Jack The
Ripper is remembered 120 years after he put down the knife for two reasons: a)
someone (almost certainly not him) wrote taunting letters in red ink to the
media and the police signed with the catchy ‘trade-name’; and b) he was never
caught and cannot definitively be identified. The Metropolitan Police may not
be working
the case, but the Whitechapel Murders of 1888 are still open, and therefore the
Ripper might as well still be at large and dangerous. Because the mystery
remains unsolved, he is still frightening. How much more frightening, then, is
San Francisco’s Zodiac Killer — who took great pains (including swatches of a
victim’s bloody shirt) to prove that he wrote his own letters to the press, has
also eluded the police for decades since his first crimes, and might
conceivably still be alive?
Part of the
modern-day ritual necessary for taking on board any horror, from the average
killing spree to the 9/11 attacks, is to get the facts of any case straight in
a succession of chronicles — paperback true-crime bestsellers, couple of TV
movies, and (eventually) a more considered cinema film. With Zodiac, this
pattern is frustrated — we have the books and the movies, but there are crucial
gaps in the intricate and exhaustive tapestry of hard evidence. Robert
Graysmith, the doodler and puzzle addict who picked up the case when more
official investigators had walked away, is convinced he knows who the killer
was, and David Fincher’s film adaptation of Graysmith’s two books on the case
eventually comes near to the same conclusion. However, there’s really no way
(short of the silly detours into fantasy that afflict most Jack The Ripper
movies) of providing the ‘closure’ demanded of Hollywood films by audiences,
development executives and screenwriting guru Robert McKee. Therefore, Zodiac
was fated from its inception to be an uncomfortable experience, a whodunnit
with the last few pages torn out, a film biography of a faceless man.
Even
something as incendiary as Spike Lee’s Summer Of Sam or as disreputable as the
endless schlock biopics of Ted Bundy, Ed Gein, Jeffrey Dahmer and John Wayne
Gacy are able to deliver approximately happy endings — they caught the
bastards! In the two-and-a-half-hour haul of Zodiac, we see all the certainties
of the serial killer genre shredded. David Toschi (Mark Ruffalo), the
bow-tie-wearing cop on the case, is a model of West Coast cool whose manner of
wearing a gun-holster was copied by Steve McQueen in Bullitt. If this were a
conventional movie, he would catch the killer — but Fincher shows the confident
supercop become a crotchety, tired, greying figure, quietly bereft when his
longtime partner (Anthony Edwards) transfers to something nine-to-five like
fraud. In a crucial sequence, Toschi attends a special premiere of Dirty Harry
— which fantasised a shoot-out finale to kill off a villain modelled on Zodiac,
who actually tries to carry out the schoolbus attack the real murderer merely
threatened — and walks out in disgust, muttering, “Whatever happened to ‘due
process’?” Paul Avery (Robert Downey Jr.) comes on like that epitome of 1970s
radical chic cool, the underground journalist with a mainstream outlet, making
brilliant leaps around the befuddled authorities and going after the Zodiac
like Woodward and Bernstein went after Nixon. He ends up drinking himself out
of a job and hiding out on a boathouse, still paranoid that the killer will
come after him.
Though Ruffalo,
Edwards and Downey Jr. are outstanding in their various crash-and-burn
approaches to the case, the film is built around Jake Gyllenhaal’s Graysmith, a
boyish outsider who makes a few connections no-one else does and later devotes
his whole life to a private crusade, to the extent of roping in his preteen
kids as research assistants. Gyllenhaal is excellent, but suffers through a few
too many scenes with poor ChloĆ« Sevigny — who gets stuck with the traditionally
annoying Teri Garr-in-Close Encounters role as a wife who nags her husband
about spending too much time on the business we’re interested in. As always,
it’s impossible not to sympathise with the character — but audiences also wish
she’d shut up and let Graysmith get on with tracking down that last stray
witness and joining the dots no-one else has bothered with.
It’s a truism
that serial killers are media creations, but Zodiac — who may have taken his
name and symbol from a watch advert, was perhaps inspired by the 1932 movie The
Most Dangerous Game, and wanted a lawyer who had guest-starred in a Star Trek
episode to represent him — remains a phantom of the tube and newsprint.
Murderers who are caught get shown up as pathetic human beings rather than
Lecter-like masterminds, but Zodiac was either clever or lucky, and remains a
phantom. Fincher offers us his creepy, misspelled letters in voice-over and
brings a hooded form on for one of the killings, but the film’s most unsettling
moments come when the possible Zodiacs are around: convicted paedophile Arthur
Leigh Allen (John Carroll Lynch) or repertory cinema programmer Bob Vaughn
(Charles Fleischer). As in Seven and Fight Club, Fincher boasts an unparalleled
ability to present ostensibly friendly, deeply twisted people credibly — one of
Zodiac’s few melodramatic moments, as Vaughn spooks Graysmith so much he flees
the suspect’s house, works entirely because of the unnerving performances.
While this
isn’t as straightforward as Panic Room, Fincher’s previous film, it lacks the
highly wrought style of Seven and Fight Club — and the few holdovers from his
earlier method (like the frequent California downpours which strike whenever
the characters aren’t depressed enough) don’t quite match the less-showy All
The President’s Men-like docudrama manner used here. Whole stretches are merely
conventional, with hits of the ’70s on the soundtrack to counterpoint the
killings and cop-shop or newsroom scenes that could have come from a TV show of
the time, like The Streets Of San Francisco or Lou Grant. Wonderfully acted as
it is, there’s still a sense that Fincher — who is evidently as hung up on
Zodiac as James Cameron was on Titanic — is working a notch or two below what
he is capable of. Screenwriter James Vanderbilt’s CV includes Darkness Falls,
Basic and Welcome To The Jungle, and his draft really could have done with a
brush-up from some less pragmatic talent to make this as deep and affecting as
it is long and brilliantly detailed.
No comments:
Post a Comment