Come anticipate David Fincher's "Zodiac"

Well I'm just taking that from the film - that it could have been a bystander or someone else. Such doubt certainly does not lead me to christen it 'conclusive evidence.'

no handwriting match, no fingerprint match, cleared a polygraph test, no evidence linking him to the scenes of any of the crimes. That's pretty goddamned conclusive.

-- Shakey Mo Collier, Wednesday, August 8, 2007 9:01 PM (32 minutes ago) Bookmark Link

that's conclusive *lack of evidence*, not proof he didn't do it. fortunately we live in nice places where you need positive proof people did a thing before you lock them up (or whatever you do to killers in the states), but there were reasons he became a suspect, and damn, that scene at the place where he worked was pretty freaky right?

If it was me I would have made him make me a key then I'd try to take him to lunch. Just to see if he'd crack.

I'm flabbergasted that people are honestly making assumptions about a person's guilt based on a movie whose entire theme is that media interpretations are inherently unreliable.

that's conclusive *lack of evidence*, not proof he didn't do it.

negative proofs are a logical impossibility (see Iraq/WMD arguments)

i so want to see this again, and even though i know i will buy the mega-mega all-extras fincher-cut version next year, i guess i have to buy it sans extras now. i mean the scene on RDJ's boat is kind of what it's all about, i think, now.

"do you have the files"
"i live on a *boat*"

xpost

lol shakey i was kidding, but the film was kinda based on real shit at the same time, i don't know that they made a whole lot up re. allen.

negative proofs are a logical impossibility (see Iraq/WMD arguments)

-- Shakey Mo Collier, Wednesday, August 8, 2007 9:39 PM (1 minute ago) Bookmark Link

not really. this is why murder suspects have to produce alibis and whatnot.

But I think people are simply assessing the available evidence - within the world of the film, of course - and coming to a reasoned conclusion. Based on that and reasoning through it, it's clear that he was deservedly the number one suspect. You're argument about 'the media' applies in that the movie does not contain other important information that one would need in assessing the case overall.

"do you have the files"

haha see pre-credits note at beginning of film "this film is based on actual case files". There are so many FLASHING WARNING SIGNS in the film that say DO NOT TRUST THIS FILM

x-post

you guys should really watch this again - and read that Slate piece. (for ex. its telling that the very first scene right after the first murder is of evidence being mishandled by the press)

(er, Slant)

http://www.crimelibrary.com/serial_killers/notorious/zodiac/river_1.html

pretty informative about the real-life case for anyone curious..

But Shakey haven't you turned from a discussion of whether the hard evidence is conclusive to a discussion of a main theme within the movie, which are separate things? In other words I don't think that us disagreeing on the conclusiveness of a polygraph test has anything to do with my ability to grasp a main theme of the movie.

I dunno - you're the one who keeps bringing up evidence as its presented in the movie, note me.

(er NOT me)

I mean if it isn't clear, the movie does NOT present hard evidence of any kind, and repeatedly draws attention to this fact.

Latebloomer I'm having a read of that site - it's very interesting.

Ebert's review is up.

so if they ever re-make columbo, mark ruffalo is a shoe-in!!!

this looked really good but i couldn't understand what anyone was saying. i spent the whole thing going "what was that?" "what he he just say there?" and re-winding it to try and catch the bits i missed and still not hearing them.

"Fincher decorates background walls with classic movie posters and includes a self-indicting, pre-opening credit visual clue (elucidated during the third act) that speaks to cinema's potent cultural impact,

wait what is this "clue" he's referring to here

-- Shakey Mo Collier, Wednesday, July 25, 2007 8:22 PM (2 months ago) Bookmark Link"

i'm not sure but there is an unusual close-up shot of some geese just after the discovery of the first bodies.

anyway, i didn't understand this film.

yea i watched the movie with subtitles. it was a big help. i sometimes do that with movies with tons of tiny little details that i need to keep track of, e.g. syriana. something about reading it, visually understanding it makes it stick a little better.

clue = "based on actual case files" text that precedes the opening credit sequence (joke being that later in the film the "actual case files" are referred to as lost/destroyed)

anyway, i didn't understand this film.

