02-25-2008, 12:06 PM
Just because your a drug addict and alcoholic, do you always have to play the drug addict and alcoholic. That's what Robert Downey Jr. does in the last two films and one upcoming that I've seen him in. He does a great job, but you would think it was like playing with fire doing that roll.
It's the Bay Area's most famous crime spree before you get to Patty Hearst. And I lived there at the time. I vaguely remember the stories, but it didn't really impact my life. It is all about me after all.
I was always curious about the full story of what exactly happened. And this story gives you exactly that. It details who was killed and how and where. It goes over the notes the Zodiac sent to the papers. It even posits a theory about who was the killer. That part was quite good. They throw up a lot of red herrings about possible alternative killers.
Ultimately, it's the story Jake Gyllenhall who plays editorial cartoonist who worked at the Examiner during the time of the murders. He becomes obsessed with solving the case at the expense of his job and marriage. he eventually writes the book on which the movie was based. It was fascinating look at the case but it got a little hokey with the quest.
The one thing about these sensational murders from the past is that they are sensational over very few actual dead bodies. At one point during Zodiac, one of the policemen asks whether they should be going to all this effort. More people get killed on the freeways in a year than were ever killed by the Zodiac. You get the same thing with Jack the Ripper. He only killed five woman yet he's spawned his own industry. Yes, killing is bad. But does the lightning justify all that thunder?
It's the Bay Area's most famous crime spree before you get to Patty Hearst. And I lived there at the time. I vaguely remember the stories, but it didn't really impact my life. It is all about me after all.
I was always curious about the full story of what exactly happened. And this story gives you exactly that. It details who was killed and how and where. It goes over the notes the Zodiac sent to the papers. It even posits a theory about who was the killer. That part was quite good. They throw up a lot of red herrings about possible alternative killers.
Ultimately, it's the story Jake Gyllenhall who plays editorial cartoonist who worked at the Examiner during the time of the murders. He becomes obsessed with solving the case at the expense of his job and marriage. he eventually writes the book on which the movie was based. It was fascinating look at the case but it got a little hokey with the quest.
The one thing about these sensational murders from the past is that they are sensational over very few actual dead bodies. At one point during Zodiac, one of the policemen asks whether they should be going to all this effort. More people get killed on the freeways in a year than were ever killed by the Zodiac. You get the same thing with Jack the Ripper. He only killed five woman yet he's spawned his own industry. Yes, killing is bad. But does the lightning justify all that thunder?
So much for the flickr badge idea. Dammit
