
    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
    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
  21. RobertR
    Sep 13, 2007
    5
    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, 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
  22. BorisG
    Jan 16, 2008
    0
    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.
  23. EliasK.
    Mar 13, 2007
    4
    They should have paid me to sit through that bullsh.t.
  24. Mike
    Dec 28, 2007
    0
    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!!
  25. JohnH.
    Mar 4, 2007
    0
    This movie kicks off with a bang and then it is sooooo freeaaaking boring.
  26. GS.
    Mar 9, 2007
    4
    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 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
  27. EricW.
    Mar 9, 2007
    2
    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
  28. [Anonymous]
    Apr 3, 2007
    3
    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.
  29. AnonymousMC
    Aug 16, 2007
    0
    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.
  30. RD.
    Aug 1, 2007
    10
    Hi I liked the movie. Gyllenhall, Downey Jr and Ruffalo's performances are fabulous. But the scene stealer is John Carroll Lynch as Arthur Leigh Allen. Although, he is there for only 5-6 minutes he is too creepy. Brilliant movie by Fincher who also directed the brilliant Seven and Fight Club(1999). Although it is a bit slow, it is rewarding. DO not expect anything, you will be Hi I liked the movie. Gyllenhall, Downey Jr and Ruffalo's performances are fabulous. But the scene stealer is John Carroll Lynch as Arthur Leigh Allen. Although, he is there for only 5-6 minutes he is too creepy. Brilliant movie by Fincher who also directed the brilliant Seven and Fight Club(1999). Although it is a bit slow, it is rewarding. DO not expect anything, you will be singing its raves. Those who way it is bakwaas are people who either do not like such intricate and grim movies or those who have very short attention span(no offense to anybody, it is your taste). Brilliant! Expand
  31. MikeP.
    Feb 20, 2008
    9
    Beautifully done, has me guessing the whole way not much better movies out there!
  32. MonaE.
    Mar 3, 2007
    10
    Master storytelling - impecable acting.
  33. Christian
    Mar 4, 2007
    9
    A grown-up movie for once from Fincher, which is not meant as an insult. Fight Club is great and Seven has its' charms, but Zodiac is the sight of a filmmaker finding the humanity in his characters and giving them the respect they deserve. the first ten minutes will absolutely terrify you, and from there you are riveted, more or less or the next two hours. Fincher doesn't flinch A grown-up movie for once from Fincher, which is not meant as an insult. Fight Club is great and Seven has its' charms, but Zodiac is the sight of a filmmaker finding the humanity in his characters and giving them the respect they deserve. the first ten minutes will absolutely terrify you, and from there you are riveted, more or less or the next two hours. Fincher doesn't flinch from the violence (has he ever?), but he doesn't linger either, like he did previously. It isn't perfect, due to a few scenes not quite adding up or adding to the plot, which may have been the point. One gets the sense this is a multiple viewing technique that will pay dividends in the future. Expand
  34. MichaelL.
    Mar 5, 2007
    9
    God, what a bunch of pinheads critics can be. Zodiac is "unsatisfying"? "No resolution"? "About a writer rather than a killer?" Newsflash...the crime was never solved! This is a brilliant, subtle film by sledgehammer director Fincher, and it's a welcome change. With enough "Se7en" clones to fill an entire video store, how nice to be cerebrally challenged! This, none the less, is one God, what a bunch of pinheads critics can be. Zodiac is "unsatisfying"? "No resolution"? "About a writer rather than a killer?" Newsflash...the crime was never solved! This is a brilliant, subtle film by sledgehammer director Fincher, and it's a welcome change. With enough "Se7en" clones to fill an entire video store, how nice to be cerebrally challenged! This, none the less, is one of the creepiest film in recent memory--gave me honest to God nightmares. Bravo to Fincher and the uniformly excellent cast. And whoever chose "Hurdy Gurdy Man" as soundtrack material is a genius--I'll never be able to listen to Donovan again. Expand
  35. Westo
    Mar 7, 2007
    10
    for anyone expecting to sit down for a 90 minute hyper-stylized blood orgy, i can understand some people checking their watches. but if you go in ready to invest three hours in an intricate and brilliantly sequenced crime drama i guarantee you will be totally blown away. i loved everything about this movie; the pacing, the acting, the cinematography, and screenplay were all tuned to for anyone expecting to sit down for a 90 minute hyper-stylized blood orgy, i can understand some people checking their watches. but if you go in ready to invest three hours in an intricate and brilliantly sequenced crime drama i guarantee you will be totally blown away. i loved everything about this movie; the pacing, the acting, the cinematography, and screenplay were all tuned to perfection. i have as much OCD and ADD as the rest of those living in western society and this movie still kept me on the edge of my seat just through the sheer passion of the characters themselves. fight club and se7en were great of course but i thought this really stood out as a masterpiece for david fincher and a mature piece of really highly focused storytelling that doesn't drag for a second. Expand
  36. WillieGreen
    Mar 7, 2007
    8
    ***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
    ***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
  37. ChadS.
    May 2, 2007
    10
    They started the meeting without him. You hear the off-camera voice of the editor-in-chief as Robert(Jake Gyllenhaal) enters the San Francisco Chronicle building; a pan finally delivers him into the conference room. He's tardy, but it doesn't matter. The movie can get by without him, for now. "Zodiac", up to this point, is a police procedural and a workplace drama. How the They started the meeting without him. You hear the off-camera voice of the editor-in-chief as Robert(Jake Gyllenhaal) enters the San Francisco Chronicle building; a pan finally delivers him into the conference room. He's tardy, but it doesn't matter. The movie can get by without him, for now. "Zodiac", up to this point, is a police procedural and a workplace drama. How the screenplay transforms the cartoonist into a pro-active character for the stretch run is what makes "Zodiac" so exciting; to see the low-man at the Chronicle emerge out of Paul Avery's shadow. "Zodiac" is really an underdog story. It's kind of like watching "Rudy". Expand
