The Zodiac Movie
Storyline
TAGLINES
The most infamous serial killer of our time... is still out there.
THE ZODIAC takes a different look at the famous Zodiac Killer case from other screen treatments of the murders. More than a simple crime story, the film is an emotional thriller focusing on the murders' impact on victims, their families and the wider community. The film follows a police detective and his son who become obsessed with the murders and endanger their family in the process.
| Justin Chambers | Inspector Matt Parish |
| Robin Tunney | Laura Parish |
| Rory Culkin | Johnny Parish |
| William Mapother | Dale Coverling |
| Brad William Henke | Bill Gregory |
| Rex Linn | Jim Martinez |
| Philip Baker Hall | Frank Perkins |
| Marty Lindsey | Zodiac Killer |
| Brian Bloom | Voice of Zodiac |
| Shelby Alexis Irey | Bobbie |
| Natassia Costa | Mary |
| Kris Palm | Michael |
| Nate Dushku | Scott Washington |
| Katelin Chesna | Patsy |
| Kathryn Howell | Mrs. Boucher |
| Alexander Bulkley |
5.50 out of 10 (2088 votes)
Visitor Reviews
embarrassed by some comments
posted on 01 Apr 2009The film was nothing short of fantastic. In reading several comments on this site, there was an overwhelming feeling of disappointment. The disappointment was not in reference to the film, but to those who so fool-heartedly badmouthed the film. I was not expecting that much from Zodiac for a couple of reasons. First, serial killer movies are almost always terrible. Second, movies that are supposedly based on actual events are almost always terrible. This film dodges both of these generalizations and is, in my opinion, possibly the best film of 2007. Not only is the direction and photography fantastic, the script is more concise than almost any I have come across. If you are interested in the Zodiac killer and wanted a film that would stick closely to the actual events of the case, then this film will not disappoint. It is extremely accurate and attentive to detail for a Hollywood film. All of the 'flaws' that were pointed out were almost laughably stupid. "It was too long." "The ending is bad." I actually read a comment that said that this film lacked emotion by the actors and should look to Brad Pitt as an example. Of course the film was long! It was an investigation that ruined lives for a decade! Of course there was no climactic ending! The case remains open. It is the subtle details that make the film special. The fact that you just sat through 160 minutes (wow. thats almost an eternity!) and did not get to find out who the killer was says something. If you are frustrated and annoyed, then the film just showed its strength. The frustration and obsession to get some closure parallels that of the story. Imagine Graysmith and Toschi; 30 years have gone by and they never got closure.
Flat !
posted on 22 Mar 2009True that the Zodiac's case is bigger, but this one handled it, or rather handled its beginning, well as a small thriller, yet sorrowfully it looked more like the movie of the week (yet with higher directing), or a pilot for a next never-seen mini-series ! And with the lack of some points it looked, at its worst, as a Docu-drama.The movie cared much about the crimes' exact dates so the Zodiac more than caring about the police officer who's after him so his family. It could've been better and deeper if this script gave more concern for the characters. For instance why this officer is so confused and obsessed; is he a work-addict?, feeling a certain threat to his manhood?, just wants to assure his intelligent?,.. to the end of answers for the question that this movie never asked. The character's development was vague since originally the character itself was flat. So when I felt the overacting at one point I blamed the script firstly more than the young cast.Speaking of which the child actor who played the officer's son seemed too eccentric as if he plays an autistic ! This inanimate look and performance weren't for the sake of the character as simply a bright kid who wants to end his fear and also communicate with his father through the only subject he interested in, though this he-swallowed-too-much-starch kind of status made that kid just a weirdo who looks like someone would turn into a Zodiac himself !, not to mention so many boring scenes for him at his father's office that led eventually to nothing!. Remember the scene in which his mom finds the astronomy's papers under his bed; the funny acting and the non-writing managed to deliver a real overdone scene to a laughable extent, like the mom found a homosexual magazines under her teen son's bed or something !? To ask tearful in great agitation : "Do you wanna talk about it ??!!".The consecutive flashy stock footages didn't show but the usual clichés in any movie deals with the late-1960s' America, besides the natural chronicling for the movie's era, they wouldn't even try to