Over the last few years, only a handful of movies have shaken me so much that they have kept me awake. In fact, I can only really think of one -- The Pianist -- which totally got under my skin. Well, Zodiac did too, in its own way, causing a very fitful sleepless night for me. A 2 hour and 40 minute-long psychological thriller following a San Francisco Chronicle cartoonist's obsession with the serial killer who terrorized the Bay Area in the 1960s and 70s, the film is extremely well-acted, as the critics all say -- though I would argue that Robert Downey Jr. is essentially playing himself (as he does in practically every movie he's in) and everyone (esp Jake) seemed to age remarkably well through the movie, which tracks these folks for over a decade. But the real success of the film was not in the moments of horrific murders (yes, they were bloody and thrilling and terrifying) but the insidious way fascination takes root in the horrible. The movie awakens the desire to investigate, to solve the puzzling ciphers, to delve into the mind of the killer -- whose identity remains throughout the movie (and, officially, still today) unknown. It's also a funny film -- depicting the frustration of bureacracy in police forces as officers try to cooperate (or not) across different geographic jursidictions, in a time when not all police stations have a "telefax." I was totally engaged on so many levels, to the point of being so skittish I couldn't walk into a dark room by myself after the movie. And unlike, say, Silence of the Lambs, which is also a great psychological thriller, but still lapses into silly terror tactics with Anthony Hopkins' punny lines about his penchant for human flesh, I thought Zodiac stayed focused on a very real and grounded logic and innate human curiosity for and attraction towards the dark, violent and unexplained. I mean, for a Hollywood movie!
Monday, April 02, 2007
Losing Sleep over Zodiac
Over the last few years, only a handful of movies have shaken me so much that they have kept me awake. In fact, I can only really think of one -- The Pianist -- which totally got under my skin. Well, Zodiac did too, in its own way, causing a very fitful sleepless night for me. A 2 hour and 40 minute-long psychological thriller following a San Francisco Chronicle cartoonist's obsession with the serial killer who terrorized the Bay Area in the 1960s and 70s, the film is extremely well-acted, as the critics all say -- though I would argue that Robert Downey Jr. is essentially playing himself (as he does in practically every movie he's in) and everyone (esp Jake) seemed to age remarkably well through the movie, which tracks these folks for over a decade. But the real success of the film was not in the moments of horrific murders (yes, they were bloody and thrilling and terrifying) but the insidious way fascination takes root in the horrible. The movie awakens the desire to investigate, to solve the puzzling ciphers, to delve into the mind of the killer -- whose identity remains throughout the movie (and, officially, still today) unknown. It's also a funny film -- depicting the frustration of bureacracy in police forces as officers try to cooperate (or not) across different geographic jursidictions, in a time when not all police stations have a "telefax." I was totally engaged on so many levels, to the point of being so skittish I couldn't walk into a dark room by myself after the movie. And unlike, say, Silence of the Lambs, which is also a great psychological thriller, but still lapses into silly terror tactics with Anthony Hopkins' punny lines about his penchant for human flesh, I thought Zodiac stayed focused on a very real and grounded logic and innate human curiosity for and attraction towards the dark, violent and unexplained. I mean, for a Hollywood movie!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
esp or except Jake? I didn't think he aged at all. The chickies get mad when this happens.
Everyone, especially Jake, aged remarkably well, as in, nobody aged at ALL -- perfunctory streaks of grey in the hair don't quite convey the weight and strain of time. Although Robert Downey did look like shit in the scene in his floating house.
REALLY Aya?? i just saw this yesterday and i came out really just worn out and sucked dry of all of my energy. Fincher REALLY did not leave anything out. i thought it could have been edited down a half hour. while i never got bored during the 2 hours and 40 minutes, i caught myself thinking at times "this is a ludicrous obsession that we are falling prey to". jake's passion to find the Zodiac doesn't come through- i lost interest in it, just like everyone else around Jake did. this, for me, is where Fincher failed.
how can you say you never got bored AND you lost interest in it? I wasn't particularly intrigued by Jake's portrayal/acting, but I was interested in how this obsession over the unsolved case of perverse violence possessed people over time to the extent that their lives and careers were significantly altered.
I liked it, especially the shots of San Francisco and the bridge. But even I was embarrassed for the women in the film. Their roles were written in what seemed like a concession to the studios.
Jakey has a pretty laid back acting style. I really feel like he's the same onscreen as he is off.
Post a Comment