Zodiac is pretty pictures glued to a filing cabinet. I look at it and I question ...in fact, every time I watch it I get a few more pointers - arrows towards the truth. The opening scene alone does explain so so much(listen to the commentaries and you'll be more inclined to pay close attention to the opening scene), but leaves you with sooo many questions. Detail upon detail the average filmgoer doesn't see - doesn't need to see ..they don't matter to the narrative, and most would seem arbitrary anyway...
But they are not. To read Robert Graysmith's books and to explore the facts on your own - maybe crazy, but fun as hell. Each audio track features so many extra pieces along with the docs ...especially the interviews. It is absolutely compelling ...the serial killer known as "the Zodiac" was not a genius, and the men trying to catch him were not stupid ...so why don't we know who he is?
I very much like the fact that the screenwriters, the cast, the crew, David Fincher himself, all had theories on the "truth"...I've watched the film 4 times since, and I still don't know. I know what the film postulates ...it's 99% sure it's Arthur Leigh Allen, and I think it was too. Rather, I think it was two.
I believe he had help. Watching the interviews, one would might guess it was Don Cheney as well, but having read so much now, I think there might be someone out there who ...helped ...licked the stamps, two "MO"s at once. Cheney seems smart and creepy enough, but is it him? I love the fact, and thus my obsession, that comes from the ultimate question out of all of this - out of the possibility both Greysmith and Fincher acknowledge which is that may never know the absolute truth ...so the question as fact still remains ...Who was The Zodiac Killer?