  38. JakeV.B.
    Aug 9, 2007
    10
    Fincher's best film to date. His depiction of the havoc wreaked by Zodiak upon those given the task or personal obsession of catching him, in many ways psychologically akin to The Shinning, is so devastating that he wisely gives little time to the actual killings. We watch the pursuing characters as their task gradually grinds them down, and Fincher's attention to the details, Fincher's best film to date. His depiction of the havoc wreaked by Zodiak upon those given the task or personal obsession of catching him, in many ways psychologically akin to The Shinning, is so devastating that he wisely gives little time to the actual killings. We watch the pursuing characters as their task gradually grinds them down, and Fincher's attention to the details, large and small, reveals a confidence in his choice of the film's direction which places him among the very best of his profession. Gambling with a fairly long running time, Fincher's excellent cast executes the director's plan almost flawlessly. I've never been a fan of Mark Ruffalo or his acting, but Fincher puts him squarely in the spotlight and he delivers the performance of his life. Some may see this film as a boring, overlong police procedural , lacking the intensity generated by the expected blood-letting, but I don't.. Fincher's made some very decent films, but nothing like this. It's a renewed pleasure to find a director whose films are identified by his name a la Stanley Kubrick. Now let's see if Fincher can consistently produce a product at least equal to this film. Expand
  39. JohnO
    Mar 9, 2008
    8
    This is superb!! If you like intelligent murder thrillers you won't be disappointed.
  40. DanF.
    Mar 10, 2007
    10
    To be honest, I did check my watch, but only because I thought we were hitting the climax (which we were an hour away from.) Beautiful looking, never boring, great performances, SPECTACULAR storyline (and huge bonus that its true.)
  41. RyanB.
    Mar 4, 2007
    4
    This is a great movie but a 3 hour movie and the middle part of it gets boring as hell and it is predictable based on a true story and the zodiac killer was never caught and the movie was featured on americas most wanted if you watch that episode it will tell you everything that happened in the movie.
  42. William
    Mar 2, 2007
    10
    A sprawling masterpiece by the one and only David Fincher. He digs deep beneath our skins and creates a film for the ages. It features oscar worthy performaces from Jake Gyllenhaal, Mark Ruffalo, and Robert Downey Jr.. The story takes hold of us and refuses to let go until the very end which is left open ended. Was Leigh the killer or was it someone else. The obsession that took over A sprawling masterpiece by the one and only David Fincher. He digs deep beneath our skins and creates a film for the ages. It features oscar worthy performaces from Jake Gyllenhaal, Mark Ruffalo, and Robert Downey Jr.. The story takes hold of us and refuses to let go until the very end which is left open ended. Was Leigh the killer or was it someone else. The obsession that took over these people ruined their lives anthe press egged it on. Their own obsession with getting the scoop transformed the Zodiac into a celebrity. They messed with everyone's minds and clues were messed around and people gave false testimonials only turning the case into a twisted never ending Labyrinth. Come oscar time next year this film should definitely be remebered. It is taut and thrilling and meticulous. Fincher, welcome to perfection. Expand
  43. DavidL.
    Mar 25, 2007
    10
    Go into this film with the right attitude, expecting to have to think and you'll find one of the most rewarding films of the past 10 years.
  44. JonS.
    Mar 8, 2007
    5
    This was a sub-par movie should have been like hour and a half but stretched it out for like 3 hours. It did have some funny dialogue but overall it was an average movie.
  45. AitorE.
    May 21, 2007
    10
    Zodiac is more than a thriller, it´s definetly THE thriller. Fincher builds a huge, monumental story where there isn´t such a thing. He invades your mind with tones of information that never shows itself confusing, but brilliantly dispensed. Mark Ruffalo demonstrates once again the great actor he is, while Jake Gyllenhaal stand the weight of a relevant role efficiently. Zodiac is more than a thriller, it´s definetly THE thriller. Fincher builds a huge, monumental story where there isn´t such a thing. He invades your mind with tones of information that never shows itself confusing, but brilliantly dispensed. Mark Ruffalo demonstrates once again the great actor he is, while Jake Gyllenhaal stand the weight of a relevant role efficiently. Summaring, Zodiac cannot be considered anything but a masterpiece of a director that loves his work and cinema. (the lake couple assassination, best filmed murder in history). Expand
  46. JayM.
    Apr 15, 2008
    10
    This strange, obsessive film by David Fincher is the perfect match of material and directorial personality. Given to compulsive retakes and meticulous preparation and long shoots, Mr. Fincher finds his alter ego in his characters compulsions yielding a masterwork nearly unmatched in recent cinema. One of the 3 or 4 best films of 2007.
