Retro Review: Madagascar

The co-director of Antz, Eric Darnell teams up with fellow animator Tom McGrath and two comedy writers, Mark Burton and Billy Frolick to sculpt out a story about some zoo animals who mistakenly end up being reintroduced back into the wild.

Alex the Lion (Ben Stiller), Melman the Giraffe (David Schwimmer) and Gloria the Hippo (Jada Pinkett Smith) love their pampered lives as zoo animals in New York’s Brooklyn Zoo.

Their friend Marty the Zebra (Chris Rock) is a little restless at the idea of spending the rest of his days in such a confined space. He yearns for wide open spaces.

One day, Marty gets an unexpected visit from a burrowing troupe of penguins who are hatching a master plan to escape back to Antarctica.

Marty decides maybe he can make his dream come true. Through a series of mishaps and madcap adventures the foursome of zoo animals will learn all about life and the world outside. Some are sure to enjoy it more than others.

“Madagascar” is a new clever and hilarious family film much in the same vein as the “Shrek” films. Like the “Shrek” films, “Madagascar” is full of clever comedic pop culture references and zany celebrity voices.

The stand-out celebrity voices this time around are Chris Rock, David Schwimmer and Sacha Baron Cohen, best known as TV’s Ali G. Rock is unmistakable as the identity confused zebra. Schwimmer is perfect as the hypochondriac giraffe.

But as celebrities go, Cohen out shines the A-list stars as the overly energetic leader of the lemurs. Cohen is brilliant.

But for me the favorite of the film was Skipper, the leader of the penguins who was voiced by co-director Tom McGrath.

Anytime those penguins were on screen I was in stitches. They have so much magic and character they deserve their own movie or maybe a short on the DVD.

The film does have rather slow beginning and I felt that the film was more fun when it didn’t focus on the 4-central characters. This film is all about the supporting players and to sustain a great animated film we need to relate and adore the central characters. Here all we seem to remember and cherish when we are done are the penguins and lemurs.

Come on Dreamworks, give us more penguin madness.

(3.5 out of 5)

So Says the Soothsayer.

Retro Review: Finding Nemo

Ever find yourself staring into a fish tank unable to look away?

Have you ever yearned to sprout fins and live among the fishes of the Great Barrier Reef?

Have you ever wanted to speak to the fish during a snorkel or dive?

In the Disney film “Finding Nemo”, you can almost answer some of those questions.

From Pixar, the same crew who brought you “Monsters Inc.” and the “Toy Story” films, “Finding Nemo” follows the adventures of a reluctant and over-protective father “clown fish” named Marlin (Albert Brooks) who frantically scowls the seven seas in search of his son, Nemo after he is snatched by divers.

Marlin’s adventures bring him face to face with some of his greatest fears. Marlin meets a forgetful fish named Dory (Ellen DeGeneres), a surfer dude sea turtle named Crush (Andrew Stanton, who also wrote and directed the film) and an addict shark named Bruce (Barry Humphries).

“Finding Nemo” is Pixar’s most beautiful film to date. You believe you are in fact in the ocean or fish tank. The water and the environment around the characters are amazing.

The whole film is utter eye-candy. The kids will love the fish adventure but the older kids will marvel at the technology shown in this film.

There are also so many laugh-out-loud situations that are sure to make you squeal with glee. The laughs do overshadow the simplicity of the story.

I found that I was enjoying all the voices and quirky characters along the quest but I was forgetting more and more about our heroes, Marlin and Dory. It got harder and harder to learn more about the main characters as the film went on. I really did enjoy the brilliant voicing from stars Albert Brooks and Ellen DeGeneres but found even they got upstaged by some of the characters in the film.

What was great about other Pixar films were the chemistry between the films two leads. Nemo has that but it just doesn’t capitalize as much as it should. Even in great quest films with human actors, the film always falls to the purpose of the quest before fleshing out the characters embarking on it. It is debatable to why this does occur.

Some of my favorite moments in the film are probably the times that involve the seagulls. I loved how the filmmakers were able to give them such character and humor. They accomplished all this with only muttering one word, “Mine!” Absolute brilliance.

When you compare “Finding Nemo” to other Pixar greats like “Monsters Inc” or “Toy Story” you can definitely see some flaws. Pixar was able to deliver deep 3-dimensional characters in both look and personality in both “Monsters Inc.” and “Toy Story”. It was the depth of character and heart-felt joy that made those films unforgettable. “Nemo” probably rests between “Toy Story 2″ and “A Bug’s Life”. “Bug’s Life” seems to be the most forgettable in the Pixar family.

