The Untouchables

With corruption and greed sweeping across Chicago, as they are stuck in the midst of the prohibition gloom, not even the police seem adverse to a bribe at all, especially when the man pulling most of the strings is the ruthless gangster Al Capone (Robert de Niro). Desperate to bring law and order back to the streets of the city, a crack force of agents above corruption, labelled "The Untouchables", is banded together under the guidance of federal agent Elliot Ness (Kevin Costner). Along with old time cop Jim Malone (Sean Connery), new recruit George Stone (Andy Garcia) and nerdy accountant Oscar Wallace (Charles Martin Smith) they set about cleaning up the streets and in particular the underground dealings of Al Capone. Despite their best attempts, Capone always seems to be one step ahead of them as Ness's straight laced tactics fail to make any impact. Forced to play Capone at his own Ruthless games, Ness and his men take the battle to him using his own ruthless tactics to try and capture him.

I have always had a penchant for gangster movies, especially those that are based in era's past rather than in a modern setting, so it is no surprise that I am particularly fond of Brian De Palma's exceptional masterpiece "The Untouchables". With the story based on the attempt to bring one of America's most notorious gangsters to rights, the film is a mixture of truth and fiction which blends together to create one of the most engrossing films to have been made in the last century, yes "The Untouchables" first hit our big screens way back in 1987. That is not to say that this masterpiece has its problems, most notably a couple of unimaginative performances, but as a whole the film rises above these and delivers on nearly every level. This makes it all the more surprising that the only Oscar it won was for Sean Connery's performance as best supporting actor.

As already mentioned, the story is based on a mixture of fact and fiction, set in the prohibition era when the notorious gangster, Al Capone was at his deadliest controlling not only the criminal activities in Chicago but also numerous police men and political figures. The emphasis of the film is the battle between the newly formed "The Untouchables" and the notorious gangster as they attempt to bring him to justice by any means possible. All of this is fine and for the majority of the film the story does remain the focal point as we watch Ness learn that the only way he will capture his prize is to become as ruthless as the gangster himself. But at times the film does seem to stray from conveying the story and begins to dwell on the magnificent work which went into the set and costume design, which to be honest is a pleasure to watch and the realism of it all helps to make the film very engrossing, but it does spoil the film when for the nth time we are left to marvel at the scenery rather than keeping the story moving along.

With the film focussing firmly on the ruthless criminal activities of Al Capone it is no surprise that the film does not shy away from demonstrating this with a couple of major scenes featuring brutal violence. The first of these memorable scenes sees Capone taking out his anger on one of his henchmen during a board meeting where he goes to work on his head with a baseball bat. This is one of the earliest scenes in the movie and really sets up not only the character of Capone but also the way in which the film would progress. The second of the memorable scenes features Elliot Ness interrogating one of Capone's henchmen and in attempt to move matters along, George Malone blows the head off of another henchman who was already dead, but makes it look like he was alive. Although there is a strong emphasis on the violence, most of it is not shown in front of the camera with the results of it being displayed, which is one of the reasons why "The Untouchables" managed to be awarded a 15 certificate instead of an 18.

There are other elements to the story, including Ness's fear for his wife and child as he takes on the deadly gangster and the teacher pupil relationships between Malone and Ness as the grizzled old policeman teaches the federal agent how to beat Capone as well as his own morals on being an honest policeman. All of these add to make the film work really well on all levels.

For anyone who is not aware of the fate of Al Capone, the way in which the film comes to a climax has a nice twist but for those who are fully aware of Capone's outcome it plays out in quite a predictable but satisfactory manner.

To be honest this is where the film is let down and it is through some satisfactory but ultimately plain performances. In the lead you have Kevin Costner as the crime busting federal agent, and all round good guy, Elliot Ness. As is quite often the case, Costner puts in a very solid and reasonably convincing performance but doesn't quite manage to shine as the star of the film. His characterisation is very good and equally matches that of hiss fellow performers. Also making a less than starry performance but still an adequate one is Andy Garcia as George Stone, the young agent plucked from a list of new recruits. At times Garcia's performance looked more like a rabbit stuck in the middle of the headlights of an oncoming vehicle, but this may be due to this being one of his first major film roles and his inexperience does show.