  47. BlakeJ.
    Mar 11, 2007
    7
    I can guarantee two things to the avid movie goer about this movie: the first, it will grip you at the beginning, the second, you WILL fall in love with Robert Downey Jr. Not to mention that you are bound to get freaked out by all of the killings. Director David Fincher does it again, his camera work is worth your money alone, not to mention the fact that he somehow gets great I can guarantee two things to the avid movie goer about this movie: the first, it will grip you at the beginning, the second, you WILL fall in love with Robert Downey Jr. Not to mention that you are bound to get freaked out by all of the killings. Director David Fincher does it again, his camera work is worth your money alone, not to mention the fact that he somehow gets great performances out of everyone he puts on screen. The second half of the movie drags on, I think it is supposed to however, since the end of the investigation dragged on for years. It was most definitely unique...And most definitely worth seeing, Expand
  48. Nik
    Jul 15, 2007
    10
    When I went to see Zodiac, I went alone, driven by boredom; at the time I just wanted something to do, so I thought I'd go see a movie, didn't think there was anything playing, but I noticed Zodiac had very favorable reviews, so I decided to see that, but I was NOT expecting what I saw. Zodiac is one of the most finely crafted motion pictures of all-time, I can't believe When I went to see Zodiac, I went alone, driven by boredom; at the time I just wanted something to do, so I thought I'd go see a movie, didn't think there was anything playing, but I noticed Zodiac had very favorable reviews, so I decided to see that, but I was NOT expecting what I saw. Zodiac is one of the most finely crafted motion pictures of all-time, I can't believe that's not even more praised by the critics and audience circles. The film is absolute brilliance, armed only with what was written in the books, and what the evidence tells us, the film manages to keep you mesmerized throughout it's entire 150+ running time (that is if you're mature enough to handle it). And even though i went in knowing that there wouldn't be any conclusion, somehow the film kept making me think "they're gonna fin him this time". And even though they didn't, I came out not remembering the last time I was so satisfied by a film. Probably the best I've seen since Sideways (which came out late in 04'). Collapse
  49. Oct 11, 2011
    6
    the movie started out good and played great, but it had a real is-that-it ending, and that spoiled the experience a bit for me.
  50. Jul 17, 2012
    4
    Yeah, well, I thought the story had potential, but when I watched it, it was just so boring. The characters I liked because they were played by some of my favourite actors - Robert Downey Jr, for example. Of course, even less than halfway through the film, everything just seemed to fade away, trying to look clever for its own sake. The actors were barely able to keep the script alive. ButYeah, well, I thought the story had potential, but when I watched it, it was just so boring. The characters I liked because they were played by some of my favourite actors - Robert Downey Jr, for example. Of course, even less than halfway through the film, everything just seemed to fade away, trying to look clever for its own sake. The actors were barely able to keep the script alive. But it didn't even manage to keep it all together - from something based on a serial killer, seriously! When a film has a serial killer in it, you've got to make it exciting! Where was the tension, the heart pounding moments? I know this was a true story, but that does not automatically make the film watch-able, let alone successful. Expand
  51. JohnR.
    Mar 19, 2007
    6
    On one side, it was a good movie overall and enjoyable. It was well acted and very well made. However, it was ultimately unsatisfying. There really wasn't much suspense at all and the Jake Gyllenhall character's efforts promised much but delivered very little. Ultimately, the screenplay is to blame. What a pity.
  52. PianocomposerGuy
    Mar 4, 2007
    8
    In a word: A flawed masterpiece. All the director needed to do was cut a 30-minute sequence about a lead that went nowhere and it would have been perfect. This is not about a serial killer, or about catching him. It's about how an unsolved crime destoys the lives of two cops and two newspaper employees who never get enough physical evidence for an indictment. The director (whose In a word: A flawed masterpiece. All the director needed to do was cut a 30-minute sequence about a lead that went nowhere and it would have been perfect. This is not about a serial killer, or about catching him. It's about how an unsolved crime destoys the lives of two cops and two newspaper employees who never get enough physical evidence for an indictment. The director (whose credits include the stunning Se7en) shows us the frustration and toll that the investigation has on their personal lives. One cop "gets out". Another is transferred out of the department after being accused of faking a letter from the Zodiac killer (he didn't). Robert Downey Jr. turns to drugs after getting a taste of fame after he accuses the Zodiac of being a latent homosexual and then becomes a target. Other than being overlong, the movie ends unsatisfactorily with accusations rather than arrests. A solid 8 with great acting performances. Expand
  53. PeterM.
    Mar 10, 2007
    9
    This was a great movie, from the groundbreaking filming methods and shots, to the great acting from Robert Downey Jr. It did not feel two and a half hours at all! The movie moved along at a perfect pace, and was never difficult to follow. The killings were brutal, but did not affect the mood off the movie too drastically. The music was fitting, and the cinematography was groundbreaking to This was a great movie, from the groundbreaking filming methods and shots, to the great acting from Robert Downey Jr. It did not feel two and a half hours at all! The movie moved along at a perfect pace, and was never difficult to follow. The killings were brutal, but did not affect the mood off the movie too drastically. The music was fitting, and the cinematography was groundbreaking to say the least. The scene on the Golden Gate Bridge was incredible! GREAT MOVIE. Highly Recomended. Expand
  54. AllistairP.
    Mar 2, 2007
    6
    I think David Fincher started reading the reviews of his movies, as he decisvely strives away from INTENSE camera action and DRAMATIC storytelling. For the first hour this feels as good as any movie by the man, as it weaves in and out of the story and characters. Some great actors (Robert Downey is the shit!) and directing, but it all just half asses itself to the end. Perhaps the Zodiac I think David Fincher started reading the reviews of his movies, as he decisvely strives away from INTENSE camera action and DRAMATIC storytelling. For the first hour this feels as good as any movie by the man, as it weaves in and out of the story and characters. Some great actors (Robert Downey is the shit!) and directing, but it all just half asses itself to the end. Perhaps the Zodiac is best left for books or a "BS" Hollywood script adaptation, as I'm sure no audience will feel that fufilled with any parts of this story. You can do worse for a movie to watch on a friday night, but David Fincher can do much better for a follow up to so many classic films. (WARNING: I liked Panic Room). Expand
