Avis des utilisateurs

Directed by Tom Hanson, who had previously owned a chain of Pizza Man restaurants, THE ZODIAC KILLER was made to capture the real- life Zodiac Killer. That plan didn't work. Instead, we got the most outrageous and compelling "tabloid horror" vortex in the history of planet Earth. And beyond. During theatrical screenings, Hanson constructed in- theater "traps" to lure the killer from hiding. These included the use of an ice cream freezer filled with rent-a-cops and a raffle with a motorcycle as a prize. You won't get insight like this by watching a David Fincher movie. But you will get it while watching THE ZODIAC KILLER.

Read the fascinating true story behind the film here: http://zodiactruecrime.ew.com

No-budget creeper about the real-life Zodiac killer who stalked California in the late '60s. It's got some grit, I'll give it that, but it's all just so cheap, slow, and dull that I couldn't enjoy it. The "acting" is terrible and the picture quality reminds me of the opening to The Wonder Years. There are some moments of unintended comedy, which I usually recommend in a movie's favor when all else fails, but this is such a chore to get through that I don't think there are enough of those moments to justify it. If you're really into the Zodiac case or if you like to try any and all horror cheapies, then give it a look. Otherwise don't bother.

Knowing the Producer and some cast members, you all likely did not know the main reason the Movie was made was to try and catch the Zodiak. There was a whole lot going on behind the scenes to scheme a plan where the Zodiak would come to see a Movie about himself. If he came, and was discovered, eventually arrested, The Movie Caught the Killer. So despite the poor reviews,what a thrill it would have been! Had a Movie caught a Killer, more folks would see it. Leading to more Movie productions. There could have been a Movie made about the methods developed to "catch" The Zodiak. Would you go see a film which led to the arrest of a Killer?

Fictional account of the killer in California who murdered various men and women from the late 1960s to the early 1970s. In this he's a nice guy named Jerry (Hal Reed). He's a nice man, kind to animals and sweet to women. Still he goes out and kills people for no discernible reason--they suggest it has something to do with his dad.

In reality the Zodiac didn't kill that many people. This movie has recreations of the real killings and adds about eight more! With the exception of one gruesome stabbing the killings here are ineptly staged and (quite obviously) fake.

There's also a subplot with a friend of Jerry's named Grover. The subplot ends halfway through the movie--and has NOTHING to do with anything else! It's all too obvious padding--and boring padding at that! There's also tons of misogynistic comments, terrible dialogue, low production values and unsure direction. This gets a 2 only for Reed who wasn't half bad. Still you can safely skip this one.

"The motion picture you are about to see was conceived in June 1970. Its goal is not to win commercial awards but to create an "awareness of a present danger", Zodiac is based on known facts. If some of the scenes, dialogue, and letters seem strange and unreal, remember - they happened. My life was threatened on October 28, 1970 by Zodiac. His victims have received no warnings. They were unsuspecting people like you ---

Paul Avery. Reporter, San Francisco Chronicle"

That opening text has apparently been omitted from some versions of this largely fictional account of the Zodiac killer's reign of terror in the late 1960s, filmed on no budget, seemingly no screenplay, and people who just simply happened to be standing nearby.

Some obviously forgot their lines and stuttered through the scene. Why were those scenes not re-filmed? Also, during an early scene in a diner, two guys (real customer, perhaps?) walking up to the front (glass) door as though they were about to walk in, but then stop, as though a crew member might have stopped them and said something like, "Don't go in there yet. We're not done filming." There is a black guy, who answers a ringing payphone, appeared to be a random passerby, unaware he was even being filmed.

The couple killed at the lake had a simultaneously creepy (what with the way the killer almost casually walked up to them, clad in full executioner's clothes) and silly (because of its amateurishness) feel. Probably the film's most memorable scene.

May be worth checking out, for unintentional laughs, and for a look at the first(?) film about the Zodiac, just don't expect it to be fact- based.

Wow. This is a keeper. Loosely based on the Zodiac's reign of terror, this laugh-out-loud horror-thriller fully satisfies the right type of viewer. While the acting is the source for most of the hilarity, there are scenes that actually provide some surreal, creepy moments. That's sometimes hard for filmmakers on $1.05 budget. This holds up to repeated viewings and never fails to entertain. What we need is a new film about the Zodiac killings, probably some of the most interesting, yet sadly, unsolved crimes of the last century. This release from Academy is misspelled as THE ZODIAK KILLER, so take that in consideration when looking for around for it.

