edited by Jonathan Doyle

Cloverfield [BLU-RAY] (Paramount Home Entertainment, 6.3.2008) Disguised under deliberately goofy, yet deliciously edible-sounding, aliases such as Cheese and Slusho, Matt Reeves' Cloverfield was produced and rushed into theaters under an equally appetizing shroud of secrecy. From last year's incredibly elusive Super Bowl ad to the film's viral marketing campaign, Cloverfield had everybody scratching their heads and drooling in anticipation. Aside from the as-yet untitled title and the Blair Witch-ian visual style, the film's biggest appeal was the enigmatic creature who was last (un)seen hurling the decapitated head of the Statue of Liberty onto the crowded streets of New York City. All we knew about the mysterious beast was that it was big and angry. Now that the highy-anticipated project has come and gone, one question has fortunately been answered: Cloverfield was a major success. (continued)

Upcoming

July 2

Hancock

July 3

The Whackness

July 4

Diminished Capacity

Gonzo: The Life and Work of Hunter S. Thompson

Holding Trevor

Kabluey

We are Together

July 9

Full Battle Rattle

July 11

A Man Named Pearl

August

Eight Miles High

Garden Party

Harold

Hellboy II: The Golden Army

Journey to the Center of the Earth

Meet Dave

Roman Polanski: Wanted and Desired

The Stone Angel

July 18

A Very British Gangster

Before I Forget

The Dark Knight

The Doorman

Felon

Lou Reed's Berlin

Transsiberian

July 22

Two Tickets to Paradise

July 23

Boy A

Talkign to "Zodiac's" Graysmith

email this story
read comments (6)
post a comment

Termite art -- that 's the best term I've heard so far (taken from a recent review by the Village Voice's Nathan Lee) that summarizes the aesthetic essence of Zodiac. And when you talk to Robert Graysmith, the author of the two Zodiac books ("Zodiac" and "Zodiac Unmasked") that served as the basis of "Jamie" Vanderbilt's script, you get the idea that he's a kind of termite himself -- a relentless eater and chomper of information.

Graysmith is the main character in the film (wth his name used and everything), and he's played by Jake Gyllenhaal in exactly this mold -- a guy who can't stop absorbing and gathering data. Graysmith sure as hell was that guy when he was on the Zodiac set and watching Fincher make the film. He wrote a book about it calling "Shooting Zodiac" (Berkeley Books) but he's ambivalent about having it published, for some reason. He's guessing, I suppose, that the attention given to the film over the next few weeks will surge sales of his two "Zodiac" books and his editor doesn't want a third Graysmith/"Zodiac" book confusing anyone.

The book will probably come out concurrent with the Zodiac DVD, which is going to be a mother in terms of extras and docs. The DVD's production budget, Graysmith says, is around $1.5 million.

I mentioned my opinion that the end of the film should perhaps have ended like Vanderbilt's screenplay did, with "Graysmith"/Gyllenhaal delivering an eight- or nine-page soliloquy that reviews all the persuasive evidence in support of Graysmtih's belief that Arthur Leigh Allen was the Zodiac slayer.

On the page, this scene works as a kind of crescendo-climax. It's not entirely satisfying but it gives a semblance of half-assed completion and finality, even if Allen was never arrested for the killings. Fincher's chose, however, not to try and deliver any kind of ending along these lines, even an intellectual one. Graysmith says that Fincher told Vanderbilt at one point, "Jamie, we're not trying to convince the audience [of Allen's guilt]...,that's not what the movie's about."

"We're satisfied that it was Allen," Graysmith says. "There was all kinds of evidence...footprints in the garden...I think he was deliberately pitting the police departments against each other...I think it's this guy."

Graysmith will be at Thursday night's Zodiac premiere on the Paramount lot, at which time I hope to take a picture or two. The above jpeg was provided, believe it or not, by his publicist.

I like this riff on the film by Entertainment Weekly's Owen Gleiberman:

"Explaining a mystery is an act of reassurance. It makes us feel that chaos has been defeated, and the forces of order restored. Zodiac, David Fincher's vastly intricate and dazzling drama about the hunt for the serial killer who terrorized the San Francisco Bay Area starting in 1969, offers no such soothing closure, and that's part of what's haunting about it. It spins your head in a new way, luring you into a vortex and then deeper still, fascinating us as much for what we don't know as what we do."

Roly-poly cancer patient<< previous | next >>Arkin in "Get Smart"

Posted by Jeffrey Wells on February 28, 2007 at 01:27 PM

comment #1

jjgittes says ...

The term "termite art" of course originally comes from a Manny Farber essay on the principles of the artist during the creation process.

Just giving the credit where it's due.

Posted by jjgittes at February 28, 2007 03:47 PM

comment #2

breadlymoore says ...

All this "The film has no conclusion" is just crap.

The Zodiac killer was never caught, but "Zodiac" pretty much names the killer by the end. Truth or not, the film points the figner at a single guy by the time the credits roll.

If it was studio demand or Fincher flaking, the truth is, "Zodiac" has an ending/conclusion/resolution. A pretty obvious one too.

Posted by breadlymoore at February 28, 2007 03:56 PM

comment #3

snackyx says ...

Why did I know that if Wells is over the moon for this film that Poland would dump on it? Do some things in the universe never change?

Posted by snackyx at February 28, 2007 04:03 PM

comment #4

jeffmcm says ...

Didn't Manny Farber intend for the term to be used disparagingly?

Posted by jeffmcm at February 28, 2007 04:05 PM

comment #5

jjgittes says ...

No, the "terminite" art principle is in relation to "white elephant Art" (lumbering, pretentious).

He was using it to suggest the artist who works in relation to minute detail and creates the Art on his own terms, away from anyone watching and "burrows' into the material......it more famously was used by him to suggest the worthiness of B films and/or things previously considered pulp material.

Posted by jjgittes at February 28, 2007 04:14 PM

comment #6