MAKING A MOVIE ABOUT A MURDERER; 1971'S 'THE ZODIAC KILLER' RELEASED BY 101 FILMS FOR THE U.K.

THE ZODIAC KILLER shouldn’t be of any great mystery to our regular readers, but for the folks at home who don’t know what I’m talking about, THE ZODIAC KILLER is the pseudonym of an unidentified serial killer who operated within the region of Northern California between 1968 and 1969. With a paltry five confirmed kills to his name, ZODIAC ain’t exactly gonna win you many hands during a game of Serial Killer Top Trumps, however, his longevity is bolstered by a series of taunting letters, some of which contained cryptograms and ciphers, he himself submitted to the police and several regional newspapers, the most famous of which was the San Francisco Chronicle, where cartoonist and amateur puzzler ROBERT GRAYSMITH, and journalist PAUL AVERY were employed. In 1970, AVERY received a Halloween card from ZODIAC which seemingly threatened his life (giving rise to the infamous “I AM NOT PAUL AVERY” buttons worn by Chronicle journalists for the better part of four months) by claiming he was “doomed”, and in 1971, he provided a foreword and played an active role in the production of TOM HANSON’s THE ZODIAC KILLER…

THE PLOT:

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?

*Pictured above: sensitivity in handling a horrifying and traumatic experience that affected an entire area of Northern California; a “how not-to" guide.*

THE REVIEW:

No shit, this entire movie was conceived and written as a way to potentially flush out the real ZODIAC. Upon completion, director TOM HANSON reportedly rented the Golden Gate Theater in San Francisco and premiered the film with the intention of luring ZODIAC to one of the screenings. KAWASAKI sponsored the event, and offered a motorcycle as a prize to the audience member who wrote the best answer to "I believe the Zodiac kills because..." on yellow cards that were handed out at the door. HANSON set up a team of people to analyse each entry for handwriting that matched that of the killer, and planned to confront them in the lobby if a match was found. Depending on the actual killer’s sense of humour would determine the mileage he would have got out of a viewing of this movie because it’s garbage. Everything about it is pathetic, and if it hadn’t been shot entirely on short-ends using actors who had never seen a movie before, I’d have to question the motivation behind its inception.

If the above statement of opinion sounds like an honest to goodness critique, then I don’t think AGFA titles are for you, son. If anything, all these elements combine to create something really rather wonderful. Bear in mind at all times that this is a movie where the ZODIAC (HAL REED), who keeps rabbits AND worships the Devil, in a touching moment of solemnity declares “Why are evil people allowed to live, when innocent rabbits like Leo must die?!” with complete sincerity. Maybe at some stage along the line, the creators of the movie could see dollar signs in their future, but five minutes spent in the company of THE ZODIAC KILLER should quickly put any fears of any cynical, and potentially lucrative, cash-in attempts to bed. This film looks and sounds like an industrial video (see; ZAAT), and contains equal parts baffling and wildly hilarious side-plots which either a) come to nothing, or b) are the dramatic equivalent of thumbing a twist-tie down the shaft of your penis.

In short, if you can get past the more uneventful, pedestrian moments of the film (of which there are a lot), you’ll find a truly unique cinematic experience caught in that most niche of netherworld’s betwixt true-crime expose, and gimmick-strewn, drive-in, exploitation nonsense (note to self: would make a great double-feature with STU SEGALL’s DRIVE-IN MASSACRE).

*Caption removed due to an over-abundance in choice of poor taste jokes*

THE PRESENTATION:

As previously stated, this film was shot on short-ends. For the folks at home who don’t know what this means, imagine one of the following: -

Blowing your nose on a part of an already mostly snot sodden tissue which has somehow miraculously escaped a previous attempt to cover it in the contents of your nose
Assembling a new cigarette from the un-burnt pieces of tobacco which lie between the dog-end and the filter of a previously smoked cigarette

In short, it looks like shit, but it’s always worth pointing out that AGFA titles never reached their laboratories in near-mint condition. These film prints have been used for a number of things over the course of time, none of which are even vaguely reminiscent of a screening, so cut the guys some slack , whoulda? The most you can hope for in these cases is a stable image and decent audio, and this presentation delivers on both accounts.