  55. MarkB.
    Mar 23, 2007
    9
    Director David Fincher is certainly both a sick puppy and an odd duck. Who else would begin Alien3 by, in the first few minutes, unceremoniously killing off little Newt, the surrogate daughter figure that Sigourney Weaver's Riplet spent all of Aliens trying to protect? Who else deserves the credit/ blame for Se7en, the inadvertent father of the torture-porn genre that later brought Director David Fincher is certainly both a sick puppy and an odd duck. Who else would begin Alien3 by, in the first few minutes, unceremoniously killing off little Newt, the surrogate daughter figure that Sigourney Weaver's Riplet spent all of Aliens trying to protect? Who else deserves the credit/ blame for Se7en, the inadvertent father of the torture-porn genre that later brought us Saw and all its sequels and knockoffs? Who else's directorial vision could mesh so perfectly with Fight Club author Chuck Palahniuk's VERY uniquely quirky, nightmarish and nihilistic voice? And the most fascinating thing about Fincher is that with Zodiac he proves himself to be a total trickster; just when you think you've got him pegged as a tremendously skilled but thoroughly heartless sadist, he upends all expectations by making his most humane movie to date...and it's about a serial killer! Long, obsessively meticulous and thoroughly fascinating, Fincher's Zodiac isn't as concerned about the Zodiac Killer's murders (which are depicted with extreme empathy for the victims) but with the trail of LIVING casualties left in his wake as newspapermen and cops, unable to track him down or absolutely identify him, suffer the destruction of careers, marriages and physical and mental health in their obsessive, Ahab-like pursuit. (San Fransisco Chronicle reporter Paul Avery, played by Robert Downey Jr. in a performance that certainly would've netted him a Best Supporting Actor Oscar nomination next year had this movie been released a little later and made a lot more, arguably suffers the most, but it's hard not to watch the same paper's editorial cartoonist Robert graysmith, played by Jake Gyllenhaal, torpedo his ten-year marriage by completely ignoring it in pursuit of Zodiac without concluding that his obsession is the most disturbing...especially given that his wife, Melanie, is played by Chloe Sevigny who, wearing overalls in half the movie and huge glasses throughout, would handily defeat any litter of kittens in an adorableness runoff.) The tragedy of Avery's, Graysmith's and police inspector David Toschi's (Mark Ruffalo) repeatedly frustrated attempts to nail Zodiac's identity lies in the time period; in just a few years the use of advanced computer cross-checking and other capabilities, extremely sensitive DNA testing capacities that would've probably caught Zodiac's slightest glitch, and all sorts of other aids to detection that all CSI viewers thoroughly take for granted would have all but assured that they'd get their man and make it stick. That's why the genius of Fincher's direction lies in his making this as much a period piece as any Jane Austen adaptation; just as Fincher cleverly communicated our culture's dependence on and worship of consumerism in Fight Club by including a brand name in nearly every shot, here he features in almost every frame a visual or verbal reference to an objest or item that would be totally at home thirty or so years ago but totally alien today. (My two favorite references: a comment by the San Fransisco police noting that one of their offices hasn't got one of those newfangled fax machines...and Avery, at a pivotal point, playing around with a brand new, almost unbearably exciting 1975 video game known as "Pong".) Admittedly, sitting through a nearly three hour movie dealing with a series of crimes that never quite gets solved, therefore effectively denying the audience an emotional release it's perfectly reasonable to want and expect at the movies is a tough way to spend a Saturday night after a long hard work week, so this movie's disappointing box office was not only inevitable but somewhat understandable. But to those who take the chance (and who later rally around this film, making it the cult item it'll undoubtedly become) Zodiac is not only one of the best films about the 1970s ever made (without so much as a single Bee Gees record in it) but can comfortably be mentioned in a breath with Robert Altman's Nashville and Francis Ford Coppola's first two Godfather movies as one of the great epics OF the 1970s. Expand
  56. EricC.
    Mar 23, 2007
    10
    David Fincher is a very interesting director. Some of his films have been horribly under rated (Alien 3) and some over rated (Panic Room). But he showed definatitively that he was a special director with Seven. Now he has shown that he is one of the best. He doesn't really revive his signature bleak-and-gritty style, but simple camera and lighting tricks, while nothing new, were David Fincher is a very interesting director. Some of his films have been horribly under rated (Alien 3) and some over rated (Panic Room). But he showed definatitively that he was a special director with Seven. Now he has shown that he is one of the best. He doesn't really revive his signature bleak-and-gritty style, but simple camera and lighting tricks, while nothing new, were impressively done. But what really made this movie was the cast, all amazingly casted. Jake Gyllenhaal was amazing, and if you don't see how than you should go back to Wild Hogs and Norbit. Here is his best outing since his amazing performance as Donnie Darko (if you've never seen it, don't judge it). And it's too bad for the people who didn't have the patience to enjoy to wild story. Quick and underplayed plot twists kept things very exciting. I can't wait for Fincher's next project. Expand
  57. MauriceJOhnson
    Mar 2, 2007
    10
    A terrifying, brilliant film along the lines of The Silence of the Lambs. It is truly revolutionary and unforgettable in several ways. Both directed and crafted to absolute perfection and acted with complete grace and dignity by Robert Downey Jr, who delivers a Oscar Nomination worthy performance and the young and very promising Jake Ghyenhaal. The movie is a masterpiece. Missing it wouldA terrifying, brilliant film along the lines of The Silence of the Lambs. It is truly revolutionary and unforgettable in several ways. Both directed and crafted to absolute perfection and acted with complete grace and dignity by Robert Downey Jr, who delivers a Oscar Nomination worthy performance and the young and very promising Jake Ghyenhaal. The movie is a masterpiece. Missing it would be insane. Expand
