Zodiac (2007)

Another disturbing scene.

That Lake Berryessa scene was filmed at the actual spot where the murder happened.

Criminally overlooked during awards season, but it was one hell of a strong year in film. Great movie.

I always found it strange that they never found out who the Zodiac was. He must be dead by now.

If he was in his twenties when he committed the murders he could still be alive.

I wonder why he would stop killing and sending taunting notes, though, if he were still alive?

He had to have either died or be imprisoned on separate crimes (but not discovered as the Zodiac) for the crimes and letters to have stopped, no?

Zodiac killer has been pretty much identified. A doctor - Friend of a famous photographer. ID by his own son cop. Guardian carried the story. Maybe someone can look up.

Your referring to Steve Hodel who an absolute nutcase. He also blames his dad for the Black Dahlia murder.

Boring, bad pacing and Gyllebhaal was miscast. Fincher films always look like somebody saved on color during the development of the film stock.

Of course, the first murder in the film of Darlene Ferrin.

It's extremely rare--almost unheard of, I think--for a serial killer to just purposely stop killing. I saw a thing last night about the Green River Killer, Gary Ridgway, who killed 48 women. He got married in 1985, settled down and stopped killing for several years (by that time I think he'd already killed well over 30 women), but eventually he "fell off the wagon". He was finally caught in 2001, I think.

Very atmospheric. Really haunting use of Hurdy Gurdy Man by Donovan.

But I agree with R9 that it's got pacing problems. Fincher's increasing self-indulgence really takes a bite out of this film. Also, for me the movie starts having issues once Robert Downey Jr enters the picture. The whole tone of his performance is just jarring to me - sometimes it felt like he was in a different movie, and ultimately I think the film spends too much time on his character. It's at its best when dealing with the detectives.

Underrated film. One of Fincher's finest, though hardly ever talked about. Chilling as well... especially that lakeside murder. After seeing it in theaters I was suspicious anytime someone walked up by my car. It's more deserving of Criterion treatment than Benjamin Button was.

Fun fact: The creepy basement guy is played by Charles Fleisher, the voice of Roger Rabbit.

Robert Graysmith, the author of the Zodiac book, and the character Jake Gyllenhaal was playing, said he received a number of "breathing phone-calls" over the years. Pretty chilling.

I agree with those saying that this is an excellent film.

I think it's Fincher's best movie (well, probably tied with "The Social Network") and one of the best of the decade it was released in. It has a sort of epic feel to it, and it was able to maintain strong feelings of suspense and tension until the very end--also quite rare.

I'm also surprised there's not a Criterion edition of it out yet, as someone upthread mentioned. I thought "Benjamin Button" was crap.

[R9], I believe that Gyllenhaal was *not* Fincher's choice for the role, but was the only way Fincher could get the film made--the studio wanted him in the role. I believe it was mentioned that Fincher argued with the studio over it, eventually relented, and this animosity was part of what caused the very bad on set relationship between Fincher and Gyllenhaal that was chronicled in several media outlets at the time.

Some very good articles were written about the on set tension/issues between Fincher and Gyllenhaal, and Gyllenhaal was young enough at the time to openly talk about such things, which further pissed the director off.

A lot of Zodiac "experts" take exception with Graysmith's version/interpretation of the case (namely that Arthur Lee Allen was the Zodiac).. but well, this is a case where no one can agree on anything almost 50 years onward...

[quote]Fincher's increasing self-indulgence really takes a bite out of this film.

Too long, with a more daring editor the movie could have actually been a good thriller, but Fincher was too precious about his own work, so the movie dragged on and on and on.

Ruffalo hated working with Fincher, hated doing 100+ takes and then Fincher printing only take 3-5.

I think Fincher is humorless sadist.

I enjoy the film a lot. I don't find it too long at all. I've only seen it twice but I will watch it again at some point. Great mood and everything just works nicely. RDJ is probably the weakest link since I've never liked his acting but then again he brings in certain comic relief, both as his character and as the movie star RDJ. Gyllenhaal's fine and gives one of his better performances.

The movie has a few truly chilling moments, especially when Jake visits that old house, and then when they visit the factory worker they presume is The Zodiac Killer.

This movie is film making at its best. It's a piece of art.

Loved this movie!

They should really make a movie about another serial killer who terrorized California and was never caught. The "Original Night Stalker," who may very well still be alive.

Here is an actual recording of his voice to one of his victims. (WARNING: disturbing).

Roger Ebert has a great quote - all great films are not long enough, and all bad movies are too short. Zodiac falls into the first category. I love it, saw it several times in the theater and predicted when it came out that it would stand the test of time. I think the pacing is excellent and I can't think of a scene that didn't add something to the story. The pacing follows the events appropriately - fast and urgent when the case is at its peak, slower and more deliberate as the search slows and peters out over time. Photography by the now deceased Harris Savides is fantastic and looked especially good on the big screen. This and Nightcrawler are the only two Gyllenhaal performances I like. Downey Jr. provides much needed comic relief, whether or not the character was really that goofy.

Another disturbing scene from the film.

R21, I disagree. A great film is just the right length.

I enjoyed your review, [R21]! Thanks for sharing. I *wish* I had seen it on the big screen (I'd love to experience it that way, as it's a real "movie theater" film). An excellent movie all around.

The moment when investigators begin to narrow in on Arthur Leigh Allen as the Zodiac.

I agree with R18. This movie is perfect. Definitely in my Top 5 favorite movies of all time.

It was overlooked at the time of its release, but it has a huge following among die hard filmophiles.

If you're upset about Criterion's snub you should know that the deluxe two-disc blu ray of this movie is LOADED, absolutely overflowing with extras, including TWO documentaries that feature interviews with the people who were there at the time (including surviving victims, cops, etc.). It's also dirt cheap, like $9.99. It's the one that has as its cover art the outside of one of the envelopes the Zodiac mailed to the Chronicle. An absolute must own for any fan of the movie.

A few other things: the movie was shot all digital. No film used.

It was as far as I can recall all shot on location. All the murder scenes were shot in the actual spots where they happened in real life. They hauled in extra soil and trees to recreate the settings as they appeared in 1968-69.

One other thing: what about this movie made you call it "little"? Are you just going by its box office figures?

Reminds me of the Son of Sam killings. Shooting sweethearts parked for a little necking

One of my favorite, favorite films. Doesn't hurt that I'm obsessed with the Zodiac case.

A lot of Graysmith's theories have been debunked. The most likely suspect for the Zodiac IMO is a guy named Richard Gaikowski, who is unfortunately dead. Google him.

R28, check out, if you have Amazon Prime, the episodes from Season 1 of Unsolved Mysteries where they discuss the possible Satanic cult connection to the SoS murders. It's a two-parter, I think it's episodes 5 and 6 or somewhere around there.

R29, me too. I'm not even bothered by the fact that the film focuses on Graysmith's theory at the expense of others. It's still such a thrill.

It's hard to think of a better "period film"—they get the details of the late 60s exquisitely correct.

Some guy whose name I forget tried hard to pin the Zodiac killings on Manson family member Bruce Davis. Maybe someone here has read the case for that.

The Zodiac Killer site says a 1970 California Bureau of Criminal Identification and Investigation report that states, "All male members of the Manson Family have been investigated and eliminated as Zodiac suspects."

The film works beautifully in scenes, but overall it just doesn't work as a film. The leads aren't very compellingly written--you don;t care about them.