Undoubtedly the star of the film is Sean Connery as the grizzled old beat cop, Jim Malone. Connery rightly won an Oscar for his performance and with out his performance this film would be left some what lack lustre. Not only is his portrayal of a grizzled old street cop convincing it is also enjoyable making it a pivotal reason why "The Untouchables" is one of the best gangster films out there. Also making a very good performance is Charles Martin Smith as the slightly timid and nerdy federal agent Oscar Wallace, whose main role is as an accountant. For those of you unaware of the Capone story you maybe wondering why an accountant is part of this elite crime force, but this character is very pivotal in the story.

Of course you cannot leave out the character of Al Capone who is magnificently played by Hollywood legend Robert de Niro. De Niro may not put in one of his finest performances as the ruthless crime boss, but it is still one which eclipses nearly all of the performances from the other actors in the movie, except for that of Connery. Not only is De Niro's characterisation absolutely brilliant but his presence fills the screen every time he appears.

Although the film does have a couple of minor weaknesses, it is very hard to find any real major fault with how Brian De Palma has directed "The Untouchables" and so it does deserve all the praise bestowed upon it by numerous film critics. As a rule, De Palma has kept the film moving along at a very good pace, apart from the few minor dalliances with the scenery and costumes, you find yourself being drawn into the film as although it is not overly quick it doesn't give you huge amounts of time to deal with what you have seen. One of his major triumphs is to make "The Untouchables" a gangster movie with a much wider appeal than those such as "Scarface" and "The Godfather". He has achieved this by making the film not just about the brutality of the violence but also by making it a very worthy period drama.

For a film which is now over 20 years old "The Untouchables" is still as enjoyable as the first time I watched it all those years ago. Yes it does have a few flaws and it is by no means as good as say "The Godfather" when you compare it against other gangster movies, but what it does do is to make the gangster genre more appealing to a wider audience with it's decent plot, some good performances and exceptional costume and set design. Whether or not this is Brian De Palma's best movie is debatable as his earlier outings with "Scarface" and "Carrie" are equally as good if not better. This is the sort of film which appeal to a wide range of viewers, you of course have the fans of gangster movies, but as a period drama it is excellent and as an interpretation of a true story it is very enjoyable.


Certificate: 15
Duration: 119 mins
Year of Release: 1987
Genre: Crime, Drama, Gangster
Director(s): Brian De Palma
Cast: Kevin Costner, Sean Connery, Charles Martin Smith, Andy Garcia, Robert De Niro, Richard Bradford, Jack Kehoe, Brad Sullivan, Billy Drago, Patricia Clarkson, Vito D'Ambrosio, Peter Aylward, Don Harvey

Rating: 8/10

Read More......

Phenomenon

George Malley (John Travolta), a happy go lucky garage mechanic, is in the midst of celebrating his birthday when he is strangely knocked unconscious by a blinding light which appears to come from the sky. When he comes round he seems to have gained a sudden intelligence which over the following days and months blossoms, as he comes up with new inventions and ideas whilst thirsting for knowledge. But this sudden burst of intelligence frightens his friends and the folks in his small Californian home town, so much so that they become hostile towards the towns new genius. His only support comes from his long term friends Doc Brunder (Robert Duvall), farmer Nate Pope (Forest Whitaker) and recently divorcee Lace Pennamin (Kyra Sedgwick), who he has deep feelings for.

Whilst some films delve deep into their pockets to entertain audiences with an all star cast or stunning special effects, "Phenomenon" goes back to basics by entertaining audiences with a touching and exceptionally well crafted story which although not overly dramatic is beautiful in it's simplicity. That is not to say the film does not have its share of well known actors and a few special effects, but rather than let them become the focus, the story remains the most important element to this film.