  58. TonyB.
    Mar 2, 2007
    10
    A terrifying, brilliant film along the lines of The Silence of the Lambs. It is truly revolutionary and unforgettable in several ways. Both directed and crafted to absolute perfection and acted with complete grace and dignity by Robert Downey Jr, who delivers a Oscar Nomination worthy performance and the young and very promising Jake Ghyenhaal. The movie is a masterpiece. Missing it would A terrifying, brilliant film along the lines of The Silence of the Lambs. It is truly revolutionary and unforgettable in several ways. Both directed and crafted to absolute perfection and acted with complete grace and dignity by Robert Downey Jr, who delivers a Oscar Nomination worthy performance and the young and very promising Jake Ghyenhaal. The movie is a masterpiece. Missing it would be insane. Based on the actual case files of one of the most intriguing unsolved crimes in the nation's history, Zodiac is a thriller from David Fincher, director of "Seven" and "Fight Club." As a serial killer terrifies the San Francisco Bay Area and taunts police with his ciphers and letters, investigators in four jurisdictions search for the murderer. The case will become an obsession for four men as their lives and careers are built and destroyed by the endless trail of clues. Zodiac exhausts more than one genre. Termite art par excellence, it burrows for the sake of burrowing, as fascinated by its own nooks and crannies as "Inland Empire." The film never veers from its stoically gripping, police-blotter tone, yet it begins to take on the quality of a dream. In Zodiac, working from a script by James Vanderbilt, Fincher has decidedly toned down his act. His straight-ahead, methodical direction isn't as flagrantly unsettling as much of his previous work, but it's more psychologically layered. In this film, for the first time, we feel for his characters when they bleed. Expand
  59. DavidS.
    Mar 3, 2007
    8
    Outstanding script and pacing appropriate to the story - old-school detective work to find Zodiac. Ruffalo is - as always - outstanding. Gyllenhaal turns in an interesting performance as a real oddball. Great cast overall - not a bad choice in the bunch. Greatest "Six Degrees" story of the film: Ruffalo's character (David Toschi) consulted on Bullitt with Steve McQueen and one of the Outstanding script and pacing appropriate to the story - old-school detective work to find Zodiac. Ruffalo is - as always - outstanding. Gyllenhaal turns in an interesting performance as a real oddball. Great cast overall - not a bad choice in the bunch. Greatest "Six Degrees" story of the film: Ruffalo's character (David Toschi) consulted on Bullitt with Steve McQueen and one of the supporting stars (Donal Logue) is the star of "The Tao of Steve," about the coolest guy in history, Steve McQueen. Expand
  60. DonaldR.
    Mar 6, 2007
    10
    Dark, detailed and dreamlike, Zodiac creeps into you like a ghost. I have not stopped thinking of this film since seeing it. Fincher has done a brilliant job of capturing everything about the time and place of this story, and his actors have delivered performances that are wise and nuanced. This is magnificent filmmaking and one of the best, satisfying films I've ever seen. Bravo!
  61. MattP.
    Mar 6, 2007
    6
    Way, wayyyyyyy too long. Too much exposition at the end and not enough Fincher-esque suspense. If this movie was cut down by about 45 minutes, then it would get a 10, but as is, a 6.
  62. BillyS.
    Mar 8, 2007
    9
    No way in hell can you make a 2 hour and 40 minute movie about an unsolved serial-killer case that spends nearly two and a half hours on the investigation without seeing the killer but focuses on its effect on the two cops and two reporters who become consumed with finding him, no way could the story grow more and more gripping with a hypnotic intensity, no way could the setting of Snn No way in hell can you make a 2 hour and 40 minute movie about an unsolved serial-killer case that spends nearly two and a half hours on the investigation without seeing the killer but focuses on its effect on the two cops and two reporters who become consumed with finding him, no way could the story grow more and more gripping with a hypnotic intensity, no way could the setting of Snn Francisco in the late 60's and early 70's be so perfectly recreated to the finest detail in its production design, music, and cinematography, and no way could Jake Gyllenhaal, Mark Ruffalo, Robert Downey Jr. and Brian Cox give award worthy performances when everyone is waiting to see the Zodiac Killer. No way! What's that you say? David Fincher directed it... oh, i see, nevermind. Expand
  63. JoeyB
    Jul 24, 2007
    10
    That wondrous rarity - a studio backed auteur masterpiece. Brilliant.
  64. SteveK
    Sep 19, 2007
    9
    First off, this is a detective movie, NOT a slasher/thriller/horror movie. If you go in expecting a slasher, after the first 30 minutes or so, you will be disappointed. Fincher is a master story-teller. It's fascinating, gripping stuff. It takes a more mature film-watching pallate, meaning there are not a lot of car crashes and special effects. Teeny-boppers who are overstimulated on First off, this is a detective movie, NOT a slasher/thriller/horror movie. If you go in expecting a slasher, after the first 30 minutes or so, you will be disappointed. Fincher is a master story-teller. It's fascinating, gripping stuff. It takes a more mature film-watching pallate, meaning there are not a lot of car crashes and special effects. Teeny-boppers who are overstimulated on MTV probably will not enjoy this one. The suspense is woven into the story appropriately adding a chilling menace that is present throughout the pic. Great movie, another triumph for David Fincher. Expand
  65. LeeM.
    Oct 24, 2008
    10
    The best thriller of the last 10 years by some distance.
  66. JayH.
    Feb 6, 2008
    7
    What an excellent movie. Great plot, beautifully written and always interesting, although at times it gets a bit tiresome, but not often. A good fifteen to thirty minutes could have been shaved off the total time. Great cast works well together, excellent acting.
  67. ChessL
    Mar 4, 2009
    9
    This was a great movie in my perspective, all those that think this movie was a total shrek, well you can all suck it.
  68. HenriM.
    Jul 29, 2009
    10
    The most chilling film I've seen in recent years. Not only does Fincher meticulously recreates the atmosphere and mood of the 70's, he gives a brilliant insight on obsession, and examines how the murder case took over people's lives. It's also technically superb, with great performances all around.
  69. JaredC.
    Oct 27, 2007
    7
    The film kind of carried on a bit once it reached 1hr and 30mins. Well, first of all, they know who the killer is and why won't you just arrest him for cryin' out loud. All it was from that point was completely pointless information that Jake Gyllenhaal gave to Mark Ruffalo that his house was fifty-feet from his house, well we don't care. Though the first hour was pretty The film kind of carried on a bit once it reached 1hr and 30mins. Well, first of all, they know who the killer is and why won't you just arrest him for cryin' out loud. All it was from that point was completely pointless information that Jake Gyllenhaal gave to Mark Ruffalo that his house was fifty-feet from his house, well we don't care. Though the first hour was pretty interesting and Robert Downey Jr. is hilarious in this crime/thriller. In the main menu it had the Jaws music and sounded so cool and creepy at the same time. Well, I was disappointed to the fact that all the music was was someone going: dudududu. OH please! Just get on with it Fincher. But other than that it was a very entertaining gripping picture. Expand
  70. Gray
    Feb 26, 2007
    9
    Excellent. Just got back from an early screening in Boston, and I'm really happy with it. A very restrained effort from Fincher, despite it's length. A great script keeps all the happenings from ever getting confusing, and keeps the film enthralling for it's entire runtime.
  71. KyleS.
    Feb 27, 2007
    9
    Saw this at a screening, not expecting to like it and it was great. Tense, well-acted, and very thought provoking. Really enjoyed it.
  72. DWilly
    Mar 11, 2007
    6
    Very strong movie making skills on display, but, ultimately, you feel had. The acting is solid throughout, although Downey causes some Courtney Love style just-playing-your-debauched-self winces; but Mark Ruffalo, taking another step toward big time actor, pretty much leaves everybody else in the dust. Apart from one great scene, with the guy who's the best guess for the real Zodiac, Very strong movie making skills on display, but, ultimately, you feel had. The acting is solid throughout, although Downey causes some Courtney Love style just-playing-your-debauched-self winces; but Mark Ruffalo, taking another step toward big time actor, pretty much leaves everybody else in the dust. Apart from one great scene, with the guy who's the best guess for the real Zodiac, not much of this stylish collection of facts and red-herring effects sticks. Expand
  73. IrfanB.
    Mar 1, 2007
    7
    Good movie, just 30 minutes longer than what it could have been. Kudos to good acting from all the actors. Robert Downy Jr did attempt to do a Johnny Depp a few times but still commendable overall.
  74. JoeyM.
    Mar 12, 2007
    9
    A surprisingly gripping and well acted account of a dark period in California history. What was fascinating for me was remembering how different it was back in that period. Pulling over because somebody was honking at you? Not being surprised when they offered to help? Not driving off when a stranger comes driving up? Zodiac was able to take advantage of people because they didn't A surprisingly gripping and well acted account of a dark period in California history. What was fascinating for me was remembering how different it was back in that period. Pulling over because somebody was honking at you? Not being surprised when they offered to help? Not driving off when a stranger comes driving up? Zodiac was able to take advantage of people because they didn't expect that type of behavior from strangers back then - and he is, at least in part, responsible for the fact that we just don't trust each other as much as we used to. A fascinating film about a cultural turning point. Expand
  75. KevinR.
    Mar 12, 2007
    8
    The best movie thus far in 2007. It suceeds where Black Dahlia failed visually and thrills the audience every step of the way.
  76. PaulK.
    Mar 2, 2007
    9
    This is a long one...but the pacing helps. Solid acting all around, with enough thrills to satisfy fans of Fincher's previous work. If you are fascinated with the zodiac killer, you will dig this and for the uninitiated, you will most likely be fascinated, after watching.
  77. VS.Dobbs
    Mar 2, 2007
    8
    Some advice for anyone heading out to see this one: pay attention. It's 3 hours but it moves fast and is packed with details and names and rarely stops to spoonfeed its audience.
  78. CarlC.
    Mar 2, 2007
    8
    Great film, but like the detectives and newspaper people who pursued the ZODIAC KILLER, the resolution kills us all in the end a bit.