(4 out of 5)

So Says The Soothsayer.

WTF? NEWS: Fox cancels ‘Lone Star’

BOOOOO! Fox you dreamkillers!! You have done it again. Found the best new show of the fall season and killed it before you gave it a chance.

The first casualty of the broadcast season is one of the best reviewed new shows of the fall: Fox is pulling “Lone Star,” its acclaimed drama about a con man leading a double life, from Monday nights.
Production has ceased on the show after five episodes. The third season of procedural drama “Lie to Me” will take its place starting next week.
Though the fate of “Lone Star” has preoccupied the media since its dismal debut last week, there’s several other shows that are also endangered after only one or two episodes.
ABC’s Wednesday night legal drama “The Whole Truth” (4.9 million viewers, 1.5 adults 18-49 rating) pulled only 15% higher than the premiere of “Lone Star.” ABC’s Thursday ensemble soap “My Generation” (5.2 million, 1.6) was likewise modest.
The second episode of NBC’s “Outlaw” (4.9 million, 1.1) laid an egg last week, even by the humble standards of Friday night. And a return to the civilian format of “The Apprentice” (3.8 million, 1.4) is struggling on Thursdays.
“The Apprentice” represents an delicate situation since NBC is shooting “Celebrity Apprentice” for midseason and the network has a longstanding relationship with Donald Trump. It would be unusual to yank a well-established competition reality series before all the episodes have aired (the entire civilian edition was shot months ago, so production cost is not a factor), especially a title that’s expected to continue on the air next year.
Though remaining in its premium Thursday night time period is increasingly unlikely, the “Apprentice” question may hinge on whether NBC can find a suitable place on its schedule to burn off the show while maintaining a livable number.
As for “Lone Star,” despite a praise-filled 77% score on Metacritic, the show’s first two episodes were Texas-sized bombs.
Only 4.1 million viewers showed up for the “Lone Star” premiere. More crucially, the show drew a 1.3 adults 18-49 rating, making it the lowest-rated show on a major broadcast network that night.
Fox gave “Lone Star” a second chance last night, but viewership sank to 3.2 million viewers while its demo rating fell 23% to a 1.0.
Combined with a sizable drop for “House” this year, the shows gave Fox a 60% lower average rating for the first night of the season compared to last year.
There’s no word yet if the remaining three episodes will be available online. There’s also no comment on whether the show will be shopped to cable, though sources say its unlikely.
From the beginning critics wondered if “Lone Star” could draw a broadcast-sized audience. The show best resembled the sort of nuanced character-driven dramas seen on basic cable networks like FX and AMC. But Fox expressed high confidence, with entertainment president Kevin Reilly telling critics the only reason shows like “Mad Men” pull such low numbers is because they’re not on his network.
“The only reason those shows aren’t watched by more people is they’re not on Fox,” Reilly said. “The [basic cable networks] don’t have this [promotional] machine.”

SOURCE HOLLYWOOD REPORTER

Retro Review: Flintstones in Viva Rock Vegas

Written: April 28, 2000

Can a re-cast and a new setting help the Flintstones sequel overcome its predecessor’s faults?

This Flintstones sequel chronicles the early years of Fred and Wilma as they meet, fall in love and wing their way to the “modern Stone Age vacation destination” Rock Vegas.

The best way to describe “Viva Rock Vegas” is that it is an almost complete rehash of the first one. When I do think of the first one I remembered the world they lived in was such a beautiful setup for a cute movie. With the studio doing their best to cast look-a-likes from Hollywood, the movie had so much potential.

The first one starred John Goodman as Fred, Rick Moranis as Barney, Elisabeth Perkins as Wilma and Rosie O’Donnell as Betty. But what seemed to destroy what could have been a very cute movie was the thought that Hollywood actually needed a villain with a very complicated plan.

Why can’t they revisit what is supposed to inspire the film? In the original series we had plots that always put Fred and Barney in “fish-out-of-water” type situations. Or they faced villains who were more of a simpleton then they were. These are apart of the magic of what makes cartoons so great.

When I think of these complicated plots that make up the tail end of the Flintstones movies, it kind of reminds me of other cartoons and what would happen if other cartoon characters were put through this treatment.

Imagine Scooby and Shaggy starring in “Wall Street” or “Pulp Fiction”. You might hear Shaggy say, “Oh Gee, Scoob it looks like Microsoft dropped another ten points today.” Or maybe “You see Scoob it’s a called a Royale with Cheese!!” It just doesn’t fit but it does make a wonderful pitch to a studio.

