Awakening the Zodiac

audience Reviews

, 33% Audience Score
  • Rating: 1 out of 5 stars
    Lazy writing and dumb character choices. It had ok production quality but it had cheesy writing. Very predictable and the script was weak. For having a shorter run time of an 1 hour 40 minutes, it felt like a drag to watch.
  • Rating: 5 out of 5 stars
    Wow, I liked this movie and Leslie Bibb as Zoe did a fantastic job of being a person with challenges but rising up to meet them and not playing the stereotypical "victim" in dark dramas, scary, horror movies. I love when an actor really takes on their part and gives it up so I go "WOW they are all in to the part". Thanks. Sure Zoe was scared and had moments reflective of that emotional state. Yet, I loved that Zoe had backbone and showed us. I don't want to give away too many moments though. On the other end of the spectrum, McHattie was excellent as Zodiac. I was surprised in part in who died, who didn't and how. The movie was creative in using events not as recent as the original events. A fresher take on rather well-told real-life events. Give us a different take, spin if going to use more or less the same bike (story). The cast was a good, well acted, interesting story. Watch it and decide for yourself! I love the title!
  • Rating: 3 out of 5 stars
    Disappointing overall as the movie had potential from a legendary story about the Zodiac in San Francisco in the 60's then fast-forwarded to today as they tried to solve this crime. The ending didn't make sense, but I guess left it open for more future stories
  • Rating: 4 out of 5 stars
    It's not the greatest movie in the world, but it sure scared me!
  • Rating: 0.5 out of 5 stars
    This movie is horrible and my life is now worse for having seen it.
  • Rating: 3 out of 5 stars
    was ok if I remember correctly
  • Rating: 4 out of 5 stars
    Not a terrible movie. The acting isn't terrible, and the plot wasn't too bad. The plot was somewhat predictable, but its a zodiac movie, so that is bound to be the case. All in all, it's better than most "thrillers" being pumped out by hollywood at the moment.
  • Rating: 1.5 out of 5 stars
    Weak, unengaging, implausible thriller. Over 40 years since the infamous Zodiac killer terrorised inhabitants of San Francisco and surrounds, three people make an amazing discovery. They stumble across homemade films made by the Zodiac Killer, films of some of his murders. In an attempt to claim a large reward, rather than alert the police, they try to track down the killer themselves. This puts them in danger. Pretty lame B-grade (at best) thriller. When I read the film summary I figured the movie was set in the 1960s, when the Zodiac Killer was at the peak of his infamy, making the danger more tangible. Having seen the excellent David Fincher-directed 2007 movie, Zodiac, I thought this may be something along those lines. When I discovered it was actually set in 2017, my heart sank. Even if the killer is still alive, he's in their late-60s, at least, so what kind of thriller is this going to be? A dull, implausible, contrived one, I thought, and I was right. Unoriginal, filled with every thriller/horror cliché, implausible, predictable, unengaging and quite dull. The Zodiac element was just a ploy to suck viewers in. Avoid.
  • Rating: 4 out of 5 stars
    Excellent - very scary and - very good looking - leads! Also, a very scary story!