Did that woman get knocked out by the tap from the car door?!😭😭😭

Did that woman get knocked out by the tap from the car door?!😭😭😭

2017

So yeah, I knew this was gonna be bad because honestly, the premise is pretty dumb. But the film wasn't the disaster I expected. But it was a long way from being good.

The acting is rather weak. Shane West and Leslie Bibb are quite over the top every now and then, Matt Craven is alright and the guy who plays the zodiac pretty rather weak. The characters, especially the couple, are rather annoying and especially Zoe is dumber than she would have needed to be. Just like "Zodiac" from 2007, this film also tries to show the obsession with the investigation, the paranoia and the little descent into madness, but where Fincher's film was extremely believable and emotional this one is very ridiculous, implausible and forced.

And then there's the zodiac killer himself, oh the zodiac killer. The film says and shows that the zodiac filmed his murders back then, although there is no evidence to back that up or to even indicate that. I would accept it as a kind of creative freedom, but the film does not want to show a fictitious version of the real events. It just doesn't make too much sense that the Zodiac filmed his murders.

The film goes even further and shows the Zodiac. And not just in his Lake Berryessa outfit but his whole face in close ups. This is not only a terrible idea in and of itself, but worse executed. The killer looks laughable here and acts and talks exactly like that. Very unbelievable and a wrong decision, which still is inevitable due to the premise of the film and the way in which the film approaches it. The film would probably have worked better if it hadn't shown the zodiac in person but had focused on the investigation and had taken a different path as the final act.

And the investigation in this film is pretty weak too. Neither exciting and tense nor even remotely smart, the film repeatedly makes claims without backing them up. The film shows that the unsolved cipher is deciphered by the characters and the name of the killer is found out, but this name is not revealed. It probably doesn't do that because it doesn't just want to claim a real suspect is the killer and doesn't want to suspect someone or come up with someone new. The way and who cracks the cipher is also very convenient.

Without going into it further and getting lost in details about the investigation or the Zodiac himself, it can be said that the whole approach to the killer and the investigation is very misguided.

But what speaks for the film is that it is well paced and absolutely not boring. On the contrary, the stupidity of the film makes it pretty entertaining.

"Awakening the Zodiac" is very weak, if not very bad, but something else might be impossible with a film of this type. There is also the question of who needs another film about the killer after Fincher's "Zodiac". That film covered almost all of the information from back then, of course it didn't address every suspect, but that has its reasons and its purpose. In addition, there are no major new events or discoveries that justify another film. There is simply nothing new to tell and a film that tells the same thing will never do it with the attention to detail, class, budget and precision of Fincher's film. And a fictitious narration of the events will never work either, as it can neither provide a satisfactory answer nor continue the story in a meaningful and logical way.

Not terrible, but doomed. Weak characters, bad plot and mediocre acitng make "Awakening the Zodiac" a film that you can watch, but then you should rather watch Fincher's masterpiece or one of the countless documentaries, read Graysmith's book or do your own research.

2017

So yeah, I knew this was gonna be bad because honestly, the premise is pretty dumb. But the film wasn't the disaster I expected. But it was a long way from being good.

The acting is rather weak. Shane West and Leslie Bibb are quite over the top every now and then, Matt Craven is alright and the guy who plays the zodiac pretty rather weak. The characters, especially the couple, are rather annoying and especially Zoe is dumber than she would have needed to be. Just like "Zodiac" from 2007, this film also tries to show the obsession with the investigation, the paranoia and the little descent into madness, but where Fincher's film was extremely believable and emotional this one is very ridiculous, implausible and forced.

And then there's the zodiac killer himself, oh the zodiac killer. The film says and shows that the zodiac filmed his murders back then, although there is no evidence to back that up or to even indicate that. I would accept it as a kind of creative freedom, but the film does not want to show a fictitious version of the real events. It just doesn't make too much sense that the Zodiac filmed his murders.

The film goes even further and shows the Zodiac. And not just in his Lake Berryessa outfit but his whole face in close ups. This is not only a terrible idea in and of itself, but worse executed. The killer looks laughable here and acts and talks exactly like that. Very unbelievable and a wrong decision, which still is inevitable due to the premise of the film and the way in which the film approaches it. The film would probably have worked better if it hadn't shown the zodiac in person but had focused on the investigation and had taken a different path as the final act.

And the investigation in this film is pretty weak too. Neither exciting and tense nor even remotely smart, the film repeatedly makes claims without backing them up. The film shows that the unsolved cipher is deciphered by the characters and the name of the killer is found out, but this name is not revealed. It probably doesn't do that because it doesn't just want to claim a real suspect is the killer and doesn't want to suspect someone or come up with someone new. The way and who cracks the cipher is also very convenient.

Without going into it further and getting lost in details about the investigation or the Zodiac himself, it can be said that the whole approach to the killer and the investigation is very misguided.

But what speaks for the film is that it is well paced and absolutely not boring. On the contrary, the stupidity of the film makes it pretty entertaining.

"Awakening the Zodiac" is very weak, if not very bad, but something else might be impossible with a film of this type. There is also the question of who needs another film about the killer after Fincher's "Zodiac". That film covered almost all of the information from back then, of course it didn't address every suspect, but that has its reasons and its purpose. In addition, there are no major new events or discoveries that justify another film. There is simply nothing new to tell and a film that tells the same thing will never do it with the attention to detail, class, budget and precision of Fincher's film. And a fictitious narration of the events will never work either, as it can neither provide a satisfactory answer nor continue the story in a meaningful and logical way.

Not terrible, but doomed. Weak characters, bad plot and mediocre acitng make "Awakening the Zodiac" a film that you can watch, but then you should rather watch Fincher's masterpiece or one of the countless documentaries, read Graysmith's book or do your own research.