a seemingly random journey through cinema's heart of darkness. so to speak.

Friday, March 02, 2007

Mixed reviews that inadvertently describe what's so great about the movie in question

Plucked from the Metacritic page for David Fincher's (brilliant) Zodiac (which, by the way, currently stands at a lofty 77):

"Bits of the picture are fascinating to look at, but eventually, exhaustion kicks in, to the point where we're not sure what we're looking at, or why." - Stephanie Zacharek, Salon

"At times, it becomes frustrating -- for example, about 30 minutes are spent pursuing a lead that goes nowhere." - Mike LaSalle, San Francisco Chronicle (heh)

"The film feels self-obsessed, an intriguing drama that slowly devolves into a bleak meditation on the absence of dramatics." - Joe Morgenstern, Wall Street Journal

"In some ways, for better and for worse, this is even more about Graysmith (Jake Gyllehaal)--who became obsessed with solving the Zodiac killings that terrorized northern California in the late 60s--than about the murderer." - Jonathan Rosenbaum, Chicago Reader

"That's exactly the problem with this movie: It's not about a killer, or his victims, or the manhunt or the cops. They're all in it, of course, more or less. But it's about a writer." - Stephen Hunter, Washington Post

(For the record, I'll later be writing my own thang about Zodiac, so don't think I'm just taking a piss at those with a deadline.)


<< Home