To be honest, the first time I watched "Phenomenon" I totally missed the point of the film and felt a little disappointed by the gentle storyline and understated performances from the likes of Travolta and Duvall. But having recently rediscovered the film amongst my collection of videos, I appreciated not only the understated performances but the beautiful storyline. Whilst the plot may have a grounding in the realms of fantasy with the main character of George suddenly gaining exceptional intelligence and telekinetic abilities after being blinded by a strange light. The main emphasis of the story is not on this extraordinary happening but on the way George as well as his friends react to his sudden burst of genius. Along the way the film provides some amusing but delightful scenes as we watch George's intelligence grow, such as his sudden ability to speak Spanish, but these are done in what could be termed as a gentle and very fitting manner which does not spoil this delightful drama. As I mentioned, the real emphasis of the plot is on the reactions to George's sudden burst of intelligence, and again these have been done so that whilst pointing out that George is suddenly treated like a freak, they are not done in either a too hard hitting or overly light manner, making them fit perfectly into the atmosphere set in the film. In fact the change in George's character from his initial joy at suddenly becoming amazingly intelligent, to one of despair as he is shunned by his friends and prodded by scientists, is not only brilliantly acted but really helps demonstrate the point of the movie. Add to this a somewhat surprising yet touching twist, which although succeeds in pushing the audiences buttons to get the desired emotional reaction, does not feel overly contrived and fits perfectly within the drama.

Whilst John Travolta is best known for his performances in the likes of "Grease" and "Pulp Fiction" his touching performance as a man who becomes treated like a freak ranks right up there amongst his best. Not because he fills the screen with a large, dynamic performance but because it is powerful whilst being understated. Yes we get a lot of his trademarks, from his charming smile and what seems to be his obligatory dancing scene, one which actually takes the mickey out this trademark, but for once you do not feel like you are watching John Travolta but you truly become immersed into the world of George Malley a humble car mechanic who is suddenly blessed with amazing intelligence. Alongside Travolta is the wonderful Robert Duvall as the town's Doctor and again it is a performance which makes you forget that this is Robert Duvall but that of Doc Brunder, a man who deeply cares for George as if he is his own son. Whilst Travolta and Duvall are obviously the big name draws for the film, Forest Whitaker makes a fine performance as George's best friend, the soul loving, Diana Ross infatuated farmer and Kyra Sedgwick is brilliant as the recently divorced mum who becomes romantically involved with George. What is particularly nice is that whilst the film has this romantic element, it does not for a single moment feel contrived or out of place, which is hugely down to the brilliant on screen chemistry between Travolta and Sedgwick.

What is also noticeable is the autumnal tones which director John Turtletaub has chosen to create a beautiful, easy on the eyes look to the film. Whilst in some films this effect can make the film seem overly soft and wishy-washy, this just adds to the enjoyment of "Phenomenon" as well as working as a great contrast for when the twist comes in the second part of the film. Also working well within the film is a stunning soundtrack with soft rock pieces such as "Change the World" by Eric Clapton and "I Have the Touch" by Peter Gabriel. But it also has quite a few soul numbers which mainly feature the delightful tones of Diana Ross, such as "Touch Me in the Morning" and "Baby Love", but the best comes from Aaron Neville singing "Crazy Love". All in all one of the most fitting and enjoyable soundtracks I have heard on a film which is lovely as just background music for writing reviews.


Although "Phenomenon" was not a phenomenal blockbuster on it's release back in 1996, although it did take over $100 million before falling off the big screen, it is a remarkably charming drama which is not only extremely easy to watch but is also very entertaining. With a simple but beautifully crafted plot, and some touching performances, this is a hugely overlooked gem from a year which was filled with action films such as "Independence Day" and "Mission: Impossible". With a well balanced mixture of fantasy, drama, romance and a subtle touch of humour this film manages to not only demonstrate the feeling of isolation as the main character becomes shunned by his friends but still delivers an emotional feel good factor through a surprising twist. At just under 2 hours long, the film actually flies by and keeps you interested for it's entire duration. Definitely a film I would recommend, especially for anyone who wants to see a different side to John Travolta.