Mean-spirited and brutal film is mainly a fictionalization of the events that happened when the Zodiac killer raised hell in California back in the late 60's-early 70's. Our chipper killer (who resembles a young Merle Haggard) goes around raising hell. When he's not braining women with car hoods or spare tires, he's knifing couples or worshiping his altar where he believes the spirits of all the people he killed will be his slaves in the afterlife! Wow, is this guy one nutty dude! Gotta love the Doodles Weaver cameo, too, and how he likes his women "plump and dumb". Everyone knows some filthy old man like that, don't they? Obviously made by people who were not too hip to film-making, the film is shoddy and poorly shot, but the sheer outrageousness of the situations is good for one look at least.

I must admit I had to laugh out loud when Doodles Weaver, a long-time comic actor, appeared in a small part as the Zodiac Killer's next door neighbor.Doodles was a holdover from the Fifties' Golden Age of Television and he had the funniest lines in this movie. Some of the murder scenes were rather intense and I felt that movie held my attention. The Zodiac in this movie had no real m.o for the police to follow and this perhaps explains why he was never captured in real life. I found it interesting that the murderer in this movie carried around his disguises (wig, fake glasses with a plastic nose and, most noticeably, a black executioner outfit. The attack of the young couple is very graphic and still quite powerful after all of these years. If you're interested in the real-life Zodiac case, you'll need to take this movie with a grain of salt!

The Zodiac Killer (1971)

** (out of 4)

San Francisco finds itself under attack due to a string of murders where people are shot for no apparent reason. The film introduces us to a "what if" scenario as we meet several people who may or may not be the serial killer.

It's important to remember that when THE ZODIAC KILLER was released, the city itself was still under terror from the real thing. Obviously this has exploitation written all over it but one might be shocked that director Tom Hanson doesn't go over-the-top with the sleaze and instead it tries to take a serious approach on the subject. On the whole this isn't the best movie ever made but it features enough to make it worth viewing for fans of the genre.

What I enjoy most about the film is that it perfectly captures the time that it is set. There have been a lot of movies that tackled the subject but this here is the only one that takes place where the crimes happened. There's a surreal nature to the film that works extremely well and I thought the atmosphere was quite good. You really do feel as if you're watching a documentary on the real Zodiac because of how good the setting is. The film also benefits from some memorable death scenes. None of them, with the exception of a knife attack, are all that graphic but at the same time they are memorable.

With that said, there are some major flaws throughout the picture. The biggest is the fact that the film really drags at 85-minutes. The pacing of the movie is quite poor and it just drags to the point where you'll be wanting to scream for them to speed things up. The performances are also rather poor to say the least and some of the dialogue is even worse. One could also argue that the film doesn't have the greatest of stories but at the same time you have to give them credit for making a film in hopes of catching a real killer!

A cheapo expose on the Zodiac murders that occurred in the San Francisco Bay area in 1968 and 1969 that benefits from its year of release in 1971, not too far removed, the stringent budget which lends the project a degree of authenticity, as well as the focus on who the film portrays as the killer, a postal clerk who loves rabbits, and buries one that died near a cross, in a strikingly bizarre scene. Compared with the film that came out in 2007, this one stands up pretty well, especially for connoisseurs of films like this, no-budget but an eye for creativity. It made it on to the TCM Underground films, a wise decision by the program director.

This low, low budget thriller attempts to seriously cast a light on the reality of serial killers in our society, purporting to be "based on the facts". It soon came in the wake of the real life Zodiac murders that plagued San Francisco in the late 1960s. While obviously it's not nearly as polished or as well known as "Dirty Harry", it is a genuinely interesting curio. This viewer actually thought that the acting wasn't that bad; in fact, it's better than one might ordinarily find in such B level fare.

At first, we follow the day to day activities of two guys: harried mailman Jerry (Hal Reed, "The Doberman Gang") and volatile truck driver Grover (Bob Jones). Jerry comes across as a nice enough, polite enough man to others, while Bob likes to impress women by creating a false identity of a successful businessman. While the characters are somewhat entertaining to watch, they're just not as intriguing as the murder spree that will soon begin in earnest. While the killer will be taunting the authorities and the media with calls and letters, two frustrated detectives, Sgt. Pittman (Ray Lynch) and Officer Heller (Tom Pittman) will try to work the case.

The raw, gritty approach is a plus, although "The Zodiac Killer" might not be trashy or exploitative enough for some viewer tastes. Location shooting is decent; there's sufficient violence and a little bit of gore. At times screenwriters Ray Cantrell and Manny Cardoza and director Tom Hanson create some humour with the material. We see our ego-driven, confident maniac (who's identified sooner in the movie than one might expect) actually kill one woman with her own trunk hood, and another with her own spare tire.

While there's nothing really special here, this makes for some mildly amusing entertainment for seekers of obscure curiosities.