generalize something deep out of that to refer to respectable conclusions else hollow common ones such as "this society became madly violent" without pinpointing to reasons or roots or anything.This movie seems to succeed in 2 points; firstly that touch of the political satire near the end when the police is after the black people asking the killer himself about that "Negro" they chase. It's a clever moment that could refer to how the American police was all along after the wrong, or the wronged, people. But as a matter of fact racism wasn't the main reason of how that murder psycho who killed 37 persons during a whole decade got away with it!. Yes, it was some bitter irony that may explain the Zodiac's prosperity at the late 1960s, though in rethinking, it could've been better if that was built correctly as a commentary from the start.The other possible good point of this movie is when it presents the police officer chasing the criminal on his own like a lone ranger, so this one-hero sort of dealing wasn't right, which drove him lastly to fail (it nearly drove him nuts !). I consider that some satire against the cow-boy's style or method. It could be the movie's suggestion to answer the most disgraceful question in the history of the American police : why the Zodiac is never been caught ? At least at this early period.So as a thriller it's another average one, and disappointing as well considering sad end where the mad killer wins !. And as a documentary it's watchable yet still its main problem is that it shows only and not trying seriously to explore. Therefore it's nothing but the movie of the week, which means that you wouldn't need it, nor lose catching anything important in it, if you already read its events before !
Intriguing Thriller That Went Beyond My Expectations.
posted on 26 Nov 2008"The Zodiac" is about Seargant Matthew Parish (Justin Chambers, of TV's "Grey's Anatomy"), a police detective in the San Francisco area in the late 1960s. On December 20, 1968, two young people are shot to death in their car late at night. This is just the beginning of a murderous rampage that continued until late 1969. The killer, who calls himself "The Zodiac", taunts the police with cryptic messages and letters, and terrorizes the city residents. And while the Zodiac causes chaos for the citizens, relations in Matthew's family, with his wife Laura (Robin Tunney, of "The Craft"), and his son, Johnny (Rory Culkin) begin to crumble as he is consumed by the disturbing case.Based on the real-life unsolved serial killing that took place in the late 1960s San Francisco, "The Zodiac" is a well-told and interesting thriller that was much better than I was expecting it to be. I personally don't know a lot about the actual Zodiac case (I just know the basic things), but from what I've been told, this movie does leave out some elements in the actual case and twists things a bit for storytelling purposes, which isn't necessarily bad. Nonetheless, the story is well told here and will give a nice insight into the Zodiac killer for those who aren't very familiar with the real case. It doesn't lose it's focus either, which is a good thing. However, I did feel that it kind of dragged it's feet a bit in certain areas, but after awhile it began to pick itself up again.The 1960s setting is brought through here very nicely with the costumes, cars, locations, etc. It does bring you back to the time of the real incidents, which is effective. Vietnam and a country in chaos is an ironic backdrop for the chaos caused by the Zodiac within San Francisco, and the time period is brought to life with numerous clips and footage from the era, including footage of actual things related to the case. As for the murder scenes, they are surprisingly saddening, and brutal to say the least. The presence of the killer himself is eerie enough, and he is only really seen in a couple of scenes, but of course his face is never shown. Good acting here as well from Justin Chambers, who was an odd choice for a lead, but pulls off the role. Robin Tunney is great as his sympathetic wife, and Rory Culkin is also good as their son. The conclusion is a bit empty, but what can you really expect, seeing as the real killer himself was never caught? The reality is that these things did happen, and that is what gives this movie it's creepiness.Overall, "The Zodiac" is chilling and eerie movie that chronicles one of the most infamous serial killings of all time. It's not perfect and it has it's flaws, but it is a decent account of the crimes, and does put on display the Zodiac's mystery and intrigue. The actual Zodiac killer himself sent a letter to police asking, "When will there be a good movie made about me?". Well, people's opinions of this film will obviously vary, but I'd say this was fairly good and worth a watch, especially if you find the Zodiac killing case of any interest. 7/10.