But the scenes posted are all fantastic, although they work even better in the context of the entire film. My favorite of all is the scene where Candy Clark screams after getting the letter at the newspaper offices, though I couldn't find it on youtube (it's been there before, though).

I thought the movie was fantastic, and the subject matter was even more fascinating.. I've been taken in by this story ever since I first heard about the Zodiac on Unsolved Mysteries in the '90s.

Hmm, can't find the clip anymore on YouTube with Robert Stack's creep narration, but it used to be there..

Great movie, quite evocative of that time and place. I grew up in the Bay Area during all that madness. The kidnapping of Patty Hearst by the SLA, the Zodiac Killer, Ed Kemper the serial killer of Santa Cruz/Aptos/Capitola, Congressman Leo Ryan going down to investigate the People's Temple and getting wiped out along with 1000 other innocent people, the assassination of SF Mayor George Moscone and Supervisor Harvey Milk by an angry white man. It was such a scary and chaotic time. The present time is starting to very similar.

Brilliant casting of Brian Cox as Melvin Belli.

So Arthur Leigh Allen wasn't the Zodiac killer? I thought one of the survivors picked his photo out of a lineup (as depicted in the movie)?

It has never been proven, R37, and probably never can.. Somebody upthread mentioned a suspect named Richard Gaikowski, and he seems to be the most popular suspect, at least as of late.

Glad to see this film getting so much respect on this thread. I always found it to be a compelling thriller. The scenes of Jake Gyllenhall in the spooky house were truly terrifying.

Gah, I HATE that screen cap at R20. I'm very hard to frighten but that pic creeps me the fuck out.

r38 I thought they had a partial DNA profile that Allen didn't fit. They might be able to use familial DNA to narrow down the existing suspect list.

It's been a while since I was really into this case; but I have a feeling a good suspect, if not the actual killer, will come out of left field. It reminds me of the Littlechild Letter in the Jack the Ripper case. IIRC, some of the letters had bizarre references in them and odd, deliberate language that could be important. The unsolved cipher, too. I can't believe that hasn't been cracked yet.

I know, right R41? You'd think there would be some software that could crack that unsolved cipher. Either that, or it was a trick by the Zodiac and it doesn't actually translate to anything.

I still think of all the suspects, Arthur Leigh Allen was the most compelling. If it weren't for the goddamned partial DNA...

Whatever you do, stay tuned to zodiackiller.com for all the latest news and discussion and like I said upthread, please check out the Zodiac blu Rays!

Here is the longer of the two documentaries. Warning: it will scare you.

The other documentary is all about Arthur Leigh Allen and it is also compelling. But not nightmare-inducing like the other one.

Great film but one that I can't bring myself to re-watch often because it's so disturbing, that's how good it is.

It really is one of the greatest and scariest movies ever, R44. I saw it three times in the theater. The second time, I was so stoned I had to get up and leave during the opening 4th of July murder scene because it was too intense, I felt a panic attack coming on. I had to spend about 5 minutes taking deep breaths in the men's room.

Just like Jack the Ripper, he was never found, and this guy was a really sick bastard.

It would be terrifying to see this coming towards you.

You're all making me want to revisit this film!

I think Fincher is incredibly handsome and therefore I admit that I cannot be unbiased regarding his films.

This was an excellent movie, IMHO.

Yeah, he's pretty.

I always associate Donovan's "Hurdy Gurdy Man" with this movie now.

So this is the part where I break up the monotony a little by disagreeing without being disagreeable. I'm a Fincher fan and he's done other movies (NOT Benjamin Button) that were better, and yes it was very atmospheric. I liked it, saw it probably three or four times over the years, but I won't say it was a perfect film or FIncher's best. Or even top ten for the year. The scene where the couple was stabbed to death at the lake was horrific. Great scene. Scary. The scene in Arthur Lee Allen's trailer was gross. All the squirrels and the shit covered dildo. Ugh. Great scene. Ro0ber Downey Jr. Is a ham, but he was very good. I loved that scene when Graysmith visits Downey on his houseboat or WTF it was, and Downey rips into him. The scenes on Cherry street where the cab driver was murdered were food. I don't know. it just seemed like the pacing was off at times and it could have been a lot tighter.

David Fincher also directed Madonna's "Bad Girl,"which IMHO is the greatest music video ever made.

[quote] The scenes on Cherry street where the cab driver was murdered were food.

I really hope you meant "were good."

That taxi driver scene was so stylish, which is typical of Fincher, but not so much of this film, which is restrained compared to the rest of his movies.

did you know that it is estimated that there are approximately 100 serial killers on the loose at any given time.

did they ever come up with anything on the Long Island serial killer where they found all those women's bodies on the beaches?

The Long Island serial killer has never been found. I don't believe they even have any suspects. The case is totally cold.

The movie perfectly captured the 1970s. It almost feels like you're watching an old Steve McQueen or Dirty Harry movie from that era. Fincher and his cinematographer knocked it our of the park with the look and atmosphere of this movie.

"The Texas Killing Fields" is on cable this weekend and I'm anxious to watch it. Has anyone seen it?

Elias' vpl helped this movie tremendously.

H.H. Holmes from the late 1800's one was one of the creepiest. He built what they called the murder castle. He did it around the Chicago World's Fair where he thought it would be easy to pull his victims from because they wouldn't be missed right away. Horrible. if you have time to watch it's interesting.

[quote]I always associate Donovan's "Hurdy Gurdy Man" with this movie now.

Thank you, r52. I heard it in a store last week and thought, that's such a creepy song. Now I know why.

I think there were 2 Zodiacs.. just like Son of Sam, David Berkowitz, admitted years later that he wasn't the only shooter.

who knew

Good 'ol USA and UK are very well-represented on that list, R64!

r64 well we are all really just one since US started from there right? : )

mark buffalo looks scrumptious in tight checked pants.

I want Mark Ruffalo on my face in the worst way.

R61, The Devil in the White City will be the next Martin Scorcese and Leonardo DiCaprio movie. Leo will probably play H.H. Holmes although besides Holmes the novel followed a designer behind the 1893 World Fair as well, so it's possible he'll play him. Apprently DiCaprio bought the rights to the novel already back in 2010.

r69 that's interesting. thanks. I'm sure I won't watch it as it will be too real. It was hard enough watching the Bio.

That's very interesting to hear R69. I've been intrigued by that story since I read the book. I recall reading a long time ago about DiCaprio buying the rights, but I wonder if now with the passing of time he will forego playing Holmes. Now that he's older he might be more ripe for the role of the detective, leaving a younger actor to play Holmes. After all Holmes was supposed to be young and handsome and able to charm women literally to their death. Charlie Hunnam anyone?

The Lake Berryessa scene was terrifying. The only way I was able to watch it again was because I watched the dvd extras which included a featurette on the making of that scene. Seeing how they filmed it step by step demystified it for me and made it sink in that it was just a film.

The reason the male survived that attack and the female didn't was probably because she weighed less and he was able to pick her up and stab her in her front as well as her back. The male survivor only got stabbed in the back. Gives me chills.

Lessen to learn. RESIST.

Lesson to learn, that is.

You want to see a movie about serial killers, watch Suspect Zero with Ben Kingsley and the lovely Aaron Eckhart. THAT was a good damned movie. Really good.

R58 A few yrs ago, I recall reading that the search had started to focus on a cop. But then I didnt hear anymore about it.

