Zodiac / Rebel Small Batch Reserve Bourbon

0:00 In 2007, director David Fincher and star Jake Gyllenhaal gave the world an excruciating examination into the unsolved Zodiac murders. In 2024, we try a new release from one of our favorite brands. The film is. Zodiac the whiskey is Rebel Small Batch Reserve. And we'll review them both. This is the Film and Whiskey podcast. Welcome to the Film and Whiskey podcast, where each week we review a classic movie and a glass of whiskey. I'm Bob Book.

0:51 I'm Brad G. And this week we are looking at David Fincher's 2007 masterpiece Question Mark Zodiac. Now, Brad, we literally just got on the horn with each other. And usually when we start, you know, our pre recording spiel with each other, catching up on life or whatever, we make vague mention of our general thoughts on the movie or where we might want to take the episode. No such luck today. We just said screw it, let's jump on and see what happens. And it's. An. Unsolved mystery. Listen, dude, I am waiting with bated breath to hear what you thought of the movie because you've never seen it before. I've been telling you for years to watch it. I've also been telling you maybe I should set expectations for you when you watch it.

1:36 I have my reasons for that. But even before we dive into Brad's initial thoughts on the movie, I just want to make note of how rare an occurrence it is for Bob to come in completely blind to an episode. The way I am right now, this is new territory. Yeah, and and like, the perfect movie to match that with. Like this is truly an opportunity to surprise you with my deep, heavy breathing. Well, yeah, listen man, I I edit the episodes. I know all about your heavy breathing and mine I take. I basically gasp between every every sentence. And I think that once again, that's appropriate for the movie that we're reviewing today. So folks, welcome into the podcast. If this is your first time joining us, welcome into film in Whiskey.

2:21 This season. What we're doing is we're looking at films from the last 20 years and we're asking the question, does this film deserve to be considered a modern classic? Now, Bob, I have to point out the fact we did not do that last week. Yes, we have some Skyfall. We have some housekeeping to do today because yes, we forgot to actually answer the question. Does Skyfall belong in the conversation of modern classics? I vote yes. Where do you vote? I vote I'm going to abstain. I think. I think I need to see the movie. I, I need to see a little more from this season to see, you know what my gauge of a modern classic is. Because as it stands right now, I think I would lean no. But you know, if, if there's a lot of average movies from here on out, I I, I could be convinced that Skyfall is a modern map.

3:17 And I don't think that we only need to consider this pool of movies either, you know, we've watched a ton of movies from this century or, you know, since 2005, wherever we're starting this endeavor that yes, I would consider No Country for Old Men and There Will Be Blood and whatever, a modern classic. So I think even among that group, I vote yes for Skyfall. I vote no, all right? It's not a modern classic. All right, so let's talk about modern classics. We've identified this list of 32 movies that we're looking at this season by whether or not they met the criteria for four categories. Is it in the IMDb top 250? Is it in the letterbox top 250? Did it make $100 million?

3:58 Was it nominated for Best Picture? And as we kind of went down the list of movies that hit all four movies that hit three, of the four movies that only hit two or one, we kind of got to the point where we had a bigger pool of movies that only checked like one or two boxes. And then Brad and I kind of just drafted them amongst each other. And this was one that I wanted to make sure made it in because when this movie came out, Brad, it was a huge flop. It did not make very much money at the box office at all and it got kind of screwed on awards contention, and we'll get into that later. But this was one that Bob kind of shoehorned in and Brad, you'll have yours that you shoot shoehorn in as well. This was definitely a Bob book pick. Yeah, and it, it feels like a Bob book. Pick it.

4:42 It feels like a film that you would be quite enamoured with. Oh, why do you say that? Because I'm a serial killer. I I you're making the connections, Bob, not me. I'm just speculating if I were to talk to anybody about it. Well, let's do this. I would like to hear what connections you find from me to this movie. But in order to do that, let's get a sense of what the movie is, and let's get into our first segment of the day, which we call Brad explains. Brad's going to give us the movie plots with only 60 seconds taken on the clock, so let's go ahead and do your take with this little segment that we call, Brad explains. Brad Explains is the part of the show where Brad breaks down the plot of the film that he has just seen, often for the first time.

