Absolutely loathe people like that, no matter how much evidence they get contrary to their beliefs they will never relen
-
The-Demon — 9 years ago(October 13, 2016 06:29 AM)
I didn't say read the book. I said you act like you know this case inside and out and don't even know the main suspects name. I knew about Zodiac since 2002 and didn't read the book until 2011. I had already seen the movie and knew from various account the author lies in his book.
I didn't have to read the book to know it but I did have to know the main facts about the case like the main suspects name which is on every single zodiac website regardless of how different websites view him. -
ophion1031 — 9 years ago(December 12, 2016 01:09 AM)
The film is great and surprisingly more accurate than I expected, but I wish it would have shown more suspects that were investigated rather than focus on Allen. I do think there is a good chance Allen did do the first three attacks, but it would have been cool to see more of Rick Marshall and to see Larry Kane and Fred Manalli. Well, actually, Kane was still alive when the movie was made so scratch that idea.
-
InjunNose — 9 years ago(December 15, 2016 10:54 PM)
I think the film is great
as a film
. Unfortunately, the subject matter being what it is, people inevitably mistake
Zodiac
for an accurate version of events. But yes, Graysmith is a truly execrable human being: he saw an opportunity (his
very
marginal relation to the Zodiac case as it was unfolding), and has been lying his sorry ass off for decades.