Don’t get me wrong the new film does have something going for it. I really liked the recast of Betty. Jane Krakowski of Ally MacBeal fame really did bring the allure needed to flesh out Betty. She is a far cry from Rosie O’ Donnell and a whole lot better Betty. Even though these characters are quite cardboard and have no depth I did kind of miss John Goodman or Elisabeth Perkins as the stars.

I know a lot of people are going to have a problem with Stephen Baldwin playing Barney. I am not sure who dreamed that casting up. Baldwin has to be the miss cast of the film.

By far the best part of this Flintstones tale was the beautiful recreation of the Great Gazoo.

It was amazing how exactly pure Gazoo was to his cartoon counter-part. Alan Cumming played Gazoo perfectly.

The scenes which starred Gazoo against Fred were so close to the chemistry in the series that I wish the whole film could have held that momentum.

It would have been grand to see Goodman face off against Gazoo.

If you go see this movie, go for Gazoo.

(2.5 out of 5)

So Says the Soothsayer.

FALL TV 2010 REPORT CARD

With every fall season I try to watch every pilot and determine what is worth pursuing. The pilot is what we all first see of a new show but often it isn’t the best gauge of how a series will turn out. A perfect example of that is say The Simpsons or Seinfeld.

The pilot is never perfect its like throwing shit at a wall to see if something sticks. The best gauge for a show is watching at least five episodes. So what I determine with each pilot season is if the show is worthy of going five episodes.

In alphabetical order, here are capsule reviews of this Fall’s pilots (so far):

BLUE BLOODS (CBS, FRIDAYS)

Stars Tom Selleck as the patriarch of a family of New York cops. Just when you thought CBS had nothing more to explore in the police procedural, Blue Bloods finds a way.

It is almost a hail mary of an attempt but it is nice to see them try. Watch for the twist in the youngest son’s (Will Estes) storyline.

Prognosis: Potential, will give five episodes.
Rating: 3.5 out of 5

—————————————————

BOARDWALK EMPIRE (HBO, SUNDAYS)

Steve Buscemi stars an underworld boss in 1920s Atlantic City who stands to make a fortune from Prohibition.

The pilot was directed by Oscar-winning director Martin Scorsese which sets up the many storylines the series hopes to follow.

Buscemi is strong and gives us a different kind of gangster. The pilot also introduces younger versions of Al Capone and Lucky Luciano. HBO series are famous for taking sometimes a whole season to show its potential. Boardwalk isn’t any different even with Scorsese at the helm this series will take a while to get good.

Prognosis: Potential, will give five episodes.
Rating: 3.5 out of 5

—————————————————

THE DEFENDERS (CBS, WEDNESDAYS)

Jim Belushi and Jerry O’Connell play the slickest pair of attorneys in Las Vegas.

The pilot introduces the characters nicely and delivers some funny scenarios.

But my question was why focus on their job it seems like such a waste when the series could be way more interesting if the primary focus was these characters lives with the job second. Kinda like Nip/Tuck but with lawyers.

Prognosis: Potential, but boring.
Rating: 2.5 out of 5

—————————————————

THE EVENT (NBC, MONDAYS)

Lost is gone. Flash Forward is RIP.

Now NBC is trying to launch another multi-layered story-driven narrative as it takes elements of Lost and 24 and tries to merge them. It hard to tell where this show plans on going.

So I am going to give it one more episode to a potential of five. If it lasts that long. With these kinds of shows it is easy to get attached but very often we are left with no conclusion.

Prognosis: Potential, will give five episodes.
Rating: 3 out of 5

—————————————————

HAWAII 5-0

(CBS, MONDAYS)

Update of the 70s classic TV show was directed by Len Wiseman (aka director of Live Free, Die Hard and the Underworld).

Alex O’Loughlin and Scott Caan have great chemistry and the dialogue is quite funny. I loved the energy of the show and look forward to the next episode. Will it wear out it’s welcome like CSI Miami or will it give us something new in crime procedurals.

Prognosis: Potential, committed to the end of show.
Rating: 4 out of 5

—————————————————

LONE STAR (FOX, MONDAYS)

This pilot surprised me and once more it looks like the best new show of the fall season isn’t being embraced by a mass audience.

The series is about a con-man who has two families and a domineering dad (played by David Keith) but is trying to go legit with his latest long con.