Don't Waste Your Time
posted on 22 Nov 2008If you don't know too much about the actual Zodiac killings, then you might find this movie worth the rental fee, but if you do then I suspect that you will react by turning the movie off after the second murder. For whatever reason, the slaying of Darlene Ferrin & the attempted murder of Mike Mageau is set up as two teenagers who have parked in a lover's lane in Vallejo to I assume make out, which isn't the case at all. It doesn't state tell you that Darlene was a married waitress, who ran around on her husband with cops for the most part & that Darlene had been followed for months by a stocky man who went by a one syllable handle such as 'Bob.' Nor did it inform the viewer that Darlene new this man & was very afraid of him & would tell her friends not to approach him whenever he was around. Darlene had also confessed to a baby sitter who had spotted the man outside of her house that she had witnessed this man commit a murder. Nor does it inform you Mike was one of two twin brothers who were infatuated by her and rivaled for her affection. It doesn't seem to tell you that Darlene had predicted that something big was going to happen on the night of her murder saying quote,"Expect to see my name in the paper, tomorrow morning." Nor does it show the fact that Mike Mageau was wearing three sets of clothing in July for some unknown reason & that Mike had told police after Darlene's murder that she seemed to know the person who had attacked them. It is these sets of facts that make the Zodiac slayings so spooky & to show them as just random killings seems to trivialize the whole thing into nothing more then a glorified slasher film. Also, the killer had phoned the police afterwards from a pay phone that was in eye sight of Darlene's home & just across from the sheriffs department & the weapon was different then the one used in the David Faraday & Betty Lou Jensen murders. Igoring these kinds of facts are the reason I turned the movie off 40 minutes in. If you don't know much about the Zodiac killings then this might be decent introduction to them, but I would suggest starting with the Robert Graysmith novels or go & see 'Zodiac' the movie based off of the Graysmith novels which I hear stay true to the actual killings. It saddens me that Justin Chambers, Robin Tunney, & Rory Culkin were apart of this film because I could tell that there performances in this film were inspiring & it pained me to not be able to stick with them through the whole sham of a movie.
If the real Zodiac sees this he kills himself!
posted on 24 May 2008Calling himself as "The Zodiac", this mysterious San Francisco serial killer confounded investigators for over 30 years with weird threatening letters and random killings in the outskirts of Vallejo, Lake Berryessa, Riverside and probably in Gaviota (Santa Barbara County).One of his most famous quotation was: "I am waiting for a good movie about me". He can repeat it again, because this film will frown in every person who sees it.If you know about the regretful work about this unsolved case you should know that this would provide sufficient material for a tauting and suspenseful thriller but... that was plain wrong after seeing this.The movie explores the seemingly random shootings and stabbings of the killings and it began well with a well-shot scene of the 1st murder but then, it goes all down the toilet. The action is guided to focus on the lead investigator on the case and his annoying son. The movie then runs between the detective, his son, his wife, a reporter and the killer. It's a mixture of police business, killings and monotonous domestic drama making the characters seem dull, gloomy and depressing. Unfortunately for the Zodiac fans this shows an extremely inert directing and apathetic editing and the ending just slams into nothing... so you'd better wait for the, most probably, upcoming excellent and thrilling movie that'll be directed by David Fincher next months called Zodiac(2006).
If properly edited, 22 minutes max
posted on 20 Apr 2008A clip-art movie. The only scenes with any motion to speak of are newsreel shots of the Viet Nam war. A cast of excellent veteran actors, but all scenes appeared to be first takes or even rehearsals. The editor must have gone loopy for lack of footage to tell the story. Sort of as if Ed Wood had been given a budget based on the the cast, payed the actors (maybe), skipped the story board, wrote the script himself, went with one-take "emoting heads" and stock footage and pocketed the savings for partying. I imagine that the cast had to bring their own lunches. In short, I think the production was out of balance. But, I guess it sometimes takes a name-brand cast to get any investors at all.Perhaps it's a prank homage to "Manos, Hands of Fate" from the producer of "Robot Chicken" and "Moral Orel".Kudos to the antique car wranglers.
Pretty bad...
posted on 12 Apr 2008This movie is your standard awful straight to video film that tries to look like it cost a lot more money than it actually did. Every character is from the stockroom- the obsessed cop, the kid who's smarter than the adults, the worried wife, the angry police chief...blah, blah, blah. There's no depth to the main characters descent into madness or whatever is wrong with him. He just starts drinking and swatting furniture. Wow, deep. How they suckered Phillip Baker Hall into this is beyond me, but they got him. Poor guy. Where's Paul Thomas Anderson when you need him, huh? If you absolutely MUST see a Zodiac film and cannot wait for this Friday to see David Fincher's (hopefully better) film, then go ahead and rent this as long as you can use someone else's cash.Oh, and something that has been really, really bothering me about a few other reviews on this site- THE ZODIAC KILLER WAS NEVER CAUGHT. Christ, the movie spells it out for you at the end. I'm not going to be totally lame and quote the whole "I'm waiting for a good movie about me" or whatever, but....he's still waiting...
Not a "true" serial killer film
posted on 04 Apr 2008This film either suffers from poor marketing or from having the wrong title; it's no more about the actual Zodiac killer than "Summer of Sam" was about the Son of Sam. It merely uses the infamous slayings as a backdrop for how a community, a police department, and one officer in particular were affected by the traumatic events.Although most of the depictions of the murders were eerie and well-done, the real focus of the film is how the taunting nature of the killer and the lack of hard evidence plays havoc with the psyche of lead detective Matt Parish (Chambers). As the case wears on and the pressure mounts to catch the killer, Parish begins to distance himself from his caring wife (Prison Break's Tunney) and odd son (Culkin). Ironically it is near the end of the movie that we see one of the more dramatic scenes, when a drunken, frustrated Matt comes home to a locked house and orders his wife to leave the door unlocked, not to bow down to the psycho. She looks at him incredulously and screams at him, saying "he's still out there and he knows where we live". Matt stumbles out of the house, and a montage of the dramatic events that were taking place in the world at the time (moon landing, Vietnam, the Manson slayings) is run while the song "Time(Has Come Today)" by The Chambers Brothers plays. It leads up to a chilling scene of the killer donning his creepy hooded costume and committing one of his more heinous killings, viciously stabbing two lovers to death in a field in broad daylight. Powerful stuff. Unfortunately the movie wraps up rather quickly after that, but it did leave some indelible moments. It was a serial killer flick from a different perspective, and I applaud the director for trying something new. "Time" will soon tell if David Fincher's soon-to-be re-leased version carries more weight and delivers on the killer's last words that he is "waiting for a good movie about me". This film may not be directly about him, but it's still pretty good.
Waste of time...
posted on 31 Mar 2008Anyone who has spent any time at all studying the Zodiac murders will find this movie to be dull and pointless. They "hollywood-ize" the premise of the movie, while in the mean time, they cut out all the twists that make this story so intriguing. -They made no mention of Robert Graysmith (a very integral part to the investigation) -They didn't even attempt to give any history on the victims (especially that of Darlene Ferrin- that is of utmost importance) Overall, I feel that the movie can only be enjoyed by those who don't know better. It is on the other hand unfortunate, that the majority of people who watched this movie do not know better and believe that what was shown is the truth. I am looking forward to the 2007 "Zodiac" coming out. Hopefully they will get a few more things right.
Great thriller. Amazing view of a real life serial killer who no one ever knew(spoiler)
posted on 22 Feb 2008Most of the film is a perspective on how the city of Vallejo was going through at the time of the killings. It isn't filled with every single aspect of the case and you are only viewing a single investigation with very little to tell. There's more to the case, obviously but the movie focuses on one main thing, The Zodiac himself. The film is accurate to most of the murderers except for a few flaws which isn't anything to complain about. There isn't much explained on the suspects of The Zodiac case and doesn't bother with bringing the rest of them up which is a disappointment since Zodiac fans were expecting more than this. Other than that, Mostly everything was fact on The Zodiac such as the letters, murderers(Except Lake Berryessa where Zodiac approaches in silence), and ciphers.The Zodiac cannot compete with the excellence of wonderful films on the chart. However, it isn't a bad film. It actually brings a close up to The Zodiac himself and not like those books by Graysmith that are highly exaggerated along with his negative views on why Arthur Allen is The zodiac when in reality, it has already been Proved that allen was not the zodiac. Not one film has given me a closer look about a real life serial killer as most of them aren't all as well as The Zodiac movie. Simply ignore the flaws and errors since it's only a movie and things are usually changed, which was only the names and some fact, and focus on one thing, The Zodiac and you'll get a closer look to the serial killer himself without ever knowing who he really was. A film to do that is worth another watch. Amazing thriller and by all else, a great film.
slow and dull
posted on 08 Dec 2007This movie took forever to get to the point, and when it ended there was little explanation.The build up of tension was at the same level throughout the movie right up to the end, very little was revealed about the killer and so many questions were left.One could have fallen asleep during the movie to wake during the murder scenes, there wasn't much to keep your attention.Having read a few other comments, the killer was found.Maybe if this movie was made after this with the killer caught, it might be watchable.
acceptable, but not special
posted on 22 Nov 2007The Zodiac Killer was one of the most famous serial killers in history, being one of the few to murder so many and get away. The Zodiac Killer, to this very day, has yet to be caught. Chances are, he never will be. And it's of no surprise that sooner or later, a movie would be made about him. In the 70s, the villain of a Clint Eastwood movie "Dirty Harry" featured a murderer based off the Zodiac Killer, but this is a film that is based around the Zodiac himself and the terror he created in San Francisco."The Zodiac" is a film with great potential for zest and entertainment, but it unfortunately does not reach those points to the expected level. Really, the very beginning of the film was executed and shot perfectly and yes the film had some other moments throughout. But overall, it's a very bland and uninteresting film. The filmmakers played wisely by not showing the Zodiac Killer's face on screen, we never see him clearly. We can hear his voice many times, which is a cold, blood-chilling tone. They chose the right actor for that job. However, the other actors, while not bad at their job, had to suffer from playing boring characters. Characters that made no sense and in scenes that oftentimes made no sense. Some scenes seemed very pointless, such as the prelude to an obvious sex scene that never unfolds and is overall uninteresting, no matter what you were looking for.It was a film that I had higher expectations for. I have heard recently about another movie based on the Zodiac Killer, released in 2007. I have yet to see this one, but hear it is highly acclaimed and a masterpiece. I aim to see it as soon as I can, but this version of the story was overall, iffy. Acceptable, but not special.
Can someone break out the Uno ...
posted on 04 Nov 2007If you're expecting some additional thoughts on the mystery of the Zodiac, read a copy of Good Housekeeping at your dentist's office and you'll receive something of more substance. This film was pointless, boring, and so terrible you keep wondering when something remotely interesting will come save it's dying ass. Even Robin Tunney, who I find always a pleasure, couldn't salvage this dump. I tend to like rather slow movies but this one wasn't slow ... slow implies a plot. I would rather play Uno in a retirement home than watch this film again. It was a total disappointment. I really enjoy the subject of the Zodiac and hoped that at least something could be considered redeemable. I think my grandmother with Alzeimer's could've shared more interesting ideas. I really would like to meet the person who buys a copy of this so I could ask them for some money. Because they obviously enjoy flushing it down the toilet ... just as the director enjoyed getting a paycheck over creating something withstand-able.
92 minutes of my life that I will never get back
posted on 25 Sep 2007Excruciatingly slow-paced. I have seen documentaries on the Zodiac killer that were much more interesting.The only reason I didn't rate this a 1 is some of the acting talent involved. The script was more like a soap opera than a movie about a serial killer, focusing more on the obsessive behavior of a policeman and his indifference to the potential danger of his wife and equally obsessed son.There was very little time devoted to Zodiac, the way he taunted the police, the actual investigation, suspects or any other aspects about the case that make it one of the most intriguing mysteries of the 20th century.
Movie about the Zodiac. Duh!
posted on 15 Sep 2007It's hard to make a movie about a real event. Everyone knows the outcome. In this case, we all know that the Zodiac was never caught, so all we have to look for is the interaction between players and the general feeling of the movie.But here the movie fails. The lead (Karev from Grey's Anatomy) is playing well, but doesn't really have much role to play. Just a work alcoholic cop trying to catch a guy that leaves no useful evidence. His wife, predictably, doesn't like being left on second place and tries to leave him. His work suffers. The cop's kid shows promise as he is both curious and intelligent. Alas, his mother discovers this and with a terrible "Oh my god" ends this plot line.All in all, a rather accurate yet boring description of the insides of a police case from the point of view of the cop. And no, you don't get to see the Zodiac :-P
What Was The Director On Crack?
posted on 28 Aug 2007What kind of movie is this? A cheesy piece of crap that's what it is. The only good thing about it was Rex Linn's acting. Everything else is a waste of time and money.I'm surprised this even made it to the eyes of the public. Literally all you see throughout the whole movie is innocent young teenagers getting shot and killed. I know that that is what happened, but most movies based on true crime have other scenes in them that are irrelevant to the main point. This movie only had about two such scenes.If you don't mind wasting your time and money on movies like this then watch it. If not don't bother.
Captures the story of the Zodiac as well as essence of the Sixties
posted on 26 Aug 2007The only reason I didn't give this a "10" is because there are a couple of slow spots - but those do not detract from the very faithful telling of the story of Zodiac.If you're a Zodiac scholar, as I am, you will not be disappointed. Even more than that, though, is the way the film captures the very essence of what it was like to grow up in the Sixties, and not in the 'in your face' way that most films ('Forrest Gump' comes to mind) do these days.We did not live our lives to a soundtrack done by Buffalo Springfield and Creedence Clearwater - though those bands were there, there was a lot more music around that's not as overused as in today's films, and 'The Zodiac' filmmakers get it.Not everyone wore tie-dye & flashed peace signs all the time, some of us owned a plaid Thermos, people wore Capri pants.I was unable to catch an anachronism, which is my favorite thing to pick on.The horror of the Zodiac crimes taking place against this very accurate background is compelling.Solid 9 for getting it exactly right.
Cheap Rip-Off of Fincher's movie
posted on 10 Aug 2007'Straight to DVD' is a phrase which can arouse unfair prejudice towards a film. Not in this case. A truly awful film, created only to steal profits from the real movie. Honestly, I think films deliberately setting out to be confused with other films should be banned. That said, if someone is stupid enough to buy one of these DVDs, they're probably going to enjoy the film more than the masterpiece it imitates. Like Forrest Gump*.If you agree with me, in disapproval of imitations like this of Zodiac, and those of films like 300 as well, please click 'helpful'. We must raise awareness. Where better to start than at the IMDb pages for a ripoff of a masterpiece.* You do not have to agree with me on Forrest Gump to click 'helpful'. The Hanks flick aside, we should make sure the vast majority know of these cheap rip-offs. Then they might not need be made illegal.
absolute rubbish!
posted on 07 Jul 2007I'm so glad I downloaded this film! I almost bought it! after watching a couple of serial killer movies, just to name a few: Citizen X, Silence of the Lambs, Summer of Sam, Henry: Portrait of a serial Killer. I have to say that this one in particular didn't appeal to me. the actors don't suit there characters, and the directing was something from Days of our Life.Right from the beginning, they used the wrong young actor in the car scene, so on, so on. Well I've had my say! Good to waist a couple of hours. But don't expect a Citizen X or in the like of the above mentioned style directing and acting.Would have been good to see the methods of researching from the police detectives and forensic scientists as well as a portrait of the serial killers mind and behavior made by the polices psychiatrist This movie does not portrait a thorough investigation; it's more of a police drama.Giving it a 2 or a 3 because I fell I have actually lost I.Q points watching this film
Portrait of an unsuccessful Hunt
posted on 18 Jun 2009Although David Finchers look at the infamous Zodiac Killer is due in a few months, Alexander Buckleys version need not be ashamed of comparison. That's what can be predicted in advance, since Buckleys film looks at the Zodiac killings from the perspective of one involved policeman's family; Fincher is hardly to repeat that. Buckleys approach, at first, is very realistic - not surprising, since the incidents he portrays are historic facts. Later on, he fuses facts and fictions, which weakens the picture a bit. But in general, he sticks to the facts and manages to fit them into interesting 92 minutes. No gore here, only a few harsh visuals, but still disturbing. In total, it succeeds in creating a sense for the madness and absurdness behind the killings. Recommended for those looking for a thrill of quality.