Zodiac
"Zodiac" is an interesting film that explores one man's obsession with finding the elusive Zodiac killer. I really do not have much to say about this movie, which is not necessarily a bad thing. Suffice to say, the movie is heavy on plot and has a standout performance from Jake Gyllenhaal. I had a small gripe with how fast the movie moved through scenes. As you probably know from reading my reviews, I am a great admirer of Kubrik and his long shots that allow audiences to soak in atmosphere. I really don't like films that convey the plot as one damn event after another, which is what "Zodiac" tended to do. I would have liked to see a few scenes really focus on Gyllenhaal's unhealthy obsession or even the brutality and randomness of the killer. Those scenes are what movies are made for--to bring together visuals, music, writing, and acting into a cohesive whole. "Zodiac" would be a better book than a movie (Ironically, it was a best selling book).
It is worth lingering over the idea that a given work could be a better book than a movie or vice versa. Many critics argue that Charlie Kauffman's movies, which include "Adaptation" and "Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind," are better suited to books because of their complex ideas. For example, in "Adaptation, " Kauffman attempts to discuss the many faces of evolution and adaptation (the earth, animals, flowers, people, relationships, etc). Contrast this philosophical plot with films that are made for the movies and its visual potential: 2001: A Space Odyssey, Lawrence of Arabia, etc. I disagree with these critics because complex ideas that seem to be better in book form can be portrayed just as good or better in movies under the supervision of a talented director. Spike Jonez did a wonderful job showing the earth's evolution from volcanic mass to fruitful sphere and exploring Kauffman's frustrating struggle to adapt The Orchid Thief. Likewise, in " The Silence of the Lambs," the audience sees a whodunit thriller that could easily have been a better book. However, the director masterfully creates suspense with visuals (the police going in the wrong house near the end and Jodie Foster bumbling around in the dark against Buffalo Bob). Furthermore, let us not forget that we are able to see the evil of Hannibal Lecter incarnate with Anthony Hopkins in one of film's greatest performances. In sum, even though "Zodiac" is probably better suited in book form, a good director could have pulled some visual nuggets out of its core.
Still, I liked "Zodiac" because it was entertaining. Similar to "Breach," the former movie is a nice outing, but could be missed.
4.0
It is worth lingering over the idea that a given work could be a better book than a movie or vice versa. Many critics argue that Charlie Kauffman's movies, which include "Adaptation" and "Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind," are better suited to books because of their complex ideas. For example, in "Adaptation, " Kauffman attempts to discuss the many faces of evolution and adaptation (the earth, animals, flowers, people, relationships, etc). Contrast this philosophical plot with films that are made for the movies and its visual potential: 2001: A Space Odyssey, Lawrence of Arabia, etc. I disagree with these critics because complex ideas that seem to be better in book form can be portrayed just as good or better in movies under the supervision of a talented director. Spike Jonez did a wonderful job showing the earth's evolution from volcanic mass to fruitful sphere and exploring Kauffman's frustrating struggle to adapt The Orchid Thief. Likewise, in " The Silence of the Lambs," the audience sees a whodunit thriller that could easily have been a better book. However, the director masterfully creates suspense with visuals (the police going in the wrong house near the end and Jodie Foster bumbling around in the dark against Buffalo Bob). Furthermore, let us not forget that we are able to see the evil of Hannibal Lecter incarnate with Anthony Hopkins in one of film's greatest performances. In sum, even though "Zodiac" is probably better suited in book form, a good director could have pulled some visual nuggets out of its core.
Still, I liked "Zodiac" because it was entertaining. Similar to "Breach," the former movie is a nice outing, but could be missed.
4.0
posted by Unknown at 7:48 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home