I thought the survivor was the guy from the first shooting not the stabbing at the Lake.

There were two survivors R76.

Is that really true that Berkowitz said there was another shooter? The two-part segment on the case on Unsolved Mysteries hinted at that, in 1987. If you haven't seen it, I recommend checking it out. The Untermeyer Park Satanic cult angle is pretty interesting and scary, too.

R70, I recently finished listening to the audiobook of The Devil in the White City. Holmes is certainly a central character but the storyline of creating the world fair is actually quite interesting as well. And it actually might've had more pages dedicated to it than the H.H. Holmes story.

R71, hmm the detective wasn't featured in the novel that much, or was he? Besides Holmes I mainly remember Daniel H. Burnham, they guy behind the World's Fair. I doubt Scorcese nor DiCaprio want to make the Holmes storyline the dominant one since they decided to film this exact novel. The novel works very well telling the story of creating and building the World's Fair while at the same going through Holmes' development into a serial killer.

BTW, the screenwriter is Billy Ray, who wrote Suspect Zero with Zak Penn.

A survivor from a shooting was the one who was asked to identify a suspect. He otherwise avoided publicity. He may have suffered mental health issues over the years.

The male survivor from Lake Berryessa gave a few interviews. At leats one of them is on youtube. He is the one who provided info for the sketch with the Zodiac in a hood. IIRC he became a lawyer. The female survived the initial assault but she died the next day. in the hospital. They both stayed conscious for what must have seemed an interminable time until they got help.

The crime scenes as they look today.

R79, those interviews you mention are part of the long-form documentary I linked to upthread, "This Is The Zodiac Speaking". It's required viewing for any fan of the case.

Thanks, R81. There was a time I read and watched everything I could on the subject. Lots of crazy people out there who imagine they are experts on the topic. I think I saw that video but I'll check it out again. Thanks for finding it.

Weren't there some odd things about Darlene Ferrin's past?

And what was her relationship with the boy who survived? She was a married woman, wasn't she?

I thought RDJ was great in that movie, the scene where he gets a postcard from the Zodiac killer and freaks out - great acting.

I am a bit meh on the film, too long, to laborious, not really tight storytelling, every time there is a police station scene the same background noise tape plays.

A better director could have made a more interesting movie.

The truly chilling thing about The Son of Sam Murders is that Berkowitz was obviously part of a cult and even though both NYPD and the prosecutors knew it, they decided to simplify things for the jury and buried it. The cult was probably even national. It's all so easily googled I won't bother to do it at 4 am, but it's out there and easily, easily found.

Or at least I hope that's the reason the prosecutor deliberately buried all the cult evidence. I've always suspected worse reasons why that evidence was kept quiet but I just never wanted to go those places.

I think the NYPD wanted people to stop panicking. Can you imagine the hysteria if the whole city found out there were multiple shooters?

"I wonder why he would stop killing and sending taunting notes, though, if he were still alive? "

In one of the Zodiac's last letters, he said he was going to keep killing and stop famewhoring. Which made sense from his POV, everything he made public could become a clue to his identity and put him at risk. If he wanted to keep killing and stay out of jail it made sense to spread his activities across jurisdictions, and to make them look random or accidental, rather than the work of a single obvious killer.

Maybe he died or went to jail for something else, or gave up. Or maybe he just got smarter about murder.

I think Zodiac must have been arrested for something before his murder spree. He used "airplane cement" on his fingertips, so as to never leave any prints.

Also, here's a photo of Zodiac suspect Richard Gaikowski. He sure does have more of a resemblance to the Zodiac suspect sketch, than any other suspect.

Such a great movie.

If you think it's slow it's probably because YOU'RE a tad slow.

I fell asleep it was so dreary and slow. Started out good. Not a great movie like Gone Girl.

[quote]If you think it's slow it's probably because YOU'RE a tad slow.

R90 doesn't understand good pacing in movies.

I forgot that the film didn't include the first double-murder by Zodiac of Betty Lou Jensen and David Faraday. Teenage lovers out necking in some remote pull-out. Terrifying stuff.

Great thread. Loved the film and, despite whatever misgivings Fincher had, I didn't think Jake was miscast. And, yes, the island and the basement scenes were both terrifying and brilliantly executed.

So, what other films -- similar in atmosphere or theme -- would Datalounge cinephiles recommend?

I am a fan of Copycat (1995), R94, with Holly Hunter and Sigourney Weaver. About a serial killer copying the MO's of other famous serial killers before him. I thought Sigourney was excellent as the agoraphobic criminal psychologist. It's been years since I've seen it. It may look a little dated now.

Didn't Darlene Ferrin supposedly know Arthur Leigh Allen or Zodiac? I remember reading somewhere that she had witnessed him commit a murder in Mexico or something like that, and so he was stalking her/keeping tabs on her.

And why was Mike Mageau wearing so many layers of clothes on a hot 4th of July? Has never made any sense to me.

Excellent underrated movie.

The ZODIAC movie: facts vs Fincher:

[quote] So, what other films -- similar in atmosphere or theme -- would Datalounge cinephiles recommend?

Henry - Portrait of a Serial Killer. Not as slick as Fincher's Zodiac, and with much smaller budget, but it's raw and disturbing.

I haven't thought of Untermeyer Park in YEARS. I use to live in that area in the 70s.

Were there actual satanists there, R100? Or just teenage potheads up to no good/listening to metal, etc.?

I think I went there once (around 1976). I remember just teenage potheads.

Who did Fincher want instead of Gyllenhaal (who was pushed on him by the studio?

I forgot that the Zodiac randomly attacked that one girl in Riverside, Cheri Jo Bates?

Wasn't the only clue to the Zodiac connection to her murder some library chair at a college, where Zodiac had carved some confession?

The kid who was shot in the first Zodiac murder was the only one who saw his face and survived. Zodiac was wearing a mask/hood when he stabbed the couple at the lake.

Cecilia Shepard saw his face as he was walking towards her and Bryan Hartnell. The killer went behind a tree to put on his mask.

Cecilia lived long enough to describe the Zodiac to police.

But not long enough to pick him out of a police lineup.

Suspect Zero has a 1-star rating on rotten tomatoes, are you sure that this is a good movie?

Wonderfully creepy film. Totally evokes the shivery uncertainty of the case, each seeming lead, petering out and leading to more questions.

It's a scary case. The "Peek through the Pine" postcard still gives me the shivers, just thinking of it.

R94, this is a TV series rather than a movie, but "Red Riding" from the UK deals with the Yorkshire Ripper case and very much evokes the time and place in the same way Zodiac does.

Can't believe it took until R60 before someone mentioned the virile protuberance of rugged Greek-American character actor Elias Koteas, which truly stole the show.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

The way I heard it the person Fincher wanted dropped out. Fincher was in a bind. A friend convinced him to try Gyllenhaal. Fincher was a little resistant because he thought Gyllenhaal was too young looking to play Graysmith. I think Gyllenhaal did a good job because I think he's a good actor, but I also think of the three principals, he was the weakest. As far as Paul Avery goes, Robert Downey Jr. was excellent, i fact he was strongest. I like Mark Ruffalo and he did a good job but he would not have been my first choice to play Dirty Harry.

The murder scenes stand out from the rest of the film as they are filmed with a stylistic beauty.