  79. ThatMoviePinhead
    Mar 2, 2007
    7
    This is good, maybe great. But is it interesting? timeless? breakthrough? astonishing? ummmm, probably no, no, no, and ....no David Fincher has become, just another great director, who chooses to do movies that don't push him, but rather keep him at a dangerous "Plateau" that "De Palma", "Ron Howard", "Joel Schumacher", etc... have all come to. Not a bad movie, actually quite good. This is good, maybe great. But is it interesting? timeless? breakthrough? astonishing? ummmm, probably no, no, no, and ....no David Fincher has become, just another great director, who chooses to do movies that don't push him, but rather keep him at a dangerous "Plateau" that "De Palma", "Ron Howard", "Joel Schumacher", etc... have all come to. Not a bad movie, actually quite good. But for a director of Fincher's caliber...to only make this movie and Panic Room IN 10 YEARS.. it warrants the question... What the HELL?????? For what it is, it's pretty great though. You know you're going to see it anyway, so enjoy it, and ignore my review of THIS MOVIE VS. the movie I wish he had the balls to make. Expand
  80. M.Johnson
    Mar 2, 2007
    7
    ZODIAC is not a thriller. Nor is it a suspense film. But I think that the people who find this film boring have missed the point. As have the people who praise it. That is because all of ZODIAC's points are made too shallowly. It shows us investigative oversight and the tragic frustrations of case-work in a pre-digital age. But the film won't commit to being about that. And it ZODIAC is not a thriller. Nor is it a suspense film. But I think that the people who find this film boring have missed the point. As have the people who praise it. That is because all of ZODIAC's points are made too shallowly. It shows us investigative oversight and the tragic frustrations of case-work in a pre-digital age. But the film won't commit to being about that. And it falls short as character study- we are told of obsession and it's toll, but we are neither SHOWN nor presented the invitation to make up our own minds. What should be the most gripping aspects of the film instead become just more details, just more bits of evidence, in a story with no satisfactory resolution. Of course, life cannot always have satisfactory resolutions, but DRAMA can, and should- even in an open-ended story. As such, ZODIAC works only as an expertly crafted, quite interestin historical piece. A kind of lesser IN COLD BLOOD. Certainly worth seeing and to be appreciated in some ways, but nothing to get excited about. Expand
  81. JasonM.
    Mar 4, 2007
    8
    This is a very well done movie. The length is a little long but it is worth it. This isnt a horror film and some people think it is and are utterly disappointed and dislike a welldone film. Seven and Fight Club are better but you are limited when you are working with a true story.
  82. SusanH.
    Mar 4, 2007
    6
    In many ways, as others have commented this is a really good movie, but ultimately many sections are flat and tedious. Perhaps Fincher was trying to give the audience a true sense of what crime investigation is really like and how the many false leads and dead ends lead to an obsessive need to find the answer.
  83. AaronS.
    Mar 6, 2007
    9
    David Fincher's most fully realized film to date. In the past, the director's visual style occasionally rubbed your nose in it's technique-'Zodiac' is a near perfect display of admirable directorial restraint. Instead of just another serial killer thriller-Fincher and his very fine cast create an elegant mood piece about obession, the media and the '70s. David Fincher's most fully realized film to date. In the past, the director's visual style occasionally rubbed your nose in it's technique-'Zodiac' is a near perfect display of admirable directorial restraint. Instead of just another serial killer thriller-Fincher and his very fine cast create an elegant mood piece about obession, the media and the '70s. Excellent film that I hope many will take a chance to seek out. Sure to be one of the year's cinematic highlights come December when the top ten lists roll around. Expand
  84. Pooja
    Mar 8, 2007
    9
    I thought it was a great movie. The plot was great and the acting was great. The only complaint is that it was a little bit to long. If it was slightly short it would have been a 10
  85. AndrewK.
    Apr 8, 2007
    7
    A great film from Fincher. No, it does not have the stylistic cinematography of some of his other films. But I believe that he uses whatever style is appropriate to the topic. This film does have a few really cool shots, specifically the tracking shot from above on the taxi cab, and the shot on the Golden Gate bridge. Jake Gyllenhaal is perfect for his part. He has always been a natural A great film from Fincher. No, it does not have the stylistic cinematography of some of his other films. But I believe that he uses whatever style is appropriate to the topic. This film does have a few really cool shots, specifically the tracking shot from above on the taxi cab, and the shot on the Golden Gate bridge. Jake Gyllenhaal is perfect for his part. He has always been a natural for the wide-eyed, innocent youth, while not being boring or cliche. Mark Ruffalo gave the other standout performance in this piece. I liked Robert Downey Jr, but I can't help feeling that this is the same part that he always plays now. And why does someone in recovery constantly play characters that are using? The story itself is captivating, especially for one, like myself, who is completely unfamiliar with the story. I was not even aware of the Dirty Harry connection as I have never seen the film. So that was another interesting tidbit. I loved the muted color tones that made one feel like one was back in the 60's/70's. I find it strange that people complain about wasting half an hour "pursuing a lead that goes nowhere." That lead, if I understand correctly, is the same man that most people believe to have been the actual Zodiac killer, as we discover by the end of the film. The violence was played down, except for one or two scenes that were truly terrifying. I didn't mind that we were focusing on Robert Graysmith (Gyllenhaal) rather than someone else, as he's the only one who never gave up on trying to put it all together. He wrote the book, and it only seems logical to follow his voyage through the events. Many solid performances from character actors in small rolls, namely Brian Cox and Philip Baker Hall. I never felt like the film was too long. It kept me hooked the entire time. Maybe some people have a shorter attention span or maybe it's just not their cup of tea. Also, one should not expect a director to go on making the exact same type of movie throughout his/her career. A director, in fact, any artist, needs to grow and explore new directions. I applaud Fincher for giving this story the exact direction that it required: nothing over the top, with an underlying tension and unease throughout the entire film. Expand
  86. DanB.
    Jul 26, 2007
    8
    Really good, engrossing and interesting... I'm kind of surprised it didn't do better. And I saw it on a plane, too, with distractions--it *still* got me. Mark Ruffalo and Robert Downey Jr. are great, too.