Fox has already threatened to pull the plug after one airing. The creator of the show has been pleading through the Hollywood Reporter for people to watch the show.

The show is brilliant but I don’t see it surviving.

Prognosis: Potential, committed to the end of show.
Rating: 5 out of 5

—————————————————

OUTSOURCED (NBC, THURSDAYS)

Hmmm, The Office in India. Outsourced finds a novelty executive shipped to India to run a call centre over there.

The stereotypical jokes are everywhere but they aren’t offensive instead delivered in a Crocodile Dundee kind of approach.

The series has some clever characters and lots of potential.

I thought the same way after seeing last season’s Community’s pilot. I’ll give it a chance.

Prognosis: Potential, will give five episodes.
Rating: 3.5 out of 5

—————————————————

SHIT MY DAD SAYS (CBS, THURSDAYS)

Wow, now that was just painful. If this show didn’t star William Shatner I would compare to something my cat throws up that is a cross between his dinner and a hairball.

Shoot this series soon please.

I get why people like the Twitter page but this is just awful and sooo badly written. Community’s Season 2 premiere was funnier when they had a Twitter account about Chevy Chase’s character called “Old White Guy Says”. Please find a companion show for Big Bang on Thursday but not this steaming pile of crap or should I say shit.

Prognosis: Abandon ship!
Rating: 1 out of 5

—————————————————

UNDERCOVERS

(NBC, WEDNESDAY)

Okay, I was bored with this show 10 minutes in.

My biggest complaint is if you are going to make a spy show featuring sexy black actors why not take advantage of that.

If you are gonna be black, be black damnit! The script sounds like these characters are a too perfect all-american white couple who have the perfect life and yes they are the perfect spies too. Blech! The script and tone of the show needs to be more black or you just have Alias with two boring married people. Give it an edge, develop the dialogue make these people sound black and not melba toast. Get some black writers, producers and directors for this show. Find that niche! Oh and if I see another NBC logo pop up during this show that says “more colorful” I am gonna scream!

Advice: Forget the damn restaurant! This ain’t Melrose! Get the couple a non-white sidekick, who is actually funny. Send the couple on a long mission to Africa to take down an African warlord like in Sierra Leone or Nigeria.

Prognosis: Potential, I’m on the fence.
Rating: 2.5 out of 5

Retro Review: Garfield

The lovable lazy feline who scarfs lasagna and is a staple in the funny pages of newspapers across the globe comes to the silver screen in a live-action take.

Garfield (voiced by Bill Murray) nearly has a heart attack when his love-struck master Jon Arbuckle (Breckin Meyer) brings home a wily pup named Odie. Arbuckle is infatuated with Garfield’s vet, Liz (Jennifer Love Hewitt) and he thinks by taking homeless Odie home maybe he can finally get a date.

Odie does bring the couple together but after Odie delights an audience at a dog show, TV host Happy Chapman (Stephen Tobolowsky) becomes obsessed with procuring Odie for his show.

The next night a jealous Garfield ends up locking Odie outside and he falls into the clutches of Happy. Now Garfield must save Odie from the sinister TV host. Can an over-weight, food-obsessed cat save the day? He’ll have to stop for a snack first.

I don’t know who thought that this was Garfield. Writers Joel Cohen and Arnold Sokolow wrote the Steve Martin comedy, “Cheaper by the Dozen” but their take on Garfield is almost sacrilege. There is nothing in this less than 80 minute film that works, well except for the CGI pertaining to the film’s star.

Garfield’s animation team should really be commended for making Garfield come to life. His animated movement, facial tweaks and human interaction is the star of the film. It is just too bad that everything else is so awful around it.

The relationship between Hewitt and Meyer has less chemistry than two plastic Barbie and Ken dolls. The guest voices on the other animals are mundane and not funny.

And why is it that Garfield is the only character that looks like the cartoon? It really felt odd seeing Garfield interact with real animals. It was almost a hybrid of “Dr. Doolittle”.

The film comes with an animated short featuring “Ice Age” character Scratch called “Gone Nutty”. That little short is hilarious and has more laughs that the entire Garfield film.

I loved the Garfield television show and comic-strips and it boggles my mind to how they came up with such a painful film on such a lovable character.

(1 out of 5)

So Says the Soothsayer.

Retro Review: Stay

When it comes to challenges director Marc Forster isn’t one to walk away. Forster is the man responsible for such critical darlings as “Finding Neverland” and “Monster’s Ball”.