OP, thanks for that chilling scene. I just can't imagine how helpless that woman must of felt being with such a good for nothing pussy guy. I'm going to have to watch this film. I know I'll be screaming at the screen. In the parked car shooting of the couple, it's amazing that the woman didn't reverse the car at least. Then ran that fucker over, reverse and back over him again and again.

The movie is dreadfully dull and disjointed in service of a story without continuity after that startling long opening R114. The next hour kind of moves with character introductions and growing dread. I like Fincher better than most here but this is his Twyla Tharp movie. The same note and movement over and over again, just a shift in background. Tharp builds to a release, no luck in Zodiac. It's very Libra:) You will be entertained by a few things but the film, like the real investigation reveals constant loss of energy in contrived and alarming ways. People who claim this movie is great must have practiced indulgence for the last 80 minutes and Robert Downey Jr.

My favorite part of the movie is the car driving through the neighborhood and viewing the homes and the 4th of July activities. I would've been 8 then, and it reminded me of my childhood.

bump

Bump for Elias Koteas's manly protuberance!

This is the real clip of the guy that called Melvin Belli on live TV, claiming he was the Zodiac..

bump

R90, thank you. I agree.

Zodiac could have been an hour longer than it was, and I wouldn't have complained.

R116, that's a lovely story! I like that montage a lot, too.

For the poster who asked about Mike Mageau's many layers of clothing, in the documentary This Is The Zodiac Speaking, he says it was because he was embarrassed about how skinny he was. He wore the extra clothes for bulk. Seems very uncomfortable for a hot July evening, but there you have it.

And the killing of the girl in Riverside (with the confession carved into the classroom desk) was never definitely linked to Zodiac. Check out the zodiackiller.com page to see what the unofficial word is on that one. They've probably reached a consensus.

I am still utterly perplexed by the people who aren't mesmerized by this movie. Just to get a better idea of what the movie gets wrong, would any of you care to name a few films that do a better job of what Zodiac tries to do? I don't mean to come off combative, I'm just curious what the reasoning is.

I would love to see a movie of this quality about the Manson family

bump

This movie is incredibly well made. I swear Jake is the best mainstream actor of his peers.

I thought Gyllenhaal was the weakest part of all the actors actually. Downey brought a good focus to the overlong story and some of the minor character actors were excellent like Edwards, Baker Hall

Ruffalo was OK, somebody else could have been better in that role.

bump

It's not like Jake had an especially interesting role. He basically runs around making a nuisance of himself to law enforcement while trying to play Detective. There are only so many ways to play that and I think he did a decent job. He's fantastic in Nightcrawler and that new Tom Ford movie.

Fascinating this thread would come up now. My city just showed this on two nights at a revival house, and I went one night since I've never seen it but have had it on my mental to-see list for years. Agree with R113 the murder sequences are stylized in a way the rest of the film is not. They were terrifying but also just amazing, lyrical and hauntingly artistic filmmaking. It's been on my mental to-see list for so long because of some review I read years back that argued the movie's real subject/theme is, investigative obsession as a form of addiction and the way there is no satisfaction from the addiction, it just destroys your life. The film did do a good job of showing the three sleuths variously being overtaken by and succumbing to the addiction, and the addiction proving to be a dead end.

Reading up online after seeing it, I came across a huge cinema-geek discussion thread where people were going at it tooth and nail over whether Fincher bought and was putting forward the cartoonist's conclusion as to whodunit, or whether Fincher and the film remained skeptical, and were saying no answer had been found.

It's disappointing to look for and fail to find an exhaustively researched book on the Zodiac thing by a highly credible investigative writer able to marshal the evidence that is and isn't there in a credible way, rather than the deeply flawed stuff that is out there. With the hindsight of many decades, it does seem the investigation(s) were messed up enough by one thing and another, that it's totally unclear whether one person did the "Zodiac" killings, whether one person wrote the "Zodiac" letters, and whether any Zodiac letter was by a person who did any of the killings.

Odd that the Zodiac, or the caller claiming to be the Zodiac talking to Belli on the broadcast, called himself "Sam" yet "Son of Sam" supposedly got HIS moniker from some other source.

R129 is scary, like he did it. Mitt, get off the fucking computer!

Funny you should insinuate that, R130. I was once on an EAR ONS message board (the Original Night Stalker serial killer in California who was never caught) and posters there came across some strange posts in the thread that some people suspected as being written by the EAR ONS himself. Creepy stuff. I was also here on DataLounge when Luka Magnotta was participating in his OWN thread right before he was captured. I wonder if that thread is still around here in the archives...

[quote]It's not like Jake had an especially interesting role.

The role was very interesting, he just didn't know what to do with it. He is a very limited actor.

No, the role isn't really interesting, R132. He's just a reporter who becomes obsessed with investigating this complex mystery... there are tons of roles like that in movies, and his character wasn't made any deeper or more distinctive through any scripted details about his personality. The focus is much more on the mystery than his character anyway. But I agree he has limited range, even in better written roles than Zodiac.

bump

OK, "bump," here's one. How about, guys who say their father was the culprit in an infamous murder or series of murderers? It's like a syndrome or something. There's a Zodiac guy as well as Black Dahlia guy.

That so many suspects were ruled out over handwriting analysis (from only one "expert") is a little ridiculous.

BTW, I find it funny, but not in an eerie way, that my post at R129 was taken as sinister in some sense. I have worked for decades in fields implicating research, investigation and review and weighing of evidence. And R129 contained only, a geek's level of evidentiary scrutiny. It contained zero signs of insider knowledge (quite rightly). It is not a secret that engrossing though they may be, the books published to date on this case contain flawed investigation, or theories tainted by bias or faulty review of evidence. It would be great to get a more authoritative piece of investigative nonfiction, but it might not be possible, given time and corruption of the available record due to time, poor preservation, etc.

r137 I think cases like this are so complicated that the normal investigative biases can really cripple this type of case, especially in the days before computers and better evidence recording and storage. The positive flip side is that because of the complexity, it's more likely someone will know something, or some obscure evidence will survive in a smaller LEO dept. evidence room. People who knew him in the subsequent years can help, too. That's how they got John List.

I posted upthread that I think it is solvable and the breakthrough will come out of left field. The naval angle, the cabbie murder-particularly the man on scene who walked into the rowhouse, and even the letters and cipher were under investigated. After suspects were found, it seems like the investigation shifted to them rather than a broad view of the whole case. Geo-profiling and familial DNA might help.

BTW, if you don't mind my asking, given your field, what do you think of the Big Data trend in policing/criminology?

R129, you don't think that the details about the murders only the killer would know included in the letters about the first couple killings, as well as the square of bloody fabric cut from Paul Stein's shirt isn't compelling enough to make anyone conclude the Zodiac killer wrote/sent the letters? Or are you saying they leave open the possibility that he had a letter-writing accomplice?

Thank you for your thoughtful post.

People must have been scared shitless in San Francisco when Zodiac threatened to blow up school buses...

I never quite understood the basement scene with suspect Rick Marshall. Was there an implication that there were 2 Zodiac killers in that scene?

Scary.

I don't get why Darlene Ferrin didn't drive away when Zodiac sped off. It seems like she knew her killer. So many plot holes in the actual story.

R141, he was in the basement with Bob Vaughn and the implication -- as imagined by the movie Graysmith in the throes of paranoia and terror -- was that Marshall was walking around upstairs.

In his book, he did mention going to Vaughn's house, but it wasn't nearly as dramatic.

Never. Let. Anyone. Tie. You. Up.

