Zodiac (2007)

Premise: In the late 1960s and early 1970s a serial killer known only as Zodiac terrorized the Bay area. Fancying himself a Jack the Ripper sort, he communicated to the papers through letters and ciphers. Although crime beat writer Paul Avery (Robert Downey, Jr.) covers the story for the San Fransisco Chronicle, editorial cartoonist Robert Graysmith (Jake Gyllenhaal) is drawn into the case through his love of puzzles. Meanwhile, detectives Dave Toschi (Mark Ruffalo) and Bill Armstrong (Anthony Edwards) attempt to sort fact from fiction as they come together with officers (Elias Coteas, Donal Logue) from smaller towns were Zodiac has hit.

Let the 2007 viewing season begin!

Subject matter aside, I was falling all over myself to get to the theatre to see this one. Downey, Jr., Gyllenhaal, and Ruffalo? How could I resist?

Of the three Gyllenhaal is ostensible the protagonist. He's the first of the three we see, and, as the Zodiac killings subsided, the focus shifts to Graysmith's continued search as he compiles the book on the subject. That book, of course, being the basis of writer James Vanderbilt and director David Fincher's fine work. Perhaps for the first time in a long time, I was struck by just how young Gyllenhaal looks. The others are aged as time goes by with grey added to their hair, but Gyllenhaal looks the same throughout, a youthful vibe clinging to him. Nonetheless, he possesses a growing talent, making the "aw, shucks" that seems to hang about him a weapon, disarming the viewer as well as the other characters. As dangerous as his obsession becomes, Gyllenhaal makes Graysmith a likable protagonist even when he appears to be losing the battle.

Downey, Jr. remains among the best in my mind, if for nothing else than his ability to play to conflicting emotions simultaneously. Avery's telling Graysmith to get away, but you can see he really wants to help the kid if you look closely. I enjoy the way he uses the physicality of his characters, rolling sideways out of a chair instead of standing up, carefully pushing a letter around a table with the eraser end of a pencil, blocking the path of a cab with his jerky steps. I don't know how he does it - I never feel like he is calling attention to himself with actorly tics, and I never fail to notice just how he does something.

As for my dear Ruffalo, what can I say? To a certain extent, Toschi becomes the most effete character he has ever played in a series of fairly languid (but well done) roles. He does great work as the cop in the midst of this madness. The voice seems a little higher, the pants a lot tighter, but the heart is definitely in the right place. I loved the way he just couldn't resist assisting Graysmith, even after the whole thing blew right up in his face. His dedication, far beyond his reward, was not only the character's touchstone but the movie's.

The only criticism I can think of for Vanderbilt and Fincher's taught, smart, and witty (albeit shockingly violent) thriller is that it drags a little as it shifts gears from the murders to Graysmith's research. Just for a bit at the top of the act, but not so much that you are thrown out of the film. Fincher starts in on you again with the tension, and you forget what you were on about.

Okay, two complaints: whatever they had on Edwards' head. Dude looked Kevin Costner in the wrong lighting. Nice work from him, though.

Other than those two things, exactly what a thriller should be. Creepy, sparingly violent, tense. Kept me up that night. A