Movies

A New Zodiac Killer Documentary Challenges Everything We Think We Know About True Crime

BBG News

Director Charlie Shackleton thought he could have his cake and eat it too. 

For quite some time, Shackleton has been mulling over the concept of creating a documentary focusing on the enigmatic and iconic Zodiac Killer. This elusive serial killer terrorized the Bay Area in the late 1960s, and has remained a captivating subject of popular interest ever since. From David Fincher’s 2007 thriller starring Jake Gyllenhaal to the Netflix documentary This Is the Zodiac Speaking released last year, the killer continues to be a staple in pop-culture intrigue.

In a recent chat, I confessed, “My feelings towards true crime are somewhat complex – a mix of fascination and repulsion.” It struck me as a captivating subject that could personally intrigue me, yet also hold broad appeal in the market.

In a shift from essays on teen movies and horror films, such as “Beyond Clueless” and “Fear Itself”, respectively, Shackleton discovered his unique perspective when he encountered the book “The Zodiac Killer Cover-Up: The Silenced Badge”, published in 2012 by Lyndon Lafferty, a former California Highway Patrolman. This book focuses on a suspect named George Russell Tucker and details how Lafferty believed his attempts to bring Tucker to justice were hindered. Regrettably, Shackleton was unable to obtain the rights to “The Zodiac Killer Cover-Up” from Lafferty’s family.

Rather than the original plan, Shackleton initiated a documentary titled “Zodiac Killer Project,” which debuted at the Sundance Film Festival on January 27. This film is a hypothetical depiction of what Shackleton would have created if he had obtained the rights and serves as an analysis of the true crime genre, highlighting how filmmakers can manipulate their audiences in such roles. Shackleton, with his endearing British accent and dry wit that borders on self-deprecation, shares his imagined approach to Lafferty’s story. Instead of live action scenes, the screen primarily displays static shots of California locations, mostly empty of people.

Shackleton explains how his film might have followed typical patterns found in true crime documentaries, such as utilizing “music with a country tone yet carrying a somber undertone” in the opening sequence, while showcasing layers of landscapes and mysterious men in the background. He references series like “The Jinx” and “Making a Murderer“. Shackleton further explains terms like “evocative B-roll,” which refers to generic footage like burning cigarettes or blurry, ominous figures that heighten suspense.

Shackleton clarifies, “I’ve always been aware of the numerous moral flaws in these matters. However, it wasn’t until I delved deeper, or perhaps got more involved, that I started addressing those ethical issues more directly.

The concept for what eventually developed as the Zodiac Killer Project originated from casual discussions Shackleton had with friends, similar to conversations you might have at a pub. Although he was legally prohibited from making a movie based on Lafferty’s book, he found himself unable to let go of this intriguing idea.

He initially considered retelling a tale he had shared numerous times with friends, but realized he was bound by the limitation of not being able to alter the book or include any of its content. With the story stripped bare, all that remained were the form and emotions he believed readers would experience if only they could experience it themselves. This predicament led him to the concept of vacant images representing locations. Since he couldn’t relate the full narrative, what was left was a void. Some might find this tedious, but Shackleton manages to make the lack of action strangely captivating, inviting readers to imaginatively fill in the gaps with his insightful and frequently humorous depictions of potential events.

However, the path that the Zodiac Killer Project eventually followed offers an intriguing parallel to Shackleton’s self-criticism for potential ethical lapses he might have committed. He openly admits that there’s a measure of overly casual “flippancy” in his discussions about what he may have done, and doubts how far he would have truly strayed in terms of sensationalist liberties taken. Yet, in a candid admission of hypocrisy, Shackleton mentions that he fails to reveal Lafferty’s Zodiac suspect’s house because it wasn’t sufficiently spooky, given the description provided in the text. In contrast, an unrelated building that Shackleton does show is ominously hidden by trees, unlike its actual counterpart.

He notes that, since you produce documentaries, you tend to develop a keen sense of spotting deceptions in other documentaries because you’re always analyzing how they were created. It intrigued him to extend this level of scrutiny to the audience, so they could examine his decisions with the same critical eye he uses for others.

Shackleton, on the other hand, avoided criticizing or shaming viewers who are drawn to true crime, understanding that they might appreciate graphic and disturbing stories. Instead, he contends that true crime has adopted this very narrative, both condemning it and providing all the captivating elements of the genre. In his Zodiac Killer Project, he particularly criticizes the Jeffrey Dahmer segment in Ryan Murphy’s popular and controversial Monster franchise, demonstrating how the series presents numerous hours of Evan Peters portraying Dahmer performing heinous acts, yet simultaneously advocates for empathy towards Dahmer’s victims.

He indicates that any potential worth the analysis once held is now entirely consumed by the true crime industry, and instead, Shackleton aims to scrutinize the true crime industry itself.

He further points out that another crucial aspect to consider is the matter of supply. “Streamers and others in the industry frequently argue, ‘This is what viewers desire; there’s a massive demand for this content, so we simply produce it.’ However, they are also generating such an abundance of content that sometimes all you find on Netflix is whatever happens to be available.

Shackleton acknowledges that he doesn’t disregard all true crime documentaries. When asked for a recommendation, he singles out Errol Morris’ 1988 film, “The Thin Blue Line,” which explores the wrongful conviction of Randall Dale Adams for the murder of a police officer, as an example of one that does the genre well. He states, “It still stands up perfectly.” Shackleton notes that while some techniques used in the film are now considered cliches, at the time they were not. However, he finds it challenging to name a recent true crime documentary that he believes maintains a high ethical standard.

Could it be that the Zodiac Killer Project has dampened Shackleton’s enthusiasm for creating his own genuine true-crime documentary? Very possibly.

Shackleton expressed that his belief in being able to explore that particular genre while creating something intriguing has dwindled over the years. He didn’t find it formulaic initially, but lately, especially within the past couple of years based on his observations of content on streaming platforms, he feels less certain that he could strike a balance and still achieve success.

Read More

2025-01-28 01:06

Previous post Boyzone Reunited Without Mikey: The Toxic Fallout and Mikey’s Mysterious Exit
Next post Guitarist Steuart Smith retiring from the Eagles after Parkinsonism diagnosis