This is the Zodiac speaking...

I’m currently reading ZODIAC UNMASKED by Robert Graysmith – I finished his first ZODIAC book a couple months ago – and I’m gearing up to watch David Fincher’s ZODIAC film. The books are very well written and interesting to see from the first hand – and it’s easy to see how Graysmith got so wrapped up in the mystery of it all. Reading the books is also bringing to light – how very well made Fincher’s film is.

Fincher captures not only the mania surrounding the ZODIAC killer – but also the obsession of Graysmith – and how it ate away at Avery, Toschi and Armstrong – the lack of cooperation between the various jurisdictions not realizing the fact that the killer was planning on them to not cooperate so it would make his secrets easier to maintain.

You’d naturally think that in a serial killer film – it’s the crimes, the killer and the cops that take center stage – and the investigation is only a by-product of all of those things – a way to fill the middle of the film. What’s really interesting about this case is that the killer shows up – taunts everyone - and then disappears – leaving everyone to wonder and the complexity of the entire investigation is what is interesting.

As I’m reading the second book – I keep flashing to the scenes in the film – it’s beautiful how the two are really playing off each other so very well. Fincher’s capturing the era of the late 60’s/early 70’s – is outstanding – the constant doubt if they are on the right path.

Graysmith goes on in the books to link various unsolved murders in Northern California to the lead suspect and his habits – and draws a much thicker stronger line in the sand saying that his suspect IS the killer. The evidence all points to it – and it’s hard to argue – but the fact that there hasn’t been a definitive swab of DNA or finger print makes it remain a mystery still.

Guns, bombs, articles on Zodiac, articles on how to successfully plea an insanity defense, recipe cards that have the same misspellings as do the Zodiac letters, a Zodiac divers watch the only other place than the letters that feature word Zodiac and the crosshair symbol – all pulled from the main suspects home in a search warrant weeks before his death. The suspect’s psychiatrist claims to have heard his confession in session over and over. The suspect’s brother, sister in-law, friends and former associates all claiming to suspect him for various reasons – up to claiming he wants to hunt humans and call himself Zodiac – or bragging that he IS Zodiac. The fact that the suspect was one of the first interviewed as a suspect in one of the early murders – only to be ruled out by a “gut feeling” – and no note remains as to why he was fingered.

This is all interesting and damning – but hardly a court case to be made to be a serial killer.

Fincher keeps the mystery going until the very end – then even at the end gives us a bit of an ellipsis – a cute little wink by saying that the suspect died before he was brought in or charged – which is enough to place a little doubt.

I’m willing to argue that ZODIAC is Fincher’s best film. I think it’s fair to say that Fincher’s best film is generally regarded as SE7EN. Don’t get me wrong - SE7EN is a really good film – it has solid acting – an interesting plot - it’s dark and gory and interesting - and has a really strong twist ending that wraps the story – but ZODIAC doesn’t have all that the powerful ending – but it remains AS strong missing those “shocking” elements. I think if you strip out the shock elements out of SE7EN – it doesn’t hold up.

It’s such an subjective argument though – so arguing that it’s a “better” film is not really valid. You can’t strip out part of a film and then really judge it as a film because the film is an entire work. I could judge the films more easily based on my “liking” one better than the other – and ZODIAC is certainly becoming my favorite of Fincher’s films and that’s more what I’m about than judging which is “better” for reasons of which I have to inflict on the film.

When I finally finish ZODIAC UNMASKED going to pair Fincher’s film up with DIRTY HARRY and make it a double feature – as it’s a bit of an homage to the Zodiac case – but in the end Harry gets his Zodiac (Gemini killer).

So much for due process, huh, Toschi?

[27-Apr-2011 edit: of course I meant Scorpio not Gemini - I was thinking of the Exorcist film (the 3rd) that had the homage to Zodiac in it and THAT homage was named Gemini - not the Dirty Harry homage which was Scorpio]

Let's talk "bad"

I started reading a book by a Australian movie journalist, Michael Adams, called Showgirls, Teen Wolves and Astro Zombies: A Film Critic's Year-long Quest to Find the Worst Movie Ever Made. It’s an interesting topic to tackle – because “bad” means different things to different people.

I know personally, I probably like a bunch of movies that others would consider “bad”. Filmmakers Jesus Franco, Neil Marshall, Normal J. Warren and many others I will giddily rent or watch films of – might be on the “do not disturb” list for others.

I’m not going to give you a book review or anything - as I'm just a handful of pages in – I’m just going to give you interesting updates as I read and find something interesting.

My first major observation is how one of my favorite television personalities Kevin Murphy of Mystery Science Theater 3000 fame gave advice to the author in the early goings of his quest. He tells him that films like Robot Monster (notorious for the monster being a man in a gorilla suit with a fishbowl on its head) – pales in comparison to films like Forrest Gump on his own personal badness scale.

Robot Monster has zero budget – and zero talent – so it had no chance.

Forrest Gump had a massive budget and tons of talent – and it’s a paint by numbers – “we are telling you to feel this here – and this here – and this here” instead of a film that had any nuance or message.

I don’t mind Forrest Gump – I thought the usage of technology was interesting (for the time) – but in the overall scale of things – yes I felt it was a American History for Dummies course – paint by numbers feeling clown hammer film. When I watch the film – I don’t mind the manipulation of it – though I don’t put it on my favorite film list anywhere – it’s your standard popcorn fair.

Murphy lists as the worst films much more modern ego-driven drivel such as Warren Beatty’s Town & Country and dares Adams to sit through Gena Davis’ Cutthroat Island. Which is interesting considering Murphy is famous for ripping older sci-fi films/horror/b-movies to pieces on MST3K. (Of course you should be aware that MST3K had to fight for the rights of the films they gave the “treatment” – so their selection was mostly public domain films – so it may be more about the budget than the films “badness”)

I find myself in agreement when it comes to Murphy and “badness” of films – the more ego and money pressed up against the screen – the more apt that if it’s bad – it’s infamously bad. That’s why I’m more apt to tell someone about my hatred for Academy Award winner Crash – than Monster A Go-Go or the Wild World of Batwoman.

Also, as an interesting side note – the first movie Adams pulls from his bingo ball machine to watch is Showgirls – which I don’t find as notoriously bad as others – the message gets a little lost but otherwise an interesting film. Even Adams claims to have an affinity for the film saying it was his 6th time watching the film – and he goes on to detail parts of a trek to Vegas he made to see the sights featured in the film. That makes two Aussies that I “know” who have an affinity for the film – interesting.

Well, I enjoyed talking to you about "bad movies" and as I read this book - or I have any new thoughts on movie badness - I will be happy to pass the word along. Sadly, as I continue reading this book - I realize it sounds more and more like a talk about the author's journey and him flexing his "I know a lot about movies" muscles than actual talk about the content and quality of the films. I'll stick with it - but as for now - no assigned reading my fellow fitness friends.