Certificate: PG
Duration: 118 mins
Year of Release: 1996
Genre: Drama, Romance, Fantasy
Director(s): John Turtletaub
Cast: John Travolta, Robert Duvall, Kyra Sedgwick, Forest Whitaker, Jeffrey DeMunn, Richard Kiley, Brent Spiner, Michael Miihoan, Bruce A. Young

Rating: 6/10

Read More......

Mask

Based on the true story of Rocky Dennis (Eric Stoltz), an American teenager who since childhood has suffered from a rare bone disease which has left his face horribly disfigured. Despite predictions from the doctors that his disease would kill him before the age of ten, he has proved them wrong and now in his teenage years is trying to live a normal life, despite the daily prejudices he encounters from his peers. Adding to his woe is his unconventional home life being raised by a drug addicted mother and her friends a band of bike riding heavies.

To my shame I have to admit that the first time I watched this in the early 90s I switched it off because I could not deal with the horrible disfiguration which Rocky lived with. But since then, and having grown up somewhat, I have revisited this film numerous times as it is one of the most compelling dramas I have ever had the pleasure to watch. What is also quite amazing about this film is that it was released in the middle of the 80s when the cinema going audiences seemed to want innocent entertainment like "Back to the Future" instead of powerful true life dramas such as this.

For me when I read that a film is based on a true story I approach it with a certain amount of caution, but whilst I cannot say how accurate this interpretation is, I can say that it is vastly different to the majority of films which base their plots on a real life story. Whilst the usual route of action for true story films is to pile on the sentiment with highly contrived scenes which focus on pushing the audiences' buttons to gain a desired emotion. "Mask" steers well clear of this allowing the film to naturally progress using the drama of the story to give the audience an emotional journey whilst also delivering a highly powerful message. With the main focus of the film being the prejudices which Rocky faces as people struggle to deal with the way he looks, the film manages to stay pretty clear of throwing to many cliché scenes at us where people struggle to deal with the way he looks. On the occasions where we do get these moments they are dealt with quickly and admirably showing the courage of Rocky as he deals with the name calling and staring with a certain amount of humour. In fact it is the way in which he deals with other peoples issues which change their views on him and it is wonderful to see the way he becomes a friend to many of those who initially struggle with his look.

Of course the film is not just about the prejudices he suffers and we get a great look at the issues he encounters whilst trying to lead a normal teenage life, most importantly wanting to fall in love. In some of the most beautiful scenes in the whole film we see Rocky befriend a blind girl whilst working at a holiday camp for the visually impaired, and the innocence of the romance which blossoms due to the girl not judging him on his looks is truly brilliant. Adding to the whole drama of the film is the slightly unconventional home life which Rocky leads with his drug taking mother and their biker friends. Whilst again this could have easily fallen to a very cliché, stereotypical portrayal of both elements the film actually goes down a different route, with his mother actually coming across as a very loving person instead of being out of her head and the bikers as being a caring bunch of people who treat Rocky like a son. In fact this side of the plot is equally as good as the main focus on the prejudices and makes the film have a very well rounded feel to it. What is amazing is at 127 minutes long the film never seems to drag as it is these ample storylines which makes the film move at such a natural unforced pace.

Whilst the exceptional plot is a huge reason why the film is such engrossing viewing, it is also the wonderful characters and remarkable performances which help to set this film head and shoulders above others in the same genre. The most amazing performance comes from Eric Stoltz as Rocky Dennis, who manages to portray with such effectiveness and relative ease the angst that Rocky goes through dealing with teenage life at school and home. Of course it does help that he is disguised behind amazing make-up but you do honestly forget you are watching an actor and not a real person. At the same time the performance from Cher as his mother, Rusty, is equally as stunning. Although I usually struggle with singers who try their hands at acting, accusing them of playing to the cameras, Cher manages to convey a real sense of caring for Rocky as if she really was his mother. Making up the cast is Sam Elliot as Gar, a biker who has feelings for Rusty and treats Rocky like a son. Although the majority of the film focuses on Rocky and Rusty, Elliot's performance fits comfortably within the film and whilst you never can disconnect his performance from being that of an actor, it is one of his most enjoyable. Special mention should go to a young Laura Dern who plays the blind girl, Diana, who Rocky falls in love with. In one scene where Rocky uses senses such as hot and cold to explain to her the colour red and blue, you completely forget that this is an actress playing the part of a blind girl. What comes across from all the performances is a sense of real caring for the story and like with the plot you become involved with the characters rather than feeling on the outside.