Six out of 10.

This 1971 horror/crime film is really low-budget. The acting is bad and the direction is flat. It doesn't really shed any new insight into the Zodiac case. It basically is just 86 minutes of people getting shot, stabbed, sliced, beaten, and killed in a a variety of bloody ways. Pretty much all the names of the victims have been changed and we know who the killer is early on, and it basically just follows him as he claims his victims. It is pretty boring, has bad music, and lots of cheesy 70s fashions (I just love the part with that guy's wig at the beginning, haha!). The scene with the sunbathers getting stabbed to death in the woods is creepy and bloody, but everything else is laughable. "The Zodiak Killer" is a cheap, low-budget effort that some may like and others may despise.

The Zodiac Killer is a speculative fiction about the real life murders undertaken by the serial killer known as Zodiac, in and around the San Francisco area during the 1960s and 70s.

It was conceived and released in 1971 by journalist Paul Avery- after he had received the infamous "peek-a-boo" halloween card from the Zodiac.

It's shot sort of like PSA-oriented docudrama, warning people that the killer is still out there...and could be anybody...even someone you know.

And it's laden with misogyny.

They develop a number of characters- all with gripes concerning women- seemingly to suggest that anyone exhibiting such aggressive traits could potentially be the responsible for the spate of murders that had been occurring over the past number of years there.

However, they then make the killer a subdued feminist minded vegetarian; whose frustrated, mainly, because he seeks acceptance from his criminally insane father, who all but ignores him.

There's a comic interlude woven in about two thirds the way through, when- in an act of desperation- the investigators visit a psychic charlatan, who gives them all the wrong information.

It all ends with the question, "Now that you know that I exist, what are you gonna do about it?".

(Keep in mind that Zodiac was still out there and active at the time this film was released)

A cheesey, low budget, yet highly entertaining film.

5.5 out of 10.

A slapdash indie production made to cash in on, and potentially aid in the capture of the still-unidentified "Zodiac" killer who paralyzed the San Francisco Bay Area with fear for two years. In this illusory concoction, the killer's identity is no mystery, as we are introduced to him formally as a seemingly mild-mannered mail carrier who loves his pet guinea pigs, and occasionally worships at a chintzy Satanic altar in his apartment.

Despite some intermittent unintended chuckles, this film actually imparts a few fairly potent violent murder scenarios. It might actually be worth a look for patient crime thriller and grindhouse horror enthusiasts, with the understanding that it has little foothold in factuality. Additionally, the backstory of its production makes it something of a novelty, as it was hoped that the film might rouse the interest of the killer, potentially leading to his identification and apprehension. Though this plan ultimately failed, I like to think that he did see the film...he'd surely be pretty miffed that his evil reign of terror was reduced to cheesy, low-budget exploitation fodder(*snicker...).

4.5/10.

The San Francisco area is beset by a series of seemingly random murders without motive or pattern. The police are taunted by phone calls and letters. Could the maniac be the violent truck driver, or the seemingly mild-mannered mailman, or even a cop?

This film has come to be known largely for its historical value. Allegedly, producer-director Tom Hanson made the film not so much to try and make a good movie so much as he wanted to call attention to the killer. His plan was to screen the film in San Francisco and assume the real killer was vain enough to attend. The screening indeed happened, but if the killer attended no one knows.

The quality of the film is not particularly good. The sound in particular is rather choppy. In retrospect, some have said the quality was never the point, it was merely intended as a trap. Even if that is true, let us not dwell on the poor quality. Besides the sound, the picture is no worse than the films of Herschell Gordon Lewis. In fact, in many cases it is better and the acting is far better than a Lewis film. Appropriately, "Zodiac Killer" had been released by Something Weird Video, the home of many Lewis films, for the DVD.

And now, Something Weird has partnered with the American Genre Film Archive (AGFA) to bring a Blu-ray to the masses! We get a new 4K scan from the only surviving 16mm blow-up elements. There is a commentary track with Tom Hanson and Manny Nedwick, as well as interviews with Hanson and Nedwick. Liner notes and director Tom Hanson interview by Chris Poggiali. And even a bonus movie, the rarely-seen "Another Son of Sam" (1977) with a new 2K scan from a 35mm theatrical print.

Arguably, "Zodiac Killer" did not need a 4K scan. When you are dealing with a film of this quality, whether the scan is 2K, 4K or anything else probably makes little difference. But that nitpick aside, this is definitely a cult film that should be seen. It has all the elements of exploitation that genre fans love, and it is about time it gets a wider audience. Senseless murder? Yes. A mailman being harassed by a nosy older lady? Yes. A real tragedy exploited for a film? Yes.