Outline of Zodiac

Outline for Presentation on “ZODIAC”

I.          Zodiac

           

Zodiac, is a film that dates back to the 1960’s when the real life crimes of the Zodiac was in progress. The Protagonist Robert Graysmith (played by Jake Gyllenhaal) works as a cartoonist for the San Francisco Chronicle when the first cipher from the Zodiac arrives. From that moment on Graysmiths life becomes so wrapped around the Zodiac, that in the end he looses himself and the people around him. After all Graysmith goes through he never does find out who the killer is and for the rest of his life he is stuck in thought of who it might be.   

           

II.         Classic Film Noir of Zodiac

1. All of the detective figures throughout the film are very prominent, in that they all want to know who the killer is. Also in the film you are able to see the old time detective figure, you know the one what wears the fedora and trench coat, with a gun in his holster. But on the other hand we see a new wave of detectives that are dressed as average Joe’s.

2. Also with in Zodiac every moment leads you guessing, either it is a regular conversation between two people or a murder scene that you will never forget.

           

A) Zodiac says to the mother, “Before I kill you, I’m going to throw your baby out the window”. And then the film jumps to another scene.

3. Commonly in classic noir we see a lot of smart remarks and snappy comebacks between the characters within the film. Like when Walter Neff and Phyllis Dietrichson are talking about speed limits in the film Double Indemnity.

A) Graysmith is having a conversation with Narlow (chief of police). “I just want to help”. “What are you, some kind of Boy Scout?” “Eagle scout, actually…First class”.

4. One of the big things that relates to film noir, are all the murder’s that are taking place throughout the film. In the old period, it seemed as if no film would be complete with a murder, and this film has a whole lot of it going on.

A)    5 minutes in the film two teenagers were shot multiple times while sitting in a car.

B)    A young couple were stabbed to death while visiting a lake in Napa CA.

C)    The Zodiac shoots a taxi driver in the back of the head after he arrived at his destination.

5. Lastly, we see a lot of corruption within the police. While Graysmith is on he hunt for the zodiac, he is receiving clues from an inside source of where he can find certain thing that will lead him closer to Zodiac.  There is also a scene where they allow Graysmith into the evidence room to try and find some clues.

III.        From the Neo Noir side of things.

1. We see that the main detective figure is not really a detective at all, and yet he gets closer to the crimes than anyone else has.

2. There is no femme fatal in this film at all, not in a male or female form. Graysmith at times can be questionable for the role of the femme fatal because he shows traits of one. He puts his own self in danger without the help of anyone else. Which we see most femme fatal’s persuading someone to do.

3. In the end, Graysmith nor any of the other detectives in the film become a hero in the end. Usually we see in classic noir the hero gets their shinning moment but this time nobody does.

4. A drastic change we see from film noir is the fact that most of the murders are taking place outside of the city and are moved to more remote areas.

A)    The teenagers that where parked on a hill

B)    The mother whose car broke down on an old dark road

C)    The Taxi driver in the middle of the night on a dark lit street corner.

Quotes from Outside Sources

Source One:

Context:	Quote from the Source:	Significance:
In Roger Ebert’s critic of Zodiac, titled “Zodiac”, he says, “What makes this “Zodiac” authentic is the way is avoids chases, shootouts, grandstanding and false climaxes”.	Ebert, Roger. “Zodiac”. All Content. N.p. 23 Aug. 2007. Web. 19 Nov. 2013	I chose this quote because it shows all the elements that aren’t used from classic noir, yet the film stays so tight to the classic noir background.

Source Two:

Context:	Quote from the Source:	Significance:
To help sum up my thought about Garysmith loosing his personal life due to the Zodiac, Steve Biodrowski writes in his DVD review of Zodiac, “As years pass and the case drags on with little activity from the killer…only Graysmith keeps it going with his own amateur investigation, a quest that slowly eats away at his personal life as his wife is driven further away”.	Biodrowski, Steve. “DVD Review- Zodiac: 2- Disc Director’s Cut”. DVD review-Zodiac: 2- Disc Director’s cut. N.p., 10 Mar. 2009.Web. 19 Nov. 2013	Biodrowski is further backing up my thought of Graysmith loosing his life due to his involvement with the Zodiac killer. Thus relating this neo noir film back to the classic time period. Where we see most protagonists putting themselves in danger to solve the case.

Film Clip

Context:	The scene:	Significance:
Every now and then the Zodiac will send in letters to the Chronicle, and in them there is cipher that they must figure out in order to find out whom the killer is.	David Toschi is the actual detective assigned to the case, wearing the suspenders and bow tie like seen in classic noir. And Graysmith is the man across from him trying to get information and is not in typical detective attire.	This scene shows aspect of the classic detective look as well as the new detective look and the scene also shows corruption within the police system with Toschi giving out police information to a non-policeman.

http://www.imdb.com/video/screenplay/vi1524629785/

blog 7

In the story The Kidnapper Bell written by Jim Pascoe, he makes many remarks stating that the story is taking place in Los Angeles. Even within the first line he says "Change flows swiftly through L.A."(209). So its pretty obvious where the story is taking place but lets look deeper into the story and relate it to the L.A. scene. First the main character is at a bar in L.A. waiting on his date to show up, while there he starts classifying everyone that is in the bar. This is something typical for residents of L.A. to do, that why so to speck everyone that lives there has fake boobs, fake hair, or just a fake body. So him doing this is analyzing each person and putting them into groups. The next scene he has drugs in his pocket and slipped a date rape drug in her drink. Drugs is something big in the city of Los Angeles, its all about who has the better stuff at a cheaper price. Maybe this point isn't't valid due to the fact there are drugs everywhere so lets move on. When the female character leads him to the dead body, on page 211 he mentions how she drives past Chinatown, Chinatown is a famous site to see when in L.A so there is another land mark. Also in that scene it mentions how dark the streets are and this will lead to the suspense later to happen. Another huge popular old L.A scene is the Los Angeles river, most of this story takes place here and this is also where to two body lay. After the situation at the L.A river, he is sent on a quest to to try and find the dead girls sister. In terms he was led back to the river and while there he mentions all the Graffiti art that's drawn all over the cement walls. This is a big shout out to L.A, Graffiti is art and art is considered an act of expression, and people in L.A are very expressive and different in their own ways. So overall i think Jim Pascoe did a good job describing settle details of Los Angeles and letting the readers mind work harder to relate the story.

Furthermore, in the story City of Commerce written by Neal Pollack, it was harder for me to relate to L.A besides the obvious statement the main male character makes about L.A. For me i see this story taking place more in Las Vegas due the all the gambling going on. But that is also from a younger generations point of view. Ive seen a lot of old films like "Gangster squad" that there was a lot of gambling going on in the olden days. But back to the story, he mentions details about the freeways he takes while getting to the casino and when he pulls up to the casino he says what cars are there which is a status thing yet again. " i pulled the car into a spot in the back row, between a gleaming Cadillac SUV and an Oldsmobile that looked like it hadn't been washed since 1973" (232). Once again showing the judgement of Los Angeles. Another thing that stood out to me was the fact that the Russian man called him Dodger, because he was wearing a Dodger hat. This is relating that hes from L.A. because he's wearing the hat and the Dodgers are from L.A. as well.

Blog 6

Through reading this article “Space, time, and Subjectivity in Neo-Noir Cinema” by Jerold J. Abrams, it was nice to see how Noir was, is, and what it will be. Even though I have not seen any of the films mentioned in the article, it was enlightening to see the different forms of a protagonist or the detective, and different ways they are molded into their characters. In the article it says, “Neo-Noir, is likely to take place in vast open spaces as in the pestilential city of tradition” (8). It also says that at the end of the neo noir period, the scene started to move out from the big city like Los Angeles and into Mexico or open spaces to make the scene more dark and mysterious. Also in the old Noir time period the cityscape were very tightly fit and well organized, but as the new noir started to move in the surrounding city started to become more separated.  The description of the neo noir detective as it states in the article, “The self is the detective, the self is the villain, and all clues exist solely within his own mind”(9). This is stating that the detective figure is both the protagonist and antagonist, also throughout the whole film or novel he is fighting himself between the good and bad.

For neo noir time the detective almost always suffered from some case of amnesia, hallucinations, multiple personality, high-tech revealing of the future, or other alterations.  This is a defining characteristic of the detective figure and what they may go though in the film or novel. In the article, “Past neo noir is usually low-tech, contrasting it with a very high-tech future noir, and almost always theological” (10). An example of a film that amplifies this is Raiders of the lost ark. Some comparisons of this film that relates back to the old era of noir is the fact that Indiana Jones has a gun and wears a noir fedora, he also uses snappy language and has quick comebacks. Indiana is also on a quest looking for something in order to determine his faith. At the end of this film the scene of turning science into religion is apparent, “No longer is the dangerous box of light nuclear; now it’s an even more dangerous box of spiritual light, “’fire of god’” as Indiana puts it” (12). This concept goes for the same film Pulp Fiction directed by Quentin Tarantino, two men are sent to recover a briefcase that when opened gleams a golden light. Abrams believes that the figure of neo noir will be “Replaced by science and high technology” (13).  Like in the film blade running they use a certain testing on robots that consist of asking them questions which related back to the interviews that were used in classic noir. “so you get the basic idea: past noir is theological, and future noir is sci-fi”. He also says, “God and the devil are replaced by science and technology” (14).  Also mentioned in the article is the Tv series called the X-files, where aliens walk around like regular people wearing trench coats and fedoras. The aliens would also put humans on a space ship that looked like Los Angeles cityscape, which relates back to the old noir. In the present neo noir scene, the article says, “These films take place neither in the distant past nor the distant future” (16).  Films that resemble this type noir includes memento, the Bourne Identity, and Fightclub, and Faith on chaos. In both memento and Fightclub, “the detective must rely on clues from his own body to reveal truths about his mind” (17). Which means that the protagonist is being controlled by the inside of himself and mind is being guided by the mind. Also in fight club, the main character kills his alter ego in order to get the bad out of him as well as max in pie: Faith in Chaos. Overall Noir hasn’t changed much they are just using different objects to bring out the original traits of classic noir.   

Blog 5

Through reading “I love you too”; sexual Warfare and Homoeroticism in Billy Wilder’s Double Indemnity written by Brian Gallagher, I was able to gain some very helpful insight to film noir and other things between the novel and film that I have yet to notice. One scene within the movie that I never took in to consideration was the first scene when Walter showed up to the Dietrichson’s house in regards of insurance; the day was bright and sunny, bringing in a mood of happiness and peace. By the end of the film, in the last scene that the house appears in the sky is dark and the mood is mischiefs.  Also, the Dietrichson’s house is referred to as “The house of death”, helping that statement out is the description of the interior like, the blood red drapes, which is referring to the blood of a human and the people that have died within the family and the people that will. Also, I never really noticed how much greed had to do with the murder. Yes, there was a lot of sexual attraction between characters within the film and novel, but the underlying basis of the murder was money. After Phyllis has showed up to Walters apartment for the first time, and they have sexual intercourse they seemed to be shown on opposite sides of the couch at a distance from one another. “What reunites the pair, spatially and psychologically, is that other primal passion—greed” (Gallagher), sex is what initially brought them together but without the murder sex was just something to do to fulfill the sexual rahh they both had between them.

Overall, Walter was bound in the middle between lust and greed and brotherhood, and ultamently in the end he chose brotherhood. Just for the fact that Walter decided to go back to the office and confess after his shoot out with Phyllis, showed a lot of admiration he carried for Keyes. “Walter ruins his slim chance of escaping over the border to Mexico by spending several hours dictating this confession to Keys” (Gallagher).  Also in Gallagher’s article, the points out a few aspects that the viewer may not have noticed, like how Keys typically appeared on the right side of the screen as well as Phyllis, while Walter would stay to the left, this way both the two characters are fighting for Walter’s attention in a love triangle and Walter is the top point.  Gallagher also mentions Keyes was not much taller than Phyllis. Like Phyllis, from the first scene of Walter and Keyes together the two show attraction by Walter saying “I love you too”, and lighting his cigar. Furthermore, by reading this article I do notice that Keyes played a father role to Walter by looking out for him in certain circumstances like, when Norton stated to accuse Walter and also wanting Walter to quite the insurance business and become his assistant. Similarly, when in Walters office, Keyes just picks up his phone just like a father would and after the phone call Keys gave advice on woman and how you shouldn’t just trust anybody.

I believe that within the film, the story between Walter and Keyes was made into a bro-mance due to the fact that there were two male screen writers, and with writing a film a relationship was formed and the two men decide to bring forth their bound between Walter and Keys. Will still see this relationship this day in age between two friends, and how friendships should be stronger than any lust you may have over someone else, because after all it is guy code.    

Blog #4

During the title sequence, a man on crutches hobbles towards the camera. Explain the significance of the image. Who in the story does this man represent? Why would this be an appropriate image to show at the beginning of the film? How does this sequence anticipate later developments in the film?

In the first frame of the film a man appears to be walking on crutches, and he is shown as a silhouette figure. The man in the crutches represents the late Mr. Nirdlinger, yet that’s not all it represents. In the film and novel Nirdlinger in put on crutches because he breaks his leg due to a work incident. After he was put on crutches is when the murder takes play. To get away with the murder Walter had to impersonate Nirdlinger by getting on a train and falling off the end of it, thus dying and breaking his neck. Walter and Phyllis thought it would be smart for people to witness Nirdlinger getting on the train so that when people start questioning the murder, people will believe he was there on the train. Although, the scene shows the man on crutches doesn’t just represent Nirdlingers death, but it shows another man death as well.  The night of the murder Nirdlinger was wearing a navy blue suit, a hat, a pair of glasses, and crutches with a broken leg. On the same night Walter wore all the same clothes and even wrapped his leg up to impersonate Nirdlingers broken leg, that make a distinct characteristic. The role of Nirdlinger ends short due to him getting murdered, so his role in the film is him dying so to speak. By Walter putting on his clothes he is all and all taking Nirdlingers fate and doom. This shows that in the end Walter will die or have the fate of dead man. Even though the viewer won’t know that by just watching the beginning of the movies, they would have had to read the novel or by some other way. Through watching the movie the significance of the man walking on crutches is revealed and the viewer can relate what happens to Nirdlinger and Walter. Walter didn’t know what would happen when he impersonated Nirdlinger but essentially he put himself in the role of Nirdlinger and in terms caused his own death or pain.

A significant change between the novel and the film is the raised prominence of the character of Keyes in the film version. Critics have suggested that the novel is a story of two lovers whereas the film depicts a love triangle and that often Walter is being pulled back and forth between Phyllis and Keys. What evidence from the film supports these assertions?

When reading the novel the relationship between Walter and Keyes isn’t as prevalent as it is in the movie. In the novel Keyes is just Walters’s boss and the detective figure. Keyes doesn’t really pop around in Walters life and, he only went to Walter when he needed something. Walter in the novel showed love and affection towards Phyllis, until he tries to kill her. But, in the movie Keyes and Walter play a more intimate role towards each other. With Walter saying, “I love you too” a few times to Keyes and doing favors for him, like lighting his cigar when Keyes can never find a match. Keyes also goes to Walters’s apartment unannounced. Keyes seems to be more privileged then Phyllis was. Also in the film Walter appears at Phyllis house and shares a few words, after she shoots him in the arm, he then shoots her and kills her.  Although, when it came down to Keyes, Walter had respect for him, that even with a gunshot wound he went over to his office and confessed to the whole murder. The respect he had for Keyes was eminent. In the last scene of the movie Walter is trying to get away but by the time he reached the door he didn’t have enough strength to carry himself. Walter is on the floor and tries to light his cigarette, when he doesn’t have the strength to do it; Keyes gets down next to him to light his cigarette. This scene shows the true brotherhood these two men shared.

In the book Double Indenmity written by James M. Cain, the detective role isn’t quite prominent or does it stick like a sore thumb, at least to me it doesn’t. In the novel you have a few characters that assume the position as the detective, three to be exact. They all go in search for the truth and they all find the answer they were looking for or at least the truth. Both Keyes and Huff play male roles in the book and they both got answers, even if they liked the outcome or not. Another character that I look to as being a detective is Lola, Phyllis step daughter. She is the best investigator out of all of them; she actually goes out on the field to find the truth she was looking for.
The first man that undertakes the detective position is Keyes; he is a big time insurance agent that runs the show over at his business. After the murder of Mr. Nirdlinger, Keyes tries to put every fact and figure in his head together about what really happened. Keyes knows there is more truth behind the man being found in the train tracks. In the book Keyes starts to get close to cracking the case when he and Huff are talking in his office about the murder. “What do you mean, Keyes?” “He was never on the train”… “Somebody took his crutches and went on the train for him?” (66). through this whole scene Keyes is piecing the whole murder together and he is getting very close to the truth and Huff knows that. Norton and Huff also have people out watching Phyllis. Keyes was always there trying to find out more and more of the story, even though in the end the murder was revealed to him. ‘Keyes?”… “I’m listening boy.” “I killed Nirdlinger” (101). Keyes tried to get down to the bottom of the case and all and all he did, he received the answers he was looking for.
In Huffs case he was a detective too. After Lola told him more information about Phyllis, he started to investigate who this woman really was. He knew that Phyllis was sneaking out with Lola’s ex-lover. He also took notice that Phyllis didn’t seem the slightest upset when her Husband was murdered; she showed no emotion at all. In the end he found out she was a snake and she had been playing him this whole time. Ultimately, he tried to put an end to her before she did him.
Lastly Lola, She really didn’t start playing a big role in the novel until the second half of the book, but after her father died she had a lot to say. She admitted to following Phyllis everywhere and she would even talk to the same people that Phyllis talked too. Lola went to the extent of listening in a conversation between her ex-lover Sachetti, and knowing that Phyllis went looking for dresses to wear to the funeral a week before he actually died. Lola is ready to expose all Phyllis secrets when she says, “ I’ll tell them to ask her why she was down in a boulevard store, a week before my father dies, pricing black dresses” (84).  Lola truly had the inside scoop on Phyllis and everything she did, and in the end she knew that Phyllis killed her father and it was confirmed when Huff gave his confession.
In this novel it was tough for me to figure out whom the detective figure really was and if that figure always has to be a guy. Keyes searched for answers and found them within Huff. Huff searched for answers and found them by getting shot by Phyllis. In conclusion, Lola looked for the answers too. So all and all I don’t know who the main detective was, but I’m sure it has to be one of the three.

Blog #2

In the novel Double Indemnity written by James Cain, the reader is able to recognize many elements that relate back to film noir. From the sneaky murder situation of a good stand up insurance seller, to a deranged housewife that wants a lot then just staying at home. The novel takes a few unexpected twists, but overall the signs always point back to the femme fatal character of Phyllis Nirdlinger, she is what Keyes would call, an “Irrawaddy Cobra”. Phyllis will stop at nothing until she achieves all her desires.

In Raymond Bonde and Etienne Chavments article, “Towards a Definition of film Noir”, they state “ Finally, there is ambiguity surrounding the woman: the femme fatale who is fatal to herself. Frustrated and deviant, half predator, half prey, detached yet ensnared, she falls victim to her own traps… This new type of woman, manipulative and hard bitten as her environment, ready to trade shots with anyone… We are a long way from the chaste heroines of the traditional western or historical drama.” The quote relates to Phyllis in every way possible, she will murder or find someone to do it for her by using her sex appeal, until she gets what she wants or moves on to the next killing. She is very persuasive and conniving, she has no heart or sympathy for anyone other than herself. Back in the 1950’s woman were looked at to be humble and domestic creatures, so for a role of a woman to be mischievous and a down right murderer was a powerful role to possess.

To be trapped in a woman’s spell can be both negative and positive. In the case of Walter Huff, he got caught in the wrong web of deceit. Also in Raymond Bonde and Etienne Chavments article, “Towards a Definition of film Noir”, they say “As for the ambiguous protagonist, he is often more mature, almost old and not too handsome… He is also an inglorious victim who may suffer, before the happy ending, appalling abuse… At times, he is a passive hero who allows himself to be dragged across the line into the gray area between legal and criminal behavior.”  Mr. Huff falls victim to this quote in the fact that he went against his own insurance company for a woman that cast as spell on him and for the money.  The way he went about the murder had an experienced ring to it, almost as if he has done it before.  After the murder he realizes that he hates Phyllis for what she had made him do, and all and all resenting himself.

Furthermore, from the website Filmsite, titled “Primary Characteristics and Conventions of Film Noir: Themes and styles” says, “The females in film noir are either of two types- dutiful, reliable, trustworthy and loving woman; or femme fatales- mysterious, duplications, double-crossing, gorgeous, unloving, predatory, tough-sweet, unreliable, irresponsible, manipulative and desperate woman.  The obvious femme fatal character was Phyllis Nirdlinger, she put out a good front to Mr.Huff so that he would kill her husband and with no remorse he was gone. The female that was reliable and loving was that of Miss Lola Nirdlinging, Phyllis’s stepdaughter, she was innocent and youthful and stuck between the middle of all the deceptions.