| Author |
Message |
|
| Marj |
 Posted: Sat Aug 04, 2007 11:23 pm |
 |
|
Joined: 21 May 2004
Posts: 10497
Location: Manhattan
|
Zodiac is one film that I desperately wanted to see in a theater but for various and sundry reasons was unable to. Finally I saw it today and the wait was well worth it. This is one of the best films I've ever seen.
Before going into any more detail, I want to read this forum. I've read everything that was posted in Current Films and perhaps I'm even too late to discuss it here.
I'll read and post later or tomorrow as it is getting awfully late here. But I wanted to simply post how much I loved this movie before I faded for the night. It's one that will stay with me for some time. And perhaps will be viewed again.
To be continued ... |
|
|
| Back to top |
   
|
| mo_flixx |
| Posted: Sat Aug 04, 2007 11:48 pm |
|
|
|
Joined: 30 May 2004
Posts: 12533
|
Marj --
I agree with you. Now perhaps some Forum members can understand my extreme disappointment re: the absence of any extras on the DVD. I did see the film 2x theatrically...and it was an unforgettable experience. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Syd |
| Posted: Sun Aug 05, 2007 12:11 am |
|
|
Site Admin
Joined: 21 May 2004
Posts: 12921
Location: Norman, Oklahoma
|
| If the next comment makes no sense, it's because I've moved my comment on Bound to the Couch with a View forum. |
Last edited by Syd on Sun Aug 05, 2007 12:25 am; edited 1 time in total
_________________
I had a love and my love was true but I lost my love to the yabba dabba doo, --The Flintstone Lament |
|
| Back to top |
|
| mo_flixx |
| Posted: Sun Aug 05, 2007 12:17 am |
|
|
|
Joined: 30 May 2004
Posts: 12533
|
re: BOUND
Syd raises an interesting question. When considering a top 100 Film, do we vote on a theatrical release or a Director's Cut w/ add'l. footage??
[And if you're Gary Marantz, I guess it depends how horny you are.]
 |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Marj |
| Posted: Sun Aug 05, 2007 12:28 am |
|
|
|
Joined: 21 May 2004
Posts: 10497
Location: Manhattan
|
Thanks Mo! But it appears I really am too late.
Would I have liked to have seen some extras on this DVD? Certainly. But I had read your post in Couch and wasn't expecting them. And I was so wowed by the film itself, I am fine with the discussions here.
I don't know if I can add more to what's already been said. I happen to love these kinds of movies. Two of my favorite films are All The President's Men and Shattered Glass (Both of which I forgot to add to my list!) And rather than a whodunit Zodiac reminded me of them.
Fortunately I had never done much reading about the Zodiac killer nor was I particularly aware of the investigation. Much of this took place during Watergate and that was my priority at the time.
But this film certainly had me on the edge of my seat. Not due to any fake suspense but due to the obsession which was the heart of the film. And wise of Fincher to make it so. Also wise were his casting choices. My God, how can one go wrong with Robert Downey Jr., Mark Ruffalo and Jake Gyllenhaal.
But, my eyes are tired from reading and I want to see Zodiac again. So I'll refer to other posts tomorrow.
Thanks Wade for the forum. And for posting so much from other forums. I just wish I weren't so late joining the party. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Syd |
| Posted: Sun Aug 05, 2007 12:32 am |
|
|
|
Site Admin
Joined: 21 May 2004
Posts: 12921
Location: Norman, Oklahoma
|
mo_flixx wrote: re: BOUND
Syd raises an interesting question. When considering a top 100 Film, do we vote on a theatrical release or a Director's Cut w/ add'l. footage??
[And if you're Gary Marantz, I guess it depends how horny you are.]
I'm voting for the version I'm most familiar with. That's a problem with Bound, which I've now seen once in each of two versions, or the Lord of the Rings movies, which I saw once at the theatre and once on DVD with considerable extra footage. This means Greed goes with the two-hour version, not the one with restored extra footage and stills. |
_________________
I had a love and my love was true but I lost my love to the yabba dabba doo, --The Flintstone Lament |
|
| Back to top |
|
| bart |
| Posted: Thu Aug 23, 2007 10:06 am |
|
|
|
Joined: 05 Dec 2005
Posts: 2381
Location: Lincoln NE
|
| Just saw Zodiac. Wow. I think any praise I could lavish upon it would be redundant at this point. I'll just say that, as the son of a journalist, there was much here that rang true and that was great -- hollywood so often gets it wrong when it comes to the press. |
_________________
Former 3rd Eye Member |
|
| Back to top |
|
| ehle64 |
| Posted: Thu Aug 23, 2007 10:57 am |
|
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 7149
Location: NYC; US&A
|
| Bart -- don't hold back, write up a full review (possibly from that angle). I want to see it again so bad, but can't justify buying this edition they put out so soon. But then again, it's just the price of two tickets @ a screening. Best movie of 2007. |
_________________
It truly disappoints me when people do something for you via no prompt of your own and then use it as some kind of weapon against you at a later time and place. It is what it is. |
|
| Back to top |
|
| chillywilly |
| Posted: Thu Aug 23, 2007 1:19 pm |
|
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 8251
Location: Salt Lake City
|
| Zodiac is next on my Netflix list. I'll be sure to add my thoughts when it gets here in the next few days. |
_________________
Chilly
"If you should die before me / Ask if you could bring a friend" |
|
| Back to top |
|
| Joe Vitus |
| Posted: Thu Aug 23, 2007 1:22 pm |
|
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 14498
Location: Houston
|
| I think you'll like it. |
_________________
You've got a great brain. You should keep it in your head.