I have only one criticism of the film and it is nothing to do with the plot or acting, but more to do with the way director Peter Bogdanovich has shot it. Maybe it was the in thing with dramas in the 80s but the film has a rather soft, autumnal look to it which for me spoils the watching of it slightly. But saying that I cannot fault him for anything else, from the opening scenes where are first glimpse of Rocky's horrible disfigurement is seen in his bedroom mirror, or the way he characterises the bikers as tough men but with hearts of gold, everything else is spot on. Especially the stunning soundtrack which opens with a foot tapping version of "Katmandu" by Bob Seger, and never drops with music coming from Bruce Springsteen, Steely Dan, Lynyrd Skynyrd and Little Richard. For those who remember the original release may query that I mention Bruce Springsteen, as his songs never appeared in the original edit due to a licensing issue. Thankfully they have been reintroduced in the DVD release and really are a worth while inclusion.


Whilst the subject matter of this film may make for hard viewing at times it is one I would strongly recommend to all ages, as the message it gets across about prejudices, with out forcing it down your throat, is one that is very real. Although I cannot say whether this is a realistic interpretation of the true story, I can say it is one of the best true story films I have watched in many a year. With a stunning plot which flows naturally and brilliant performances from Eric Stoltz and Cher, it is a film which deserves more acclaim than it has achieved. My only criticism of the film lies in the way it has been shot which softens it a little too much for my liking.


Certificate: 15
Duration: 127 mins
Year of Release: 1985
Genre: Biographical, Drama
Director(s): Peter Bogdanovich
Cast: Eric Stoltz, Cher, Sam Elliot, Laura Dern, Dennis Burkley, Estelle Getty, Harry Carey Jr

Rating: 7/10

Read More......

Catacombs

On a trip to visit her sister in Paris, a young American is taken to an illegal rave in the Catacombs, a vast labyrinth of tunnels deep beneath the romantic streets, where the remains of 7 million people make up the tunnels. When the rave gets raided by the police, she becomes separated from her friends and lost amongst the vast array of tunnels; she believes that she is being chased by someone or something.

With the words "From the producers of Saw" blazoned across the top of the DVD case, I was expecting either a torture teaser in the same manner of the Saw films, or at least a film which was equally as entertaining, suspenseful and scary. Sadly I was expecting far too much, as "Catacombs" is a serious disappointment, it is neither a torture teaser and it is far from entertaining or suspenseful, in fact I would struggle to really class it as a Horror. The scariest things about "Catacombs" are the terrible plot, the crap characters and the fact that I managed to sit through it despite the urge to switch off after the first 10 minutes and every five minutes there after.

"Catacombs" really doesn't start well, with a glimpse of a woman dancing at a rave whilst baring her chest, for me this was just titillation for the sake of it, in the blatant hope that it will grab your attention and it set alarm bells ringing straight away. But that isn't the real issue, right from the outset there is no real substance to the story, the American woman gets a rather brief postcard from her sister saying come to Paris and so she does all within 48 hours. The film is then a rushed mess, flying through scenes which could aid the story by building up motivation, but instead taking us far too quickly to the illegal rave. Yes there are a couple of nice touches where it attempts to explain why there are 7 million people buried under the streets, but it does it so quickly that you could miss it if you are not paying attention.

Having given us the rather brief and rushed build up "Catacombs" grinds to a halt as it turns into purely a chase film with the lead running in disarray from something she believes is following here. The difference between the rushed opening and then the painfully slow, seriously dragged out chase section is such a contrast that it makes you wonder if you are watching the same film. It is at the chase section where you are screaming out for speed, adrenalin and excitement but not once does it deliver anything close to being exhilarating. But the films Pièce de résistance is still to come and I have to say I really didn't see the climax coming. Why? Because it is so stupid, contrived and laughable that it screamed desperation by the writers to finish this farce.