The films themselves are complete polar opposites but challenging nonetheless. In his latest film, Forster finds himself another challenge as he delves into the world of psychiatry.

Ewan McGregor stars as Sam Foster, a brilliant young psychiatrist who seems to have the perfect life with his beautiful girlfriend and ex-patient Lila (Naomi Watts). Sam’s life changes when he substitutes for a colleague on the case of Henry Lethem (Ryan Gosling), an art student who is flirting with the idea of committing suicide. The more Sam digs into the case, the more he finds the case intriguing almost to the point of obsession.

The case starts to consume his life and he will stop at nothing to stop Henry. Is there more to this case then meets the eye? Is this prominent psychiatrist on the right track? What are the keys to Henry’s life?

“Stay” is one of those movies that is brilliant on paper but not so much once it’s on screen. The film’s central storyline is intriguing as through the psychiatrist’s eyes we start to see Henry’s life and Sam’s desperation to save him. This is also brilliantly accented by the doctor having an ex-patient as a lover.

What are the major problems with the film is that there is so much more being forced into this film. The moody atmosphere is typical with this kind of film but feels overly heavy. The intricate and interesting editing while fascinating is way to distracting. Then there is the last 40 minutes which seem almost like the film couldn’t settle on a finale in reality so they had to tack on a twist ending.

The performances from McGregor, Watts and Gosling are superb but this amount of talent needed a stronger film. The film should have been more about these three then what the ending supports.

I have to give Marc Forster credit for taking risks but unlike his previous films, this film’s script and concept seems lost to Forster. Films like “Finding Neverland” and “Monster’s Ball” rely on the strength of script coupled with performance. Stay has the performances but not the script or foundation to support them.

(1.5 out of 5)

So Says the Soothsayer.

Retro Review: Stuck on You

The far-out Farrelly Brothers are back.

Still fondly remembered for helming such huge comedies as “There’s Something About Mary” and “Dumb & Dumber”, the Brothers have found little success in their latest outings.

Treading very closely to their previous film, “Shallow Hal”, the Brothers tackle the subject of conjoined twins.

Let the mayhem begin.

“Stuck On You” tells the story of Martha’s Vineyard conjoined twins, Bob (Matt Damon) and Walt (Greg Kinnear) who have a special connection as brothers even beside the fact that they are conjoined.

Walt dreams of being an actor and decides that he wants to try his luck in Hollywood. He has to convince his brother to make the journey.

Walt’s dream is powerful and before they know it they are booking into a motel in Los Angeles. Bob has also came to LA to eventually meet his 3-year Internet girlfriend May (Wenn Yann Shih).

Walt and Bob meet a struggling actress and model, April (Eva Mendes) and are eventually discovered by superstar Cher.

How will their misadventures in tinsel-town work out? Does Walt have what it takes?

I was very surprised by “Stuck on You”. The Farrelly’s seem very bored in their depiction of the life of Bob & Walt. There is very little smart dialogue or genuine laughs. It was just frustrating on how shockingly unfunny this film was.

The performances from both Damon and Kinnear are first rate, however.Their relationship and chemistry wasn’t hilarious but engaging. Each of them makes the best of this bad situation.

I also liked the performance of new-comer Wenn Yann Shih who seems to have quite a natural take and on-screen quality and will probably float above this kind of material.

The whole idea of going to Hollywood in a movie is such a bad thing for this film. It could have been funnier possibly if maybe they wanted to be on Broadway instead. Hollywood setting a comedy in tinsel-town is always a hard thing to watch. The struggle, back-stabbing and how unglamorous the real tinsel-town is just isn’t funny. So many other comedies have struggled with the idea and “Stuck on You” is no exception.

Even the typical Farrelly humor seems to have disappeared from this film. There were hardly any goofy or vulgar jokes, which is probably why the film is “PG”. Come on a Farrelly Brothers film that’s PG, that’s not a Farrelly movie. Bring back the real Farrelly’s.

(2 out of 5)

So Says the Soothsayer.

Retro Review: Get Carter

Written: October 11, 2000

Sylvester Stallone returns to his roots as the action star we know and love. Can he still carry the gauntlet?

Stallone stars in a remake of the 1970′s classic “Get Carter” which originally starred Michael Caine.

In this version, Stallone stars as Jack Carter, a Vegas thug who returns to his hometown to attend his brother’s funeral.