-Topher |
|
| Back to top |
|
| bart |
| Posted: Fri Aug 24, 2007 10:41 am |
|
|
|
Joined: 05 Dec 2005
Posts: 2381
Location: Lincoln NE
|
Well, I don't have a full-blown review but here are some impressions of some of the perfs. I'm not going to get into the camera work, but will say it was so stunningly good that I had to watch a second time so I could just drink in some of the shots without having to strain to follow the dialog. (and thanks Fincher, for reigning in your Up-the-Orifice-cam this time around) And don't even get me started on the soundtrack, so exquisitely and chillingly bookended by Donovan's classic Hurdy-Gurdy Man.
Bob Downey seemed to nail a character I know from visiting my father at work over the years (and working briefly as a copy clerk there in my late teens) and meeting the newroom's resident drunk/cynic. There was something abrasive and deeply sad and sometimes funny that Downey just captured so perfectly.
John Carroll Lynch ("Leigh") seems to be one of those actor's actors who can play just about anybody and quietly make you believe. Scary as hell, and what's with the squirrels, man?
Gyllenhaal -- Not my favorite young actor, but I think his somewhat moonstruck-boy quality worked to perfection in this role and the way he worked the whole relentless Boy Scout thing provided something that both Downey and Ruffalo could bounce their relative degress of cynicism and world-weariness off of.
Ruffalo -- perfect. Had the ring of truth -- what more can you ask from an actor? Give him a box of animal crackers with that Oscar he so deserves.
Graysmith: They invited [Leigh] to their painting party.
Toschi: What's a painting party?
Gsmith: People come over and help paint your house.
Toschi: Sounds like a terrible party.
As for the rest of the ensemble, a who's who of indie talent, there were roles so seamless that it was only far into the film that I would have those moments of "hey, that's John Getz!" or "hey, that's Chloe Sevigny" or "hey, that's James LeGros!" |
_________________
Former 3rd Eye Member |
|
| Back to top |
|
| Joe Vitus |
| Posted: Fri Aug 24, 2007 10:47 am |
|
|
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 14498
Location: Houston
|
| Agree with everything. I figure that about seven years ago, Toby Maguire would have played Gyllenhaal's part. It's his sort of role (or was, until Spider-Man). But I think Gyllenhaal was great in it. Personally, I like him a lot. |
_________________
You've got a great brain. You should keep it in your head.
-Topher |
|
| Back to top |
|
| lshap |
| Posted: Fri Aug 24, 2007 11:02 am |
|
|
Site Admin
Joined: 12 May 2004
Posts: 4248
Location: Montreal
|
Been doing some back-reading of this forum since I finally had the chance to see the film.
My opinion falls pretty close to Tire and Trish's - Zodiac is a fine film with some nicely layered characters, but the subject matter was a little too worn to earn my unabashed enthusiasm.
In other words, Fincher made the best film possible about a mid-level crime story. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Joe Vitus |
| Posted: Fri Aug 24, 2007 12:07 pm |
|
|
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 14498
Location: Houston
|
| Can you define "worn"? I guess my question is: are there enough Zodiac films already (there have been a couple before this), or is it just the general psycho killer genre you're referring to? |
_________________
You've got a great brain. You should keep it in your head.
-Topher |
|
| Back to top |
|
| bart |
| Posted: Fri Aug 24, 2007 12:25 pm |
|
|
|
Joined: 05 Dec 2005
Posts: 2381
Location: Lincoln NE
|
Lorne,
re "In other words, Fincher made the best film possible about a mid-level crime story."
See, this is what for me made the film so splendid -- it's basically about a few guys who are mostly going in circles and getting really frustrated and scrabbling for elusive bits of evidence and bickering endlessly about handwriting analysis -- and YET it is so utterly fascinating in the way it delves into the grind of real police work. I think the achievement is monumental. |
_________________
Former 3rd Eye Member |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