Where for me "Catacombs" really fails is by the poor casting of Shannyn Sossamon in the lead role of Victoria, the American visiting her sister. Sossamon is svelte and gorgeous but lacks any real screen presence, I would have found Duncan Norvelle running round screaming "Chase Me, Chase Me" more entertaining and endearing than Sossamon. She is far from helped by some dire and misplaced dialogue, why for the life of me would you be screaming out "Leave me alone" when you are trying to run and more importantly hide from whatever is chasing you. Her whole character and performance is a mess and at times the combination of this as well as some terrible camera work makes the film feel like a poor copy of the "Blair Witch Project".

Sadly the film focuses mainly on the Victoria character, and everyone else is really of little significance. Even Victoria's sister Carolyn, played by Alicia Moore, otherwise known as pop singer Pink, has very little to do in the film and most of the time she is just as annoying as Victoria. What you have in essence is one women frantically running round screaming, another who is a bitch with no real reasoning and a handful of French guys who speak no English and add nothing to the story.

The nail in the coffin for me was the way the whole film is put together and from start to finish it alienated me. Scenes were run at double speed, presumably to try and speed up the boring bits but then went on too long and became tiresome. The choice effect of the directors seemed to be strobe lighting which I am sure went on far too long as it started giving me headaches wherever used. But the worst problem was in the chase scenes, close ups of Victoria's face made it look like she was running on the spot in a dark studio and the distance shots were boring. The whole thing failed to build up the much needed atmosphere and tension. As for being produced by the people who made Saw, well they should stick to what they do best.

Can I find anything positive to say, well at 88 minutes it is not too long and the actual Catacombs with their walls built out of skeletons look quite impressive but that is as far as my compliments can stretch? For me it was a waste of a good idea, which struggled from the opening scenes to grab my attention and entertain me, let alone scare me. In fact the wind whistling through the rafters is far more frightening than this. If you really want to watch a screaming woman run around some tunnels for the best part of 90 minutes then I suggest renting or borrowing this rather than splashing the cash.


Certificate: 18
Duration: 88 mins
Year of Release: 2007
Genre: Horror, Thriller
Director(s): Tomm Coker, David Elliot
Cast: Shannyn Sossamon, Alicia Moore(Pink), Emil Hostina, Sandi Dragoi, Mihai Stanescu, Cabral Ibacka, Radu Andrei Micu, Cain Manoli

Rating: 4/10

Read More......

Zodiac

As a murderer, calling himself Zodiac, starts sending cryptic messages and threats to the police as well as newspapers in and around San Francisco. Chronicle reporter Paul Avery becomes obsessed with the case which frustrates the investigating officers David Toschi and Bill Armstrong, as well as causing wide scale paranoia in the Bay area. Years later, and without anyone solving the riddle of the Zodiac killer, Chronicle cartoonist Robert Graysmith is still following up leads as he believes he is closing down on the killer.

Once in a blue moon a film comes along which grabs your attention to the extent that you stop everything else that you were doing and become transfixed, unaware of anything else except what is happening on the screen. One such film is David Fincher's "Zodiac" which retells the true story of the Zodiac killer who caused major paranoia in the bay area of San Francisco in the 60s and 70s.

For me I had read the hype over the film but as is often the case was not expecting it to live up to all it's acclaim, thankfully it did and in some ways surpassed it. Part of the reason why this film bit me in the ass and made me pay attention is that it is not like your usual serial killer films. Yes a big part of the film is solving the mystery as to who the killer is as well as the unravelling of the clues, and the depth the film goes into as to how and why is truly fascinating. But what is more prominent for me is the way the film also shows the effect it had on the lives of those who became so obsessed with the case. I would say at times the film comes across more as a character examination rather than a thriller, which will no doubt disappoint some audiences who are looking for a "Columbo"/ "Diagnosis Murder" style thriller, as this is as far away from it as you can get. Part of the reason why I feel "Zodiac" works so well is that it is closely based on the book written by the Chronicle cartoonist Robert Graysmith as he did his own investigations. In being so closely linked everything about it seems more realistic than other films in the same genre. Not once did I feel that a scene had been overly glamorised just to please the audience, although no doubt some of it was. This maybe another reason why some audiences fail to gain the same pleasure from this film as me, as in being so true to Graysmith's book the film is very detailed and at times can feel slow.

