Aqui Quem Fala é o Zodíaco

Zodiac is one of my favorite films of all time, and this doc adds a new compelling layer to it; a companion piece, sort of. Interviews include the real Robert Graysmith and footage of Arthur Leigh Allen and the people he hurt. It confirms how much attention to detail was put into the movie, and how important it was to some people who interacted with the main suspect. There is a lot of information I wasn't aware of and unlike most unsolved serial killer documentaries where they almost leave you wondering what the point of what you watched was, this one provides some semblance of closure. It's absolutely compelling and worth a watch.

This Is the Zodiac Speaking: A nasty guy alright, at times he wanted to encourage people to think he was Zodiac, even wrote letters to people suggesting that he had carried out the murders. But just before he died he denied it, wrote a letter which was discovered when he was found dead. Certainly some circumstantial evidence, the testimony of those families he interacted with and abused is interesting. Their memories stretching back 50 years might not be so reliable though as to his actions in proximity to attack sites. Maybe he was just a sad petty predator who had dreams of being an infamous serial killer. Still the series is worth watching even I think it could have been done in 2 rather than 3 episodes. Directed by Phil Lott and Ari Mark. On Netflix. 7/10.

A family welcome in big and burly teacher, Arthur Leigh Allen into their world, he seems perfect, caring and considerate, but could he potentially be The Zodiac killer, a masked figure, who's claimed several victims, and delights in tormenting The Authorities.

A well known story, a fairly infamous serial killer, one that of course inspired an excellent movie adaptation.

It's revealing and shocking in equal measure, with some fascinating first hand interviews, with people who knew Allen well.

It's well paced and well produced, it will keep you on your toes, it does tail off a little bit in the third episode, but those behind it can't be blamed, as there's no resolution, only theories.

It's a story that's always intrigued me, and I've never had any doubts as to Allen's guilt, this three last series did nothing to change my mind, I still believe he's guilty, I'm just stunned they weren't able to convict him.

8/10.

"Zodiac Killer" is the first serial killer that intrigued me. I was maybe 8 years old when I first saw a documentary about him. Since then, I have been returning to the topic from time to time, listening to podcasts on the subject and generally being interested in new facts in the investigation. I've watched a lot of documentaries on the subject, listened to podcasts, and even read books, so I had to see this documentary as well. Was it possible to create a complete film about this monster in human skin this time?

No. But it doesn't matter at all, because this film is very close to being a perfect summary of a long-term investigation for those who have been following the case for a long time, and at the same time to be a shortcut for those who only know about Zodiac from David Fincher's film.

So why did the film get a 7/10 from me and not a 9/10, if it is "almost perfect"? Because in my opinion it is too fictionalized. There are too many unnecessary stories, too many digressions and asking questions, and not enough accurate presentation of the facts about Zodiac.

Nevertheless, it is worth watching this film to judge for yourself whether the way it is presented suits your taste. For me, it was slightly too long for the amount of information it gives. It could easily have had two episodes instead of three, if only those genre scenes, which did not add much to the film, were abandoned.

After seeing this well-done and thoroughly researched series, Arthur Leigh Allen was the Zodiac Killer. Of this I am certain. Others can drone on about circumstantial evidence and speculate and doubt all they want, but anyone who doesn't think it was Allen after seeing this series is deeply in denial or just doesn't want to believe the obvious. What it really boils down to is this: many people, especially armchair detectives, love a good mystery, so much so that they hope the mystery won't be solved. When it involves infamous criminals, such cases take on a life of their own and they want the mystery to continue. So when a longstanding case is finally solved, they're actually disappointed because there's no longer any mystery in their lives. They also refuse to believe that someone other than themselves solved it. It's all rather sad.