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.

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.

Zodiac felt like a hybrid of a heart-thumping serial killer flic mixed with a deeper, if plodding, portrait of an alcoholic journalist, an obsessive cartoonist and a dogged cop. Sure, marry the best of those stories and - voila - it's a masterpiece. But I just wasn't sufficiently drawn to Gylenhall's masturbatory, career obsession with finding this killer, which made the center of the film taste overcooked and rubbery. I dig slow buildups and I grant plenty of wiggle room for a story to ferment; this one was left in the oven a tad long. I liked Downey Jr. and Ruffalo's characters quite a bit, it was unfortunate their stories were merely support beams for what I thought was a less interesting structure.

Have to echo Marj. It was in fact Gylenhaal's destructive obsession that intrigued me so much. Which is part of the reason the ending doesn't quite work for me. There should be no victory, just compulsion that eats away at the characters (from Zodiac on down, they are all caught up in destructive, out-of-control obsessions, and they all thing they are the masters of themselves; maybe Ruffalo is an exception).

Thanks Joe.

But do you think Gylenhaal's character thinks of himself as a master of himself?

I take the journalistic perspective here -- whatever happened at the end, that is what really happened. It's based on true events, so it can't "not work."