With a film which is all about the characters, mainly those of reporter Avery, detective Toschi and cartoonist Graysmith, the film needed some very good actors to fill these parts and it really did not disappoint. For me the best performance came from Robert Downey Jr. who truly became the character of Paul Avery. I personally feel Downey is a hugely underrated actor, maybe down to his personal problems, but in "Zodiac" he shows what he really can do with a decent part. The transition which Avery undergoes from quite a cocky reporter to a physical, alcohol addicted wreck is shockingly realistic, and by the end of the film you get a real sense that his involvement in the case really destroyed him. Also making a better than expected performance is Mark Ruffalo as Inspector David Toschi, who started of like a caricature of Peter Falk's famous character "Columbo", thankfully this was short lived as if it had gone on it would have most definitely ruined the film. Prior to "Zodiac" I had only seen Ruffalo in fluffy roles, mainly as the love interest in romantic comedies, but he demonstrates in this film that he is more than capable of handling more serious roles. To be honest when the film started I didn't even realise it was Ruffalo in this role, which is not just down to some good make up and costumes, but to his performance. Like Downey he really gets into the character and you never get a sense that it was just an actor going through the motions. Making up the threesome and what you would class the lead role is Jake Gyllenhaal as Robert Graysmith. At times I did feel the part was a bit too big for him as the majority of the scenes understandably revolve around him, but for the most he did a really good job. Most of the time where I felt he struggled in the role was early on, but by the end of the film I felt he had really grown into the character and it was later on that Gyllenhaal was rivalling Downey for being the best actor.

Whilst Downey, Ruffalo and Gyllenhaal were undoubtedly the main focuses of the film, the supporting cast were by no means inferior. For me special mention should go to Anthony Edwards as Inspector William Armstrong, who although is not a central character puts in a performance which is on par with Messrs Downey, Ruffalo and Gyllenhaal. In fact like with Ruffalo, I didn't even realise it was Edwards in the role until there was a scene where he was the central focus and I recognised his voice. Edwards is by no means the only other good actor in the film, and the likes of Dermot Mulroney, Chloë Sevigny as well as Brian Cox all put in first rate performances in their respective roles. It is partly down to the choice of cast as to why I think "Zodiac" works so well, as none of them seem want to steal the show from anyone else.

One of the noticeable things that "Zodiac" has is atmosphere and it is no surprise when you realise that the director of the film is David Fincher, a man who previously directed films such as Se7en, Panic Room and The Game. Fincher manages to not only take us back to the 60s and 70s but also create an atmosphere of suspense. At times he may drag things out slightly too long for my own liking, but for the most he hits the nail on the head. Personally I liked the way he worked the characters rather than the action and for me was the reason why the film was so compelling. Where I do feel he may have alienated some audiences is to have not put in the level of suspense where something like a phone ringing in a silent room will make you jump, but then I didn't mind this and personally feel it would have changed the feel of the whole film if he had gone down this route.

I suppose if you are looking for an overly tense, slick, thriller with a fair bit of action, a few suspenseful frights then you are more than likely going to be disappointed by "Zodiac". On the other hand if you want a thriller which is a bit different from the commercial norm, which isn't afraid to dwell on the characters rather than move along at a rate of knots then there is a very good chance you will enjoy "Zodiac". For me the combination of realism, plot and performance made me sit up and pay attention and despite being a rather impressive 158 minutes long it gripped so much I didn't notice the time.


Certificate: 15
Duration: 158 mins
Year of Release: 2007
Genre: Drama, Thriller
Director(s): David Fincher
Cast: Jake Gyllenhaal, Mark Ruffalo, Anthony Edwards, Robert Downey Jr., Brian Cox, John Carroll Lynch, Chloë Sevigny, Ed Setrakian, Dermot Mulroney

Rating: 8/10

Read More......