The Zodiac killer is hiding in Elias Koteas's pants.

[quote] Just to get a better idea of what the movie gets wrong, would any of you care to name a few films that do a better job of what Zodiac tries to do?

Kurosawa's High and Low, for starters. Silence of the Lambs. Manhunter. Memories of Murder.

Zodiac wasn't bad but I watched it because of this thread and was disappointed. RDJ was dire.

It's not, r131. I got into a back and forth with that guy and finally decided it was Magnotta himself, and barely slept for a week.

The thread was deleted pretty early on if I recall.

R141, I think there were several times when the film implied that the killer was framing someone, such as when the reporter and expert were discussing how the handwriting had changed for no reason. I got the impression that the movie suggested Bob was someone the killer knew through the theater and had emulated his handwriting -- maybe the guy who had Bob store that reel of film for a while.

[[[BTW, if you don't mind my asking, given your field, what do you think of the Big Data trend in policing/criminology? ]]] I'm not in law enforcement specifically. But I know a bit about this niche. It's even become a job specialty, often titled "crime analyst." A good job, with a downside being, there's nowhere to rise from that niche. They're not investigators, though it's "investigat-IVE." It's all about stats, mapping, Big Data. I know someone who works for one of the companies that designs the software; the job of the person I know involves traveling and interfacing with high-level LE entities to show them how to use it and straighten out glitches.

Anyway, in my on-the-sidelines opinion, it's great as an added tool side-by-side with classic investigative methods. The danger is the American (or perhaps human) tendency to stampede into over-emphasis on the new shiny toy. This is what happened in the 2016 election.

[[[Just to get a better idea of what the movie gets wrong, would any of you care to name a few films that do a better job of what Zodiac tries to do?]]] Not sure there is a consensus on what Z was trying to do. I do think the piece I read arguing that Z was about addictive obsession as filler for a void or wound in the soul, which then becomes a void or wound in itself, had a point. And Z did a good job with that theme.

bump

bump

I usually hate David Fincher's style but I've seen this film many times. It's one of my favorites. Every time I re-watch it I fall down the rabbit hole of searching out the unsolved ciphers and reading the forums/wiki devoted to the case.

R154, do you then have trouble getting to sleep, and jump at every noise you hear in your house? That's what happens to me after I fall down the Zodiac rabbit hole.

Terrifying stuff.

BUMP

Freaky to think he never got caught..

West Coast DLers: ITS PLAYING ON THE BIG SCREEN TODAY (July 9th) @ 5pm at the Egyptian Theater in Hollywood!

(Tickets are $12)

It's the only great movie Fincher has made. Beyond the style, which is laid on with a trowel, of SEVEN and FIGHT CLUB, the films themselves are terrible and weak and both will age very badly, I think. The rest of his films are total crap.

If you L.A. bitches can handle the 157 min runtime in one sitting, then you should go!

I agree, [R159]. I think it's a brilliant film. For me, "The Social Network" is a close second though.

The *rest* of Fincher's filmography however is style over substance like you say.

(And thank God there's no Brad Pitt in "Zodiac"--he would have ruined it).

This scene where Gylenhaal visits one of the Zodiac suspects at his home is terrifying...

Forgot to mention: the Egyptian in L.A. is screening it in 35mm!

Scariest scene in the film...

(Are today's investigative experts pretty sure that Zodiac was only one guy working alone?)

That's a 35mm screening in L.A., too. I hate when you go see a repository film and all they do is protect the DVD or some shit. I think the second feature, The Zodiac Killer (1971) is a DVD projection. I've never seen that movie.

Wish I could go to this—I always wish I were there instead of NYC, for many reasons—if only to mingle with other Zodiac Killer enthusiasts.

just watched this on netflix the other night......

I'm going to watch this again later. It's such a great film.

Bryan Hartnell was a very curious young man. In the film he is portrayed as being very calm and unperterbed during the ordeal, and I thought it was just the actors interpretation....but no, i saw an interview of Bryan Hartnell after the murders while he's still in hospital. He was remararkably calm and even forgave his assailant....he'd just seen his girlfreind stabbed to death and nearly died himself?? what a weird guy. there were people posting in the comments that Bryan actually killed his girlfreind himself...or knew the attacker.

I love this movie, own this movie, but am always annoyed at one minor motif in this movie:

Mark Ruffalo's character is always mooching food.

Presumably to provide much-needed 'levity,' R169.

Here's a behind the scenes pic of Fincher directing a scene from the film; he actually looks kind of creepy here himself ;)

I can see why Gyllenhaal was terrified of him now^

R93, Yes, it does.

RDJ was not a huge star in 2007. Surprisingly, he only got 3rd billing, behind Ruffalo and Gyllenhaal. But his public persona and acting schtick has always been the same.

More behind the scenes (watching the monitor together?); RDJ actually looks pretty great here....

Jimmi Simpson and Donal Logue are both good in their bit parts. It took me years to realize that was Jimmi in "Zodiac", actually.

R175 Woof, hot RDJ. He still looks great now in the marvel movies. Just that his personal fashion sense sucks!

Also, I loved Ruffalo in the vintage clothes in this flick.

His ass in Tuskegee tight checked pants at the end was to die for

Ruffalo is channeling Columbo so hard in this movie.

Lol, [R179]

Gylenhaal looking stressed out of his mind (as he apparently was during the entire production of this film) while receiving advice (probably more criticism actually) from Fincher before a scene on the "Zodiac" set...

Gyllenhaal was miscast!

How was he, r182? I think he plays pretty well a geeky newspaper cartoonist obsessed with the Zodiac case and code.

Agree, [R182]! Even though it's probably his best performance (I don't like him or think he's that talented) he's still the weak link in the movie. I've always felt like they should have cast somebody else on that role.

Gyllenhaal is "okay" in his part but is basically a blank here and he doesn't really add *anything* on a personal level or enhance what's already written in the script with his performance.

I'm trying to think of who though (circa 2006--film was released in 07) would have been ideal...

Tobey Maguire maybe? (I dislike him personally, but his acting was quite good during this time and he could have played the "quirky, obsessed, cartoonist/novice investigator" type here...)

Sam Rockwell perhaps? He's good in *everything*.

If it was made today, I could see someone like Paul Dano, Joseph Gordon Levitt, or Ryan Gosling nabbing the Gyllenhaal role.

Fincher didn't want Jake for this movie (this is partially why they didn't get along during filming).

Jake was forced on him by the studio when he signed on. I have no idea who Fincher actually wanted in the role though.

[R165], I hope that you are able to visit L.A. and the Egyptian Theatre sometime in the near future and that you have a blast while you're here!😊

The theater dates back to the '20s and was one of the original movie palaces built by the legendary Sid Grauman (who built the Chinese Theatre as well--among many others).

Charlie Chaplin, Mary Pickford, Douglas Fairbanks (and the majority of old Hollywood stars and filmmaking pioneers) attended screenings and had premieres there, and the theater has been fully restored to its original glory thanks to donations and volunteers, etc.

It's a real piece of cinematic/Hollywood history.

Whenever you visit, I think that you'll find the theater and its patrons very welcoming and glad to have you there!

It will happen someday! :)

Mark Ruffalo's wardrobe in this movie *is* pretty fly...

*was that really just a "normal" suit back then?

I came away convinced Arthur Lee Allen was the killer, because thats where the film led us. Also think there was one killer who had a "helper" somewhere behind the scenes.