  87. Josak
    Aug 20, 2007
    10
    I absolutely loved this movie. I rented it and watched it 3 times over the weekend (can't remember the last time I've done that). Absolutely gripping; it keeps you hooked from start to finish. Everything about it is pure quality: the way its constructed, the acting, everything plays out perfectly. Best of all, it keeps you at the edge of your seat wanting to know what happens I absolutely loved this movie. I rented it and watched it 3 times over the weekend (can't remember the last time I've done that). Absolutely gripping; it keeps you hooked from start to finish. Everything about it is pure quality: the way its constructed, the acting, everything plays out perfectly. Best of all, it keeps you at the edge of your seat wanting to know what happens next. And the fact that it's a true story and the killer was never caught, makes it all the more suspenseful and scary. This is my favorite movie of the year and probably the best I've seen in long while. Expand
  88. ScottS.
    Feb 13, 2008
    9
    Great film a little complicated to follow in places due to the many names and dates used but it will keep you guessing throughout. Highly enjoyable.
  89. GavinC.
    Aug 20, 2009
    8
    'Zodiac' displays both gripping suspense and comedy while introducing a mix between 'scary film' and 'murder mystery film'.
  90. Matthew
    Feb 27, 2007
    9
    Fincher rebounds from the "One watch only" predictability of Panic Room. He's back on top. The movie is long and full of important dialog, so I think a lot of people won't like it. It's a thinker. I'll be adding this to my expanding Fincher Shelf, with SE7EN, The Game and Fight Club.
  91. BilB.
    Mar 12, 2007
    6
    Every nook and cranny, ever corner and turn was covered and re-covered leaving nothing to the imagination. A really good film showing the SF at the time, even down to the commercials playing on the radio which brought back many memories, but nevertheless, I found myself dozing off and getting bored with the predicatble performance of Robert Downey. Overall, a 6 in my book.
  92. MarcK.
    Mar 14, 2007
    8
    A little on the long side, but it was able to keep my interest throughout. Just a fascinating and interesting story...I hope they were faithful to what the actual events were.
  93. PaulG.
    Mar 15, 2007
    9
    My attention never flagged, even though the movie approached three hours. That in itself is high commendation. A great detective story. Wall Street Journal's Morgenstern has his head stuck in the stock reports.
  94. JimD.
    Mar 16, 2007
    9
    This is not your typical Hollywood
  95. DanH.
    Mar 18, 2007
    7
    This is a good movie with a ton of high-end actors. The directing is professional and to-the-point. The only reason I couldn't give it a better score is becasue of Jake Gyllenhaal as the lead. Don't get me wrong, I think Gyllenhaal is a good actor, but he just doesn't match the role he played in this movie. He's too "leading-man", especially for the part of a This is a good movie with a ton of high-end actors. The directing is professional and to-the-point. The only reason I couldn't give it a better score is becasue of Jake Gyllenhaal as the lead. Don't get me wrong, I think Gyllenhaal is a good actor, but he just doesn't match the role he played in this movie. He's too "leading-man", especially for the part of a introverted cartoonist with an obsessive tedency. Gyllenhaal was a poor casting decision. Other than that, I highly recommend this film. Expand
  96. JavierB
    Jul 22, 2007
    8
    Really long movie but an interesting and good film.
  97. AndyG
    Jul 28, 2007
    7
    It's true that this movie is very finely crafted - but it's also too long. Technically, nothing to complain about. Good acting by all the leads, nice job recreating a 60's /70's atmosphere etc.. It's just that, at some point, in spite of yourself, you might actually start to feel bored. Still a decent movie.
  98. jw
    Aug 11, 2007
    8
    Does anybody else feel that hiring Robert Downey, Jr. to play a brilliant but hopelessly cynical and sarcastic addict is something like hiring the world's best hacker to design hacker-proof software? He has a hopelessly unfair advantage in that respect, but the results are always, ALWAYS entertaining. Observed at a safe distance, he is one of our best actors. And that label can be Does anybody else feel that hiring Robert Downey, Jr. to play a brilliant but hopelessly cynical and sarcastic addict is something like hiring the world's best hacker to design hacker-proof software? He has a hopelessly unfair advantage in that respect, but the results are always, ALWAYS entertaining. Observed at a safe distance, he is one of our best actors. And that label can be extended to Gyllenhaal and Ruffalo, I think. One is under-appreciated for everything but Brokeback Mountain, and the other is just flat under-appreciated. Nice to see Edwards again, too - he pairs well with Ruffalo. The movie itself is wound perfectly. The horrific stabbings in Napa are all the prompt one needs to remain tense through even the most mundane scenes to follow. Surely friends and family of the "few" true victims have no trouble seeing Zodiac as more than just an underachieving kook. The manic frustration of all involved is easily understood when framed this way. Expand
  99. ChrisV
    Aug 16, 2007
    8
    This movie isnt the best ever seen, its very long, and its entertaining, just because it was a true story, dont see it if you think you are gonna see Michael Myers in accion
  100. ScottW.
    Aug 24, 2007
    9
    Deep, long story and with a frightfull grip, Zodiac is a movie that you can get lost in. Its what movies are for.You will become obsessed yourself, with the case during the show right up to the end. If you like David Fincher films and have not checked out Zodiac. Please do. This one is one of his best. A 9.5 for me.
Metascore
78

Generally favorable reviews - based on 40 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 35 out of 40
  2. Negative: 0 out of 40
  1. Firing on all cylinders as a creepy thriller, police procedural and "All the President's Men"-style investigative newsroom drama, the smart, extremely vivid production oozes period authenticity.
  2. Reviewed by: Todd McCarthy
    90
    Conveying an astonishing array of information across a long narrative arc while still maintaining dramatic rhythm and tension, this adaptation of Robert Graysmith's bestseller reps by far director David Fincher's most mature and accomplished work.
  3. Reviewed by: Nathan Lee
    100
    Zodiac exhausts more than one genre. Termite art par excellence, it burrows for the sake of burrowing, as fascinated by its own nooks and crannies as "Inland Empire."