-- jed_, Monday, October 1, 2007 1:34 AM (2 hours ago) Bookmark Link

ok i'll take the bait. what did you not understand

I got this from Netflix and it has been sitting in my living room for two weeks. I watched the first hour of it but was not able to concentrate (it wasn't the movie, though, I had a very hard time concentrating enough to even read a newspaper right after that).

watched this last week, struck me as very much a made-for-tv movie with some big stars. quite poor. ridiculous conclusions.

just as said s1ocki, i couldn't understand what was happening because i couldn't understand what anyone was saying.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=ePYxO-KgXT4

oops wrong thread hahahahahaha

Director's Cut on the way too. That's a bit sudden i find.

not these days

i'm holding out for the supa-dupa multi-disc edition with the director's cut etc, though i hope it has both versions on it.

which is WAY more defensible for a film like this than for, say, 'blade runner' or 'apocalypse now redux'. i think "fincher's dvd cut" has been a possibility since before the film even came out in cinemas. 'blade runner' dircut was an afterthought.

best use of a pop song i've ever seen in a film. not that i ever listened to HURDY GURDY MAN much but i certainly won't ever again in my life be able to hear it without wanting a stiff drink.

we did a thread once about best uses of pop songs in films. can't find it mind.

this is driving me crazy, but wasn't butthole surfers' version of Hurdy Gurdy Man notably used in recent years in some indie movie about a creepy teenager or something?

Zodiac was the best movie I have seen in ages.

will we get to see the 3 minute black-screen music montage sequence on this ere director's cut dvd? hope so. only 6 minutes of extra footage on it in total by all accounts.

'L.I.E.' it's used in Yerac. So Sight and Sound says.

will we get to see the 3 minute black-screen music montage sequence on this ere director's cut dvd? hope so. only 6 minutes of extra footage on it in total by all accounts.

-- pisces, Monday, October 29, 2007 3:06 PM (49 minutes ago) Bookmark Link

ere's 'oping. where have you seen its only 6 minutes?

my bad. it's *four* minutes:

http://www.criterionforum.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=6662&postdays=0&postorder=asc&highlight=zodiac&start=0
____________________________________________

The 2-disc set will feature a version of the film that's 162 minutes long (for the record, that's 4 minutes longer than the theatrical version). Extras will include audio commentary by director David Fincher, a second commentary by Jake Gyllenhall, Robert Downey Jr., producer Brad Fischer, James Vanderbilt and James Ellroy, 3 The Film featurettes (Zødiac Deciphered, The Visual Effects of Zødiac and Digital Workflow), 3 Sequence Breakdowns (Blue Rock Springs, Lake Berryessa and San Francisco), 5 The Facts featurettes (This is the Zødiac Speaking, Lake Herman Road, Blue Rock Springs, Lake Berryessa and San Francisco), 4 Prime Suspect featurettes (His Name Was Arthur Leigh Allen, Linguistic Analysis, Jeopardy Surface: Geographic Profiling and The Psychology of Aggression: Behavioral Profiling), 2 text-based features (Special Agent Sharon Pagaling-Hagan's Behavioral Profile of the Zødiac and Dr. Kim Rossmo's Geographic Profile of the Zødiac) and the film's theatrical trailer. Audio will be Dolby Digital 5.1 on the DVD version, and Dolby Digital Plus 5.1 on the HD-DVD. All of the video-based special features will be in HD on the HD-DVD version

cheers. shit i am such a sap i might buy the theatrical as well as this. it's not necessarily about footage but about choices, right?

Really, really good, but I thought the Coke product placements were incredibly jarring. Did anyone else notice that?

not that i ever listened to HURDY GURDY MAN much but i certainly won't ever again in my life be able to hear it without wanting a stiff drink.

Having seen Donovan perform it last week, I feel the same way.

Yes- never thought I'd hear Donovan soundtracking brutal executions!

nobody else thought this was very made-for-TV stuff, with just better actors than normal?

i was very disappointed with how standard it was.

you're a dick.

oh the debating-school rhetoric.

The acting and tech quality is way above average, but yeah, the raw material is "pretentious cop show."

Mark Ruffalo's character was slightly Columbo-like, I thought. That's not a bad thing.

yeah he's meant to be. the actual guy was a media cop -- consultant on 'bullit', i think. that's part of the whole thing. i don't think morbius understands the film.

Yes- never thought I'd hear Donovan soundtracking brutal executions!

Lest We Forget

Starts @ 3:30 (On the the other hand, altough it is brutal, the actual execution is later on and Donovan-free)

nobody thinks that one guy was a bit disappointing? i'm constantly bemused at how standard his posts are.