For our annual summer countdown, we are looking at our favorite 25 movies that were not huge hits during their initial release, but mean a lot to us. Check out last year’s Summer of Stars countdown or the year before when we did blockbusters! Find the rest of the Flop and Fizzle series here!

by Rosalie Kicks, Old Sport & Editor in Chief 

“I am not the Zodiac. And if I was, I certainly wouldn’t tell you.”

Everyone has a boogeyman. A person, place or thing they are afraid of. Often an entity based on fiction rather than fact. However, when malevolent figments of imagination find their way into reality it is a reminder that evil does exist. 

When David Fincher made the film Zodiac, his goal was to make a picture that centered around facts rather than mythical lore. Growing up in the northwestern part of the San Francisco Bay, David came to find the Zodiac killer as “the ultimate boogeyman”. This sentiment caused him to push screenwriter James Vanderbilt to pen a script that was based on certainty. Together they combed through actual police reports, conducted interviews with those that worked on the investigation, met with the two surviving victims and spoke with family members of the suspects. Instead of creating a blood soaked slasher, Fincher set out to conceive a motion picture that evoked the true horror in this world: an unsolved crime. 

I recall going to see Zodiac by myself and the audience was sparse. The film I witnessed on screen was not the one that I expected to see from the director of Se7en. In writing this article, I took a trip down the rabbit hole in an attempt to understand why I had been left with those feelings. Research uncovered that the film was marketed to a crowd with an affinity for endless killing sprees, gore and edge of the seat suspense. Of course some of these elements are present but this is not a run-of-the-mill horror film seeking to evoke temporary fear or repulsion. Instead, it falls more in the category of a noir-thriller that conjures up the feelings of anxiety, frustration, and defeat. Unfortunately, the storytelling methods did not connect with the audience it was intended for. 

What I find most fascinating about this film is its method of deception. The opening scene of this picture alludes that it will center around the infamous serial killer himself. Within the first few moments there's a brutal slaying of a young couple hoping to partake in some necking on lover’s lane. From here the story quickly shifts and, in turn, the film is more of an account of the destruction caused to those that had gotten caught up in the shadows of the mysterious figure. Fincher does an exemplary job of showing that the Zodiac killer did not just end the lives of people physically, but he managed to do so mentally as well. 

The source material, Zodiac (1986), was written by Robert Graysmith, who is portrayed by Jake Gyllenhaal in the picture. The obsession shown by Graysmith about finding this real life boogeyman is madness. Robert stops going to work, cuts off his family, and commits maniacal behavior that is cause for concern for his mental state, all for the sole purpose of needing to know who this individual is. Zodiac never addresses the killer’s motivations but instead shows the grip that this sort of despicable character has on a society causing them to lose sight of other atrocities. Much of Fincher’s reasoning behind this was to avoid glorifying a killer. This is proven through a scene in which Inspector Dave Toschi (Mark Ruffalo) explains to Graysmith the amount of people that have died in the city compared to those killed by Zodiac. Toschi is attempting to help Graysmith understand the reason for the case going cold. We live in a world in which wickedness is on the menu every day and, unfortunately, when totaling up these nefarious acts they are cause for more destruction than a lone serial killer. 

Fincher’s film, I believe, did eventually find its audience, and I think one would be hard pressed to find anyone describing it as a flop. Instead, this is a picture that is revered for its methodical and careful storytelling rather than being a gratuitous cash grab a la Dirty Harry. The Clint Eastwood picture based on the Zodiac killings was referenced in Fincher’s flick as disgusting to Inspector Toschi. Prior to filming, Fincher pledged to Toschi that he would not recreate the exploitative themes in his version. 

No matter how many times I watch Zodiac, I still get chills from the performance of John Carroll Lynch as Arthur Leigh Allen. Allen was one of the main suspects in the case, but the police were unable to gather enough evidence to prove he was the one behind the mask. When Allen is first introduced on screen, he appears to be an ordinary guy working in a factory at a mundane job. Lynch’s matter-of-fact delivery comes off as cordial and well mannered yet, there is an undertone that as the detective begin to scratch the true personality comes out.  It is this scene in particular that sticks with me as it shows that the true reason the case goes unsolved is that the boogeyman could be anyone.