The basement scene was terrifying. Thought Greysmith was going to be killed, for sure, if I didnt know better from real life.

Never get the praise for Ruffalo. He never seems convincing to me. I always see him as "acting" in every role he's ever done.

Someone upthread posted about the Original Night Stalker. I'll see if I can find the YT vid I once saw about him & post it here.

He killed like 12 people & raped 6-7 as the East Bay Rapist. Not only never caught, no one knows who he is nor what he looks like. Hes very possibly still alive.

R58 & r75...I think they've been focusing on the disgraced former Police Commissioner in NYs Suffolk County Sheriffs Dept., James Burke, as a possible suspect.

The only flaw the film really has is how much it tries to convince the viewer that the case against Arthur Lee Allen was clear cut, when it wasn't.

Such a good movie. But scary. I never watch it after dark.

Fincher's films are usually style over substance because he's not a writer. He doesn't know the difference. He's a brilliant photographer but when it comes to screenplays, he relies on others to make the call.

R186: what a refreshingly kind and friendly post! (on an already interesting thread).

The murders stopped when Romney moved to Boston.

Lol, [R195]!

What about the Zodiac's phone call into that news program with Melvin Belli that was featured in a scene in the film?

Does everyone think that was the real Zodiac (it was such a public thing to do)? Or was that likely a troll just trying to freak an already terrified public out even more?

R196, the real Zodiac seemed to be a bit of a famewhore and a publicity hound, going out of his way to keep his name in the papers and once complaining that people weren't wearing Zodiac-symbol pins. So I suppose it's possible that he took the risk of calling Belli, but I doubt we'll ever know.

Thank you, R186 for your sweet post! I love Los Angeles but haven't been to that theater. I would actually like to live there someday. There's time!

To the poster upthread who said that the film does include the murders of Faraday and Jensen: it doesn't. It opens with the July 4th attack. The Faraday/Jensen killings happened around Christmas 7 months prior. They are alluded to in the film, but their murders aren't depicted.

Do any "eldergays" here know whether the Donavan song "Hurgy Gurdy Man" played at the very end of the movie was always supposed to be haunting/scary (like at the time it was originally released)?

Or did it only become creepy in the context of this film (because of how they used it)?

*Hurdy Gurdy Man (not Hurgy)

[quote]It may be hard to imagine now, but there was in fact a time when most listeners thought the “Hurdy Gurdy Man” sounded like a pretty nice dude. After all, he’s just a short and plump little guy (a “roly poly man”) who plays a quaint centuries-old instrument (the hurdy gurdy), “singing songs of love.” And there’s hardly anyone less sinister than Donovan, a flower child famous for such sunny, ad-friendly hits as “Mellow Yellow” and “Sunshine Superman.” Donovan even said “Hurdy Gurdy Man” was about the Maharishi, whom he studied under alongside the Beatles. (He wrote the song before many in their circle soured on the guru, resulting in John Lennon’s “Sexy Sadie” a few months later.) Donovan even felt positive enough about the “Hurdy Gurdy Man” that, for the subtitle of his 2007 autobiography, he used the name to describe himself.

[quote]But the song’s odd production—Donovan sounds like he’s singing through a fan—and downbeat performance did make some uneasy. While typically described as a “sixties period-piece ditty” “about the power of music,” the 2002 All Music Guide to Rock calls it “dim, dark.” Even the video for “Hurdy Gurdy Man,” if you watch closely, plays troubadours and hippies dancing in bikinis against, at one point, an atomic explosion.

Thank you so much, [R201]! Your post answers all my questions and that article is hilarious...

One of the greatest things about this movie is its use of "Hurdy Gurdy Man". Christ, what a creepy song.

Cold Case show on the Original Night Stalker

[quote] What about the Zodiac's phone call into that news program with Melvin Belli that was featured in a scene in the film?

Does everyone think that was the real Zodiac (it was such a public thing to do)? Or was that likely a troll just trying to freak an already terrified public out even more?

There were two phone calls allegedly from Zodiac: the first one which alerted the police to his interest in Belli, and then the second one which was on tv and someone called in. If I remember the film correctly, Call #2 was eventually traced to a patient at a mental hospital. The operator who took Call #1 claimed that the voice of the call that she took was not Caller #2 anyway.

Yeah, that phone call to Belli on the TV news broadcast was NOT in fact from the Zodiac killer, it was a mental patient impersonating the Zodiac.

He called after the Ferrin/Mageau shooting and the Lake Berryessa attack to report what he had done. The calls weren't recorded.

I highly recommend this documentary that contains some information that wasn't in the movie. They interview most of the major players, including the victims and police who worked on the case.

After watching this, I'm not 100% certain that the Zodiac was Allen. The second half of this documentary raises questions about him as the prime suspect. I guess I still lean towards Allen, but it's hard to say definitively.

Thanks, R208.

Very interesting, R208.

That documentary originally appeared on the very cheap Paramount blu-ray/DVD deluxe director's cut release. If you own a blu ray player, and you either love this movie or are very interested in this case, you should own that release.

It's the one with the "Please Rush to Editor!" letter as the cover artwork.

There are two documentaries on that release. The other one is called "His Name Was Arthur Leigh Allen" (I think that's the title). That one focuses on him as a suspect and is not a general overview of the case like the other documentary.

Both of them are must-sees, and both are bone chilling, perhaps more so than the movie.

[R211], after seeing both of those documentaries, who do you think was the real Zodiac killer?

(Do you think it was Arthur Leigh Allen? And do you know if he (Leigh) really owned a "Zodiac" brand watch like they had him wearing in the film, or was that just a liberty that the screenwriter took with the story?)

Arthur owned the watch. It was a gift from his mother in 1967. There's a photo of of it at the link.

His name was Arthur Leigh Allen is on youtube

My favorite Fincher movie. It's fascinating as much for the way the crimes took over people's lives as it is for the sick, senseless cruelty of the crimes themselves.

It also really does feel like the late 60s and early 70s. I lived in NYC rather than the SF area but still it just feels dead-on.

The oddest thing is the attack where he wore a mask and stabbed that young couple in their backs. The way he spoke to them and talking about him needing money to get to Mexico (I think) just seemed totally out of character. Why make up that story when he was in control? And why wear a mask if he intended to kill them anyway? If he hadn't left that writing on their car door I would have sworn that wasn't the Zodiac.

He seemed to be living out a fantasy. As if he were a comic book villain,donning a costume and taunting the cops.

[quote]Why make up that story when he was in control?

It was the way he got them to agree to be tied up. He seemed to really want to stab the shit out of the poor girl while she was helpless, which he then proceeded to do. The guy he stabbed a few times just to get it over with. He really seemed to luxuriate in sticking the knife in her when she was tied up. He could not have done that if they weren't bound.

Cecilia was struggling and trying to roll away as she was attacked which resulted in stab wounds to her front and back.

He probably loved that. Wriggle all she might, she couldn't get away. However, if they hadn't been bound, the experience of stabbing her to death would have been much more difficult and less satisfying.

Whoever mentioned upthread the scared-shitless attitude in the Bay Area during the time wasn't kidding; I would add the shootout at the Marin County Courthouse and Manson breaking big down in the Southland (if you didn't mention it). All with the continuing horror of Vietnam churning away in the background. Frightening time to be a kid.

There just seemed to be insanity in the air in the 70s. I'm in the UK and there was a book released a few years ago about how crazy the 70s were. For example, there was an attempted military coup of the government in the early-70s and it wasn't even deemed important enough to be front page news in the newspapers of the day. High ranking British military officials had a detailed plan in place to remove the Labour government and take control and it was reported on like page 5 or something in the Times. Just more cray.

Thanks, [R213]!

I know Mark Ruffalo's cop character says that all of the evidence against Leigh was technically circumstantial (and it was), but that is a *really* weird coincidence and makes me lean more towards Leigh as being the Zodiac.

So THIS is where all the civil people hang out.

I agree, R223.

But that criminal profiler lady in the documentary says Allen was a pedophile, and there's indication from the crimes that the Zodiac was hetero with a strong hatred of women, so she counts him out. Can't he be both a misogynist and a pedo?

Perhaps he was polymorphously perverse.

Weren't there also a lot of strong coincidences with Richard Gaikowski? It strikes me that the one thing you can say about the Zodiac case is that it proves you shouldn't read too much into coincidences, because you read about each of these suspects and every time you think "This one HAS to be the Zodiac!"; and then you move on to the next one and read about them and you have exactly the same thought.

Those sketches of the Zodiac Killer with the square-shaped hood and sunglasses have always freaked me the fuck out. I cannot even imagine what it must've been like to be out in some isolated area and encounter somebody who looked like that.

Yes, R227. My money's on Gaikowski. The timing lines up, he was a newspaper editor/writer, his nickname hidden in one of the codes. Too bad he's dead.

I thought that Allen had been ruled out by DNA?

Was the creepy projectionist guy with the basement a real life person? Whatever happened to him? Was he ruled out as a suspect?

I don't know if this has been mentioned yet, but this movie is on Netflix Instant, if you're interested.

Is there any kind of consensus among modern day "Zodiac" experts about who they think did it?

(Also: I've never felt you could really "rule out" someone entirely in the Zodiac case based on forensics; so much was made in the movie about crime scene contamination and you can see how in the film (compared to now) how people were careless with handling letters (no gloves on) and other Zodiac evidence, as forensic methods and knowledge weren't as developed as they are now. It was such a different time).

Here was one of the police composites of the Zodiac

Richard Gaikowski

This was another one (though bizarrely he looks Asian here)

Another one

R230 They didnt tie that up in the movie, but I always figured he was Allens accomplice. His "helper" that may have sent the letters, which is why the DNA didnt match up to Allen.

Thats assuming Allen was the Zodiac, which is where the movie wanted to take us.

How soon we forget... From the Creepy Files.....

What surprises me (because the Zodiac was *such* an attention whore in the extreme) is that we don't know his identity for sure at this point.

If he was dead now (which is likely because of how old he would be), wouldn't he have left something behind (like a letter) or made a full deathbed confession (or left a tape to be played after his death) just to taunt everyone one last time and make sure the Zodiac "legacy" would be attached to his name forever? (And so his name would live in infamy like Manson, etc.)

He loved the attention *so much*, it's really hard to believe that he would have wanted to die anonymously or remain anonymous after his death....

*Doesn't make sense with his "extroverted" personality

Writing on the car at one of his crime scenes

One of the almost non-existent samples of Mittwriting

The composite at R233 looks like my dad but I'm positive he wasn't the Zodiac.

r239 IIRC, there were some people who believed that the detective himself wrote some of those letters in order to keep the case alive. Graysmith also came under scrutiny. There was definitely some kind of internal investigation of the detective (Toschi). Because of Graysmith's connections to the case (and Toschi) the book obviously never explored that angle, and the movie glossed over it.

The scene where Jake goes over to the guys house - the one with the movie posters - and then the guy reveals that he himself was the one who did the handwriting. Scary as fuck,

Romney 1969

"Romney has acknowledged similar stunts. He was paraphrased in a Boston Globe story in 2005 as saying that he ­remembered 'dressing up as a police officer himself and startling his friends and their girlfriends by rapping on the steamed-up windows of their parked cars.'"

Little film?

It's 3 fucking hours!!!

r236 Everything about that attack seems so unlike every other attack. Why did he dress up in such a way--and spend so much time on the Zodiac sign--if he intended to kill them all along? Why did he wear that damn holster? It's so odd. And why did he spend so much time and effort telling them that cover story about needing to go to Mexico if he intended to kill them both? All the other killings are so brutal and efficient, but this one seems so theatrical.

[quote]Little film?

[quote]It's 3 fucking hours!!!

Teeny tiny!

I never thought about how different it was, R249. Are you suggesting it was a different killer?

I think the idea was that he was taking his craft to the next level. Why he didn't do something similarly elaborate on his next outing came down to the need for expediency. He wanted to move in on San Francisco, but he couldn't repeat the theatricality of the previous incident. He barely got away from the crime scene by the Presidio as it was.

[quote]Are you suggesting it was a different killer?

No, I definitely think it was the same killer, but only because of the note left on the car door. If that wasn't there then I would find it impossible to believe that was the work of the Zodiac, simply because there were so many inconsistencies. It was said that the outfit he wore for the Lake Berryessa attack wasn't just some makeshift thing, it was something that was obviously labored over. The Zodiac sign wasn't just scrawled on, it was done with some care, for example. Yet he obviously intended to kill them both. Why go to the trouble? Also, he obviously seemed to plan his attacks to some extent. Each of those first three killings were in secluded areas. But the Presidio murder seems more like something he did on the spare of the moment. There were plenty of places in San Francisco with the same level of seclusion where he could have killed someone in the same way he did with his previous attacks, but he didn't. Obviously he was cray, so there's that; but those last two attacks still strike me as odd, given the relative consistency between the first two attacks.

"It strikes me that the one thing you can say about the Zodiac case is that it proves you shouldn't read too much into coincidences, because you read about each of these suspects and every time you think "This one HAS to be the Zodiac!"; and then you move on to the next one and read about them and you have exactly the same thought. "

That's the thing. There are so damn many people in this world, that if you want to find someone who looks like ___ and is ___ age and lived in ____ and _____ during ___ years and is known to have ____ personality traits, there will probably be several people who meet all the criteria out of sheer random coincidence. And obviously that's the case with some or all of these suspects, obviously several of them aren't the killer but are just white male assholes who were in the right place at the right time.

And was it the Datalounge that also realized Mitt Romney fit the criteria? Because yeah, R239, if the killer grew up to have a major political career, it's explain why he stayed anonymous...

[quote]Why did he dress up in such a way--and spend so much time on the Zodiac sign--if he intended to kill them all along? Why did he wear that damn holster? It's so odd.

A poster upthread said it was like the Zodiac Killer was living out some comic book villain roleplaying type of thing, and that's not a bad theory. He was wearing that get-up like it was a costume.

Another theory people have is that he wore the hood just in case someone saw him commit the murders, and if that happened it would be possible for him to run away without his face being seen.

TCM is showing "The Most Dangerous Game" this week. Is it worth watching?

Is the sexual chemistry between Gyllenhaal and Downey's characters deliberate?

Zodiac shoots taxi cab driver Paul Stine while kids in the neighborhood watch from a window and call the police.

Excellent choice in music by Fincher.

Do you guys think the Zodiac killed more than the five that are officially attributed to him? He claimed to have killed over 30, I think. And what about that woman who claimed he held her against her will in his car and said he was going to kill her baby before killing her? It's claimed there were inconsistencies in her story about the encounter, which obviously casts some doubt on her testimony; but it's depicted in the film.

I definitely think he killed more victims than the ones we know for sure. Most serial killers are like that.

Oh yeah, there are probably more victims - people that vanished and were assumed to have gone to "look for America", hippies that nobody cared about, drifters that were never identified, whatever. The San Francisco Bay Area was full of drifters and druggies and people who wouldn't be missed in the late sixties and early seventies, if Zodiac had wanted to kill for the sake of killing he'd have had plenty of targets that wouldn't be missed.

Obviously he also liked killing respectable people who would be missed, and famewhored about it when he did, that doesn't mean there weren't other victims that attracted less notice. In his last letter he even said that he was going to keep killing without attracting public attention, maybe he'd been doing that all along.

Donna Lass is a possible victim not included in the film. She disappeared from Lake Tahoe in 1970.

The creepy projectionist was the killer at Lake Berryessa. That's why he used the costume.

It's a very good film. I remember boying the dvd when it came out 10 years ago (I feel old, sigh).

Very underrated film, good to see it get a bit of attention here.

I love how Jake really does act as a "Boy Scout", as he is accused.

Mormon symbols.

Over pronounced plaids for men were huge in the very late 60s and 70s, r188.

And I should add, not only overly pronounced plaids (ie, exaggerated plaids), overly pronounced plaids in pure polyester.

He undoubtedly had victims before and after. Most famous serial killers, unless they were caught before they went further, did. From Dinardo in Pennsylvania to Jack the Ripper, who was seen by witnesses, had other victims. Dinardo has already confessed to earlier victims. Like Son of Sam killer Berkowitz, who has confessed to being part of a cult with another killer, prosecutors suppress the evidence so as not to confuse the juries and get a conviction, Similarly the Manson murders.

[quote]Jack the Ripper, who was seen by witnesses, had other victims.

Wow, I never knew that. Was that before or after the official murders, or both? Do you know if there's a website?

r270 I'm not the poster above, but the link below is a great resource. The one caveat is that it's frequented by UK LEOs, and their usual biases apply.

Oops. Sorry fixed link.

R270, I also recommend The Casebook site as the overall best website for info about JTR.

R270, I also recommend The Casebook site as the overall best website for info about JTR.

R270, I also recommend The Casebook site as the overall best website for info about JTR.

R270, I also recommend The Casebook site as the overall best website for info about JTR.

R270, I also recommend The Casebook site as the overall best website for info about JTR.

R270, I also recommend The Casebook site as the overall best website for info about JTR.

R270, I also recommend The Casebook site as the overall best website for info about JTR.

R270, I also recommend The Casebook site as the overall best website for info about JTR.

R270, I also recommend The Casebook site as the overall best website for info about JTR.

R270, I also recommend The Casebook site as the overall best website for info about JTR.

R270, I also recommend The Casebook site as the overall best website for info about JTR.

R270, I also recommend The Casebook site as the overall best website for info about JTR.

Hey, can anyone recommend this Casebook site I keep hearing about?

LOL, R285.

Jeez, I got so excited when I saw there were so many new replies in this thread. Ugh.

Sorry, I posted about many serial killers having previous and sometimes later victims in the Dinardo thread (Four men , missing in PA, part II) and they showed up here. I've been posting in both threads. Obviously, I like true crime. But this kind of stuff has been happening at DL a lot lately (posts showing up in the wrong threads) and there were several posts about it last weekend

Here's a very youthful Armistead Maupin giving a press conference in 1978 about Dave Toschi and the fake Zodiac letter...

Maupin seems like an arrogant asshole; catching the Zodiac was more important than any alleged drama with Toschi.

I think Maupin just wanted the press and to make a name for himself--which he did.

[[[There just seemed to be insanity in the air in the 70s]]] Yep, just read the Jeffrey Toobin book about the Patty Hearst/SLA thing, and it's OK but it's not the book to zero in on the surreal madness of it all then, which is so well rendered in Fincher's "Zodiac." . With Quentin Tarantino about to do a Manson Family film, who should tackle the SLA and Patty to make this a film festival?

I bet if they would ever find out who did it, it would be so boring and it would kill alot of the hype.

Kill the hype? I don't think anyone is counting on "hype" for anything here. It's not like there's an active TV series about the case in production.

Perhaps you mean that knowing who the killer was would dispel the mystery? I for one would welcome a resolution. It drives me crazy to not know. It's the sort of crime that would definitely be solved nowadays with our advanced forensic science and profiling techniques.

Definitely, r292. If Zodiac happened today he would be caught pretty quickly. I believe that whoever did it is now dead, given how long ago this was.

Was it ever estimated how old he was at the time of the killings? He could still be alive. Lots of people who were adults of serial-killing age in the late 60s are still alive today.

Between 28 and 40 is their best guess.

bump

Terrific underrated film, great performances.

Does anyone else here follow the zodiackiller.com site and message boards?

They've been teasing some huge news and new DNA testing forthcoming this year. My money is still on Gaikowski.

Has anyone ever had an Aqua Velva?

Gyllenhaal and Downey Jr's characters should have ended up in bed together that night.

The perfect double-bill with "Zodiac" would be a 2003 South Korean film available on Amazon, "Memories of Murder." It concerned a different type of crime (serial sex killings of women in a small rural town in the early 1980s), but the focus like "Z" was the investigation in a time pre-dating modern forensics and procedures, and how the obsessive quest to solve the mystery, brought those involved face-to-face with the Unknowable, and nearly unraveled them . . . . Also like "Z", cinematography and mood ambience of high artistry, haunted outdoor scenes of terrifyingly eerie atmosphere, and the then-contemporary zeitgeist as backdrop . . .

Thanks for the recommendation, [R301]! I'm definitely going to check that South Korean movie out. I'm a big fan of "Zodiac" and enjoy fact based psychological thrillers as well.

I'm just hoping that "Memories of Murder" is not ultra-violent/excessively bloody like some of the other South Korean films I've tried to watch before. Some of the Japanese and SK films go *way* over the top with the gore--though I will say that none of the films I've seen yet (that were like that) from Japan or SK were based on true stories....

"Memories of Murder" is not excessively bloody, R302. It's spine-chilling, in an atmospheric and disturbing different way. But a really fine crime film. There's also quite a bit of humor--The investigators that are thrown together on the case are a bunch of characters.

r298 the original post was in June, so I'd take it with a grain of salt. DNA isn't necessarily definitive, either. A lot depends on sample, chain of evidence, etc.

Bumping this old thread to address a few things:

Arthur Leigh Allen is still the best suspect. The DNA sample was taken from the front of the stamp on the envelope of one of the Zodiac letters. It could be almost anyone’s DNA, so it couldn’t have ruled out Allen. I’m not 100% sure he was the Zodiac, but I think it’s more likely than not.

Mageau picked Allen out of a lineup, but he did so 20 years after the fact. It’s also not clear that he got a good look at the Zodiac’s face. Mageau also struggled with drug addiction after the attack and suffered from major PTSD.

It does seem that Darlene Ferren recognized the attacker, or thought she did. It also appears that she knew Allen and was creeped out by him.

The Cheri Jo Bates murder was not definitively linked to Zodiac. I actually don’t believe he was responsible, or that he killed anyone except for the ones law enforcement agrees he killed. The Zodiac was what we would now call a troll. His letters were him trolling the cops and the newspapers.

If Allen wasn’t the Zodiac, then I think the killer probably died not long after the final Zodiac letter in 1974.