As much about the crippling obsession that gripped those searching for the Zodiac killer that terrorized Southern California in the late Sixties and much of the Seventies as it is gruesome sequences of stylized terror, Fincher's film defies the conditioning foisted upon American audiences who flock to crime dramas (whether they be films or TV series) that promise pat resolutions and clearly defined good and evil. Zodiac disturbs and fascinates because it does not wrap up cleanly - there is no triumphant climax where our shades-of-grey heroes capture the ruthless murderer. The investigation, which spanned decades, never produced anything other than very suggestive evidence that a particular individual committed the brutal Zodiac killings; it remains an absorbing, harrowing and deeply unsettling tale of true crime.

Based on the novel by former San Francisco Chronicle cartoonist Robert Graysmith (played by Jake Gyllenhaal), Zodiac traces the investigation, as conducted by Detectives Dave Toschi (an astonishing Mark Ruffalo) and Bill Armstrong (Anthony Edwards). False hope and dead-end leads pile up as the two men struggle to connect the dots and end the Zodiac's surreal reign of terror. Graysmith, at first on the periphery of the proceedings, finds himself allied with fellow Chronicle writer Paul Avery (Robert Downey Jr.) in an effort to piece together the sprawling puzzle. Years slip away and while the police and Graysmith come tantalizingly close to pinning the crimes on suspect Arthur Leigh Allen (John Carroll Lynch), the men can never deliver any damning evidence that unequivocally proves Allen's guilt.

Fincher, working from a dense, nimble James Vanderbilt screenplay (reportedly, Fincher, Vanderbilt and producer Brad Fischer spent nearly two years conducting an investigation of their own - essentially dusting off the case files and checking the facts all over again), manages to make all of the procedural elements feel vital and engaging. What could've been a very dull, dry and lifeless affair (think "Law & Order") is compelling and, at times, mesmerizing; it doesn't hurt that Fincher's knack for visually stimulating films is in full effect, although to his credit, the director doesn't overplay his hand. There are a few truly stunning sequences, but the flashy camerawork that marred Panic Room, for example, is scarce here. Ultimately, Zodiac is a satisfyingly frustrating experience, a film that defies convention and plays out with the messy urgency of real life. Murderers go free, questions go unanswered and closure fails to materialize - all bitter truths and ones that bubble just beneath the surface of this masterful work of art.

Reviewer's Bias*
Loves: David Fincher, serial killer stories
Likes: Robert Downey Jr., police procedural
Dislikes: Chloe Sevigny, Double dips
Hates: Unsolved crimes

The Movie
Zodiac kind of sneaked up on me, as I hadn't heard much buzz about it, and I certainly hadn't heard that it was David Fincher's return to the box office, following the stylish thriller Panic Room. As a big fan of Fincher's work, especially his visual style, and a fan of movies and books about serial killers, I was excited to see what Fincher would do with the story of the Zodiac. What I eventually saw wasn't at all what I expected, but was a welcome surprise from a director who obviously doesn't want to be pigeon-holed as an MTV-generation editing junkie, after establishing himself as the king of the MTV-generation editing junkies with his previous films.

Using political cartoonist/investigator Robert Graysmith's books on the Zodiac killings as the foundation for the story, the film introduces the cryptic killer that terrorized California for years, but doesn't let you get close to him, using shadows and physical distance to maintain a separation, with the exception of the actually slayings, with are so upclose it's upsetting. It's a distinct difference from the intimacy the audience shared with John Doe in Se7en, and appropriate for an unsolved crime wave. The film sticks to the truth, as reported by Graysmith, and doesn't create a heroic plot that in reality didn't occur. The Zodiac of the film is just as much a mystery as the Zodiac of history.

As a result of the lack of connection with the killer, the film gets to know his hunters well, including Graysmith (Jake Gyllenhaal), reporter Paul Avery (Robert Downey Jr.) and inspector David Toschi (Mark Ruffalo.) Each man invests a great deal into discovering who the Zodiac is, way more than anyone should have, considering the progression of the case. Working together, but mainly on their own, they spend years chasing down every lead, and every time they seem to get close, they realize how far away they are. The effect the case has on their professional and private lives takes up the bulk of the second half of the movie, but it's no less intriguing than the killings in the beginning. The nitty-gritty of the investigation is as engrossing as the graphically depicted murders, with one scene, in which Graysmith simply visits a possible informant (played to horrifying perfection by Charles Fleischer) being one of the most frightening in the entire film.

Though Gyllenhaal is the star of the show, and he does well as the ultimate boy scout, showing extreme enthusiasm for bringing the killer to justice, no one is as fantastic in this film as Downey, who is perfect as a drunken lout of a reporter, the epitome of the crime beat writer who does his work on the streets and in the gutter. The energy he brings to the film with his performance is invaluable, and he stands as a important contrast to Gyllenhaal's naive rookie. On the other end of the spectrum is Ruffalo, who plays his cop character with restraint and slow-burn intensity that makes his ongoing travails more personal and relateable. He's the most down-to-earth of the three, looking simply to do his duty and frustrated by an inability to finish the job. Between the three men, there's a complete portrait of obsession, which is the real story here.

Instead of taking the legendary tale of cat and mouse and applying his bag of visual tricks to it, Fincher created one of his most straightforward films, using his gift for detail to take audiences back to the days of the killings, going so far as to show the studio logos before the film in the style of the time. While the film is as stylish as Fincher's previous efforts, it's an understated style, and doesn't take away from what is his first period piece, injecting you directly into that time, in much the same way Se7en and Fight Club took you into those worlds. It's unlikely a film full of quick cuts and stunning computer imagery would have made sense in the analog '60s, and Fincher wisely realized that, focusing more on perfect compositions and atmospheric settings to further his art. There are several frames in Zodiac that could be hung next to Hopper's Nighthawks without any art enthusiast complaining.

The length of the film is one of the few possible negatives to be found in Zodiac, but it's not that it's an overdone mess. The story is simply too sprawling and too complex to be compacted into a clean 90 minutes. The sheer size of the film, and the many plot points and storylines may turn a few people off from the movie, and the fact that a resolution is impossible due to the case's unsolved nature doesn't help either. The film does attempt to point a finger at a few suspects, using the books' theories, and there's a bit of "closure" in the form of a coda, but overall, the film is about the journey, not the destination, much like it's not about the crimes but the investigation, and it's not about Fincher's signature style, but his most accomplished direction.

The Bottom Line
Zodiac shares more in common with The Game than any of the other films in Fincher's filmography, and is easily his most complete film, from beginning to end, thanks to a focus on storytelling instead of visual acrobatics. Fincher's finest directing work, an enthralling story and an outstanding cast make what could have been an overlong exercise in indulgent filmmaking into one of the best serial killer films ever.