Monday, May 21, 2007

Zodiac

Under this title, I expected something mystical and maybe even star-related. No, the film was a disappointment: overlong, filled with details crime plot, finally giving an expected answer. Many minor personages appear and disappear, confirming it is a true story – too true to be artistic. One should mention good work of design team which accurately reproduced all the vending machines, street lights, and cars through more than 20 years – it was certainly one of the concerns of the director. Also, the episode in the basement is a nice piece of horror – unfortunately, the only one.

I do not quite understand why people become obsessed with such crimes – obsessed enough to think about it, to write about it, and to make a movie about it. There should be great love for justice – and for detail. There are so many tragedies and injustices in this world, that a particular maniac, who even died long time ago, seem to be a pointless figure.

To film the story written by Robert Graysmith, director David Fincher should have something in common with him - and he does. The guys are both Virgos (sign of detail lovers), with Suns aspected by very strong Jupiters (which gives love for justice). Also, Fincher got Venus in Libra and Mercury in Virgo, whereas in Graysmith’s chart Mercury and Venus are in reception in Libra and Virgo.

Justice is worth fighting for it, even for 20 years, yes. But when details become dominating, good intentions turn into boredom.

3 comments:

Sarah said...

I have never read such a ridiculous review in my life. Your first incredulous lines "Under this title, I expected something mystical and maybe even star-related. No, the film was a disappointment.." show that you clearly didn't even bother to research the film's content before watching it, that you clearly believe your own associations with the word are 'Zodiac' the only ones that exist.
And then to finish off with a discussion of the star charts of the story writer/director... what relevance does this have to how good or bad the film is?

Not a well thought out criticism of the film in any respect at all. Better to keep this kind of thing on your blog rather than pretend it is a real and thoughtful review of the film.

Valerie Livina said...

Hello Sarah,

Thank you for your comment.

Indeed, when I come to watch a movie, I never read reviews, on purpose: I do not want to have any prejudice before watching, to get a fresh look and my own opinion.

I have realised that all those stars given in official reviews are often not right, because people follow the mainstream and do not like to think themselves.

To consider your second point, about how relevant the quality of the film and the astroportaits of its authors - this is my turn to laugh :) To me the connection is very clear, because people create art according to their natal charts.

Those who do not see and do not understand, can proceed in blindness. Good luck.

V.

Anonymous said...

While I understand where Sarah is coming from, I have to disagree!
First of all, Valerie's review are unique (as far as I know)in bringing the perspective of traditional astrology into the mix -- and not in a superficial way, either!
But also, as a San Franciscan who lived here during the "Zodiac times" and used to read Graysmith's political cartoons in the SF Chronicle, I looked forward to and absolutely loved this movie! But Valerie's review -- with her own special perspective as one who does *not* live in the US -- gave me a completely fresh look. Beyond just an afternoon's entertainment, this review has led me to consider some deeper issues about our culture. Thanks, Valerie!