As he asks a couple questions about the mysterious death of his brother he uncovers clues and a seedy plot buried in his brother’s past. The lynch pins in this plot seem to originate with an ex-acquaintance of Carter’s (Mickey Rourke), a club owner (Michael Caine) and a slimey software developer played by Alan Cumming. Carter also has to take under his wing the care of Carter’s brother’s wife and daughter. They are played by Miranda Richardson and Rachel Leigh Cook.

“Get Carter” is one of the best action films I have seen in a while. This is the type of film that last summer’s “Gone in 60 Seconds” should have been. The car chases were grim and exciting and the whole film’s seedy underworld felt like an underworld.

I liked how the plot enveloped different angles from the first film as it updated itself. Stallone is no where near as blood-thirsty as Caine in the original but his tender side does add to the audience relating to the thug. Also these small elements of emotion were pivotal in the film’s hidden plot.

Even though this was definitely a Stallone vehicle it stilled allowed a lot of Stallone’s supporting cast to shine. These performances were by Rachel Leigh Cook and Alan Cumming.

I liked Cook’s tortured daughter who has her innocence stripped away a layer at a time. I loved the always enjoyable Alan Cumming as a spoiled “Bill Gates” kind of guy trying to protect his obvious imperfections. The scene where Carter drags his out of the party and for a joyride is priceless and really shows Cumming is becoming a notable character actor.

Approaching his mid fifties, Stallone still seems to be able to pack a wallop. I would have liked a long exhausting fight at the end between Rourke and Stallone. In the party fight scene Stallone took a couple punches just like “Rocky” might and that made me cheer “Rocky, Rocky” until I was brought back to earth. I would have liked to have seen more of this adrenaline. I was a little perturbed at the lighting also for when Stallone and Rourke clashed.

Speaking of lighting, that for me was one of the problems associated with viewing this film. I liked that the grays and blues harnessed the seediness but some things were a little hard to see.

Another flaw I found was in Miranda Richardson who seemed to be wasted as the brother’s wife.

Her character seemed clichéd and absent a lot when maybe we should have had a couple more scenes between Carter and her. Other than those I enjoyed the film.

I am not exactly sure why Warner Bros. tried to cover up this movie (hiding it from press screenings) when if it was promoted better it could have been received better. They could have been scared about its comparison to the original which is such a cult phenomenon. Still it was tons better than the “Gone in 60 Seconds” remake.

(3.5 out of 5)

So Says the Soothsayer.

Retro Review: Zodiac

David Fincher is one of those directors that if you are a movie fan you always want to see his latest project. Fincher achieved this movie geek praise and critical acclaim when he made movies such as “Fight Club”, “The Game” and “Panic Room”.

The last time that Fincher tackled the serial killer murder-mystery genre it was with the legendary “Se7en”, which starred Brad Pitt, Morgan Freeman, Gwyneth Paltrow and Kevin Spacey, which is still regarded as one of the greatest serial killer films of all time.

In his latest film, Fincher returns to the genre that made him famous but this time it is the real serial killer known only as the Zodiac.

“Zodiac” stars Robert Downey Jr. as reporter Paul Avery and Jake Gyllenhaal as cartoonist Robert Graysmith who both worked at the San Francisco Chronicle the day the infamous letters from The Zodiac first started arriving. The film follows accounts that were detailed in the novels written by the real Graysmith many years after the murders.

The film also details the police investigation spearheaded by Inspector David Toschi (Mark Ruffalo) and Inspector William Armstrong (Anthony Edwards) which suffered from many hang-ups, botching of evidence and eventual abandonment.

Who was the Zodiac well you will have to see the film and make your own conclusions and the evidence is all-consuming and compelling.

At a running time of 165 minutes, Fincher’s Zodiac at times feels quite long. The film bombards you with so many facts and figures, side investigations and very little character development.

The characters in the film just feel like “Law & Order” clones or “CSI” automatons who spit out useful information when it is deemed appropriate.

Like both of those series we don’t get to know the people behind the case all that well but they are just there just to deliver relevant information.

Gyllenhaal’s character is really the only one who showcases more of who the character is and I guess that makes sense since the film is based on his character’s book. I think what would have made the film better is if the film just focused on Graysmith’s own investigation instead of going over the case twice.

But maybe that is just me.

I really enjoyed all the performances from Downey Jr., Gyllenhaal and Ruffalo who did their best to be memorable even if their roles didn’t call for it.

There are some really nice camera shots and pans throughout the film but the film just lacks a drive of intrigue or intensity that is so desperately needed in films like these.

(3.5 out of 5)

So Says the Soothsayer.