5:30 Brad, this was your first time with Zodiac, correct? It sure was. And you watched it. I have to say I'm, I'm impressed. You watched it in one sitting starting at about 9:30 in the morning. So this was like, you know, pour yourself a cup of coffee, start your morning off right with a David Fincher meticulous investigation movie. I'm, I'm very impressed. I do think this will be one of the easier, Brad explains for the season. But I'm giving you, as always, 60 seconds. Spoil this movie for us, Brad, and then we'll talk about it some more. One minute and go. Zodiac is a film about the Zodiac Killer of the 1960s and 70s. It follows the journey of a San Francisco chronicler I believe is the newspaper.

6:15 The Chronicle, yeah. The The Chronicle, I apologize. A cartoonist who works for the Chronicle that becomes obsessed with finding the killer in the late 70s through the 80s and eventually writes a book on it. Fun fact, they never actually find the Zodiac Killer even though everybody's pretty sure that they know who who done it. Boom, Zodiac, Zodiac. Now Brad, I have already sensing some thoughts from you. I'll let you tease them out yourself. But I do want to hear, you know, you said this seems like a Bob book movie. What do we mean by that? Because you're right. But I'd I'd like to hear how I landed on that list for you. I think that it is incredibly meticulously shot and fastly paced.

7:06 Like you move from scene to scene really quickly and you don't have to sit very long with each idea as you rush through this movie. And I it just has the the look of a movie that Bob would love, like the color palette of the film, the acting style of the actors. I'm guessing that Robert Downey Junior was your like least favorite performance of all the main people. Sure was. Yep, you are on to it man. Dude, I, you know how there's times where you tell me that my tasting notes are just perfect and there's nothing you have to add. That's kind of how I feel about this movie. But yeah, I I think that this has all of the things that Bob is going to look for in a movie, and I think that this movie is not good.

8:02 Yeah, I, I kind of figured you were going to come in with with a similar vibe to that. And I want to set the stage today by saying this. The first time I saw Zodiac, I thought it was a not even just competently made, an extraordinarily well made movie that felt too long, a little shaggy and left me wondering like, what's what's the message here? Like what is the point of all this? And I think that Zodiac is one of those films that despite my my own opinion of it, there was something about the craft of the movie and it's kind of downward spiral of obsession, similar to a movie like Vertigo, I guess, which also San Francisco sent. But that kept me kind of like anytime I was just like perusing my shelf and feeling like, what should I throw on for a little bit, even if I only make it 45 minutes in, be like, you know what, I kind of want to watch Zodiac again. I need to give that another chance. And it was never the, I have to give this a chance because it's Kubrick's 2001 and I have to like this movie. It was more just like, yeah, let me check that out again. And I've probably seen it in full maybe four times through now, but I've seen bits and pieces of it, I'd say maybe 10 times.

9:18 And every single rewatch makes this movie richer and deeper and I appreciate it more. It kind of has the opposite effect of Fincher's other quote, UN quote masterpiece, The Social Network, where while that movie is big and flashy and Sorkin's dialogue is like right there for you to grab onto, I feel like repeat viewings of The Social Network has made me feel kind of like, yeah, like we got the point the first time, You know what I mean? Like, I it never gets to be a richer experience on rewatch for me. So all that to say, I kind of expected you to come in here much cooler on this than me, and not because of our particular differences in taste, but just because this was your first time with the movie. If this was your second, third time, I don't know if you'd like it better, but I think that I was kind of banking on you not being as all in on it as I am.

10:10 Here's the problem, Bob. I I've said this a few times about other movies. The problem I have with this movie isn't that I don't like it, it's that I was really bored for two hours and 32 minutes. 35 minutes, however long it takes to get to the credits. I never found anything in this movie to actually be compelling. Oh, interesting. And and so like it like well made. I think the pacing is really well done, although it gets really tiring after a while to feel this sense of urgency that goes nowhere and ends up being just really boring.

10:51 So it's it's kind of this like mixture of I think that Fincher wanted you to feel the pressure of this case building over the years, but all I felt like was that he was trying to kill me personally, with how long the film was, like, I die of old age before it was finished. So it's like, yeah, I just was really bored for 2 1/2 hours and then I wasn't and now I'm here. There you go all right, well, you as always, you are adding just a, a pleth, a wealth of analysis to this this podcast man, and I'm I'm joking, I'm being facetious. If you're bored, you're bored. I do want to interrogate, not even interrogate, investigate a little bit like.

11:34 Why you? I was going to say I I have my rights. Yeah, you haven't. You haven't read me, my Miranda. