MovieChat Forums > Ulli Lommel's Zodiac Killer (2007) Discussion > Don't see this movie!

Don't see this movie!

posted 19 years ago by sfilojon
25 replies | jump to latest

This is easily the worst movie i have EVER seen. I'm not exaggerating, I told the guy at Blockbuster that they should take it off the shelves. I felt like I was getting dumber watching it. The only thing interesting about this movie is the box. On the box it says "from the director of the boogeyman" so I figured...eh whatever, if this was made recently I'm sure the directing at least won't be TOO bad :-\, but after I saw the movie and looked at what "boogeyman" they were talking about, it's some nonsense from the early 1980's that he made. Great way to rope in unsuspecting viewers.

ANYWAY, I think that they just liked the name "Zodiac Killer", and didn't bother to research any of the actual Zodiac's crimes or his MO, or even the years that he was active. All of the crimes they talk about have nothing to do with the original Zodiac and take place years after the actual Zodiac's crimes did (they talk about him killing people in '74, '75, etc...the actual Zodiac killed in 68,69, and 70). They also compare the Zodiac to "Vampire of Dusseldorf" Fritz Haarman throughout the movie and talk to Fritz's "son" quite often. The Zodiac and Haarman were nothing alike, and it makes more sense to compare him to BTK who also shot people, not a man who killed people by chewing through their necks. None of the Haarman facts are correct either, just a bunch of jumbled nonsense. His son even says "Don't forget, his name was Fritz Haarman with 2 t's"...His actual name just has one! I think that the writer/director simply typed in a google search for serial killers and the quickest ones that came up were the Zodiac Killer and Fritz Haarman. "Ooh those sound like cool names, let's make a movie about them without doing any outside research! great idea!"

Perhaps my favorite inconsistency in this movie is the way that the experts as well as the young killer describe suffering from DSM-IV and getting cured of it. "I was also diagnosed with DSM-IV and have since recovered", etc. For those of you who don't know, DSM-IV is the psychological manual for mental disorders. If anybody suffers from the book itself then they must have some SERIOUS problems! Haha.

Anyway, my point is that this goes on the bottom of my top 5 worst movies of all time list, and it's rare that a movie ever reaches that point. But, if you are interested in watching a totally non-fact based story about serial killers that happens to be nothing more than boring, full of inexperienced actors, and not completely rational, I'd say check out this movie.

...Oh, and I liked how the killer "tear gassed" a few of his victims with dry ice. Nice touch...

[–] thatguy_78757 18 years ago

One of the WORST movies I've EVER seen:

I thought this was a low budget student film or by a first time director- a LOT could be forgiven in THAT case...

but no, this director has a LOT of experience
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0518579/

it had an interesting box cover but it was made on video, confusing, BAD acting, BAD sound (did they use the camcorders built in mike?)... has almost NOTHING to do with the original Zodiac case...

some young kid starts copying the zodiac crimes (although they have NOTHING in common) then starts buying Zodiac memorabilia from a zodiac author. Surprise- the Author IS the Zodiac killer ( if he was never caught HOW does the author know about Zodiacs childhood?)

Its a 2005 movie- why did that kid have a 1989 haircut?

WARNING to self- remember this if you ever get to make a movie! Makes Boondock Saints look good!

[–] wave_surfer87 18 years ago

this directors movies seem to take real killers names and make a mess of the story, making things up that have nothing to do with the actual killer... go read user reviews for BTK killer.. they say the same things that the ones for this movie do "worst movie Ive ever seen" those sorts of things... that was a terrible movie... I Havent seen this one but after seeing BTK killer... I have no desire to waste my time with this directors "film"

[–] seifer_linx 18 years ago

Okay, I have seen a lot of bad movies in my life, but I can testify in a court of law none of them have even come close to the level of crap that this movie is. Just like the thread starter, I picked this film up for 3 dollars at a local dvd store. Cover looked kinda cool and from the director of the boogyman (not a good film but watchable) and opening title sequence music by "Pink", she wouldn't put her name on something bad right? So I figured "why not, its 3 dollars". I was alone in my room and put this abomination in my dvd player. After the first five minutes I had to turn it off (really 2 minutes minus the opening credits sequence with Pink's garbage music, still the best part of the movie). I felt embarassed that I even owned this thing and robbed that I actually payed someone to own it. I warn all of you out there if you ever and I mean EVER see a film on the cheap dvd rack and there are no screenshots from the film on the back cover, put it down and walk away, I don't care if its a quarter. You'll thank me.

[–] jeremy-533 18 years ago

Seriously. Ulli Lommel has succeded in making the absolute WORST movies about real murder cases. None of them are worth your time. None of them have cohesive stories. They all seem to be filled with random images - slaughterhouses, corpses, internal organs, etc - with no purpose other than to extend the running time of the movie.

Here's something you can count on: If there's a mainstream movie coming out about a actual murder case (Zodiac, Black Dahlia) or if there's a big news story about a killer who has been caught (BTK, Green River Killer, Pickton) you can bet that Ulli Lommel will quickly release low-end product to suck up your money.

DO NOT BE FOOLED. If you see this text: "From the director of The Bogeyman" and "Ulli Lommel's [insert killer title here], it means "STAY AWAY FROM THIS MOVIE".

If ever there was a guy who shouldn't be allowed to make movies, it's Ulli Lommel. I'd seriously consider paying you not to see his movies.

[–] BillMoseleyMan 18 years ago

Good question: Ulli Lommel vs. Uwe Boll? Who would you prefer not to see a film from?

[–] AJLe 17 years ago

I know there are a zillion things wrong with the movie: The fact that the writer didn't even begin to research the real Zodiac killings (Zodiac randomly chopped up, decapitated, and dismembered his victims...in LA no less? News to me), the terrible, sub-porn acting, the awful dialogue, etc. - but that big "surprise twist" where the author of the book turns out to be the real Zodiac?

Is there anybody above the age of 4 who did NOT see that coming in the first five minutes of the movie? I mean, as soon as they establish the character, in the same 60's horn-rimmed glasses, as the know-it-all Zodiac expert, I'm like "Oh I get it, this guy is the real Zodiac, and ends up killing the copycat at the end of the movie, huh?" - FIVE MINUTES IN.

And then, just in case the audience hadn't gotten their "subtle" storytelling, they have the author on the interview show, and the guy asks him "Oh, so that would make the Zodiac, oh, about your age today, right?". Friday the 13th Part 5 was more subtle in their big "surprise finish" than this movie was.

This movie was a modern-day Manos: Hands of Fate, just without the unintentional camp and MST soundtrack. In fact, this movie was worse than most of the movies MST3K covered. Truly horrible - avoid at all costs.

[–] hollandprojects 17 years ago

I have seen what I consider to be bad movies.
That is completely and totally understandable.
Somebody might not agree with whatever the premise or motivation behind the film might be, but at the very least, it was entertaining.
I just expect to be entertained. Is that too much to ask for?

I compare this film to a football game.
A good game is a close game and goes into overtime, the players are exhausted, etc.
A bad game is where the score is 81-0 or something really lopsided.
This film is comparable to witnessing a football game where neither team even tries, they make every mistake in the book and on ocassion, throw the ball the wrong way.

This "film" does not even qualify as a bad movie in my book.

I paid for a roller-coaster ride and was given a ride on the merry go round.

How this film qualifies as a mentionable movie and made it to the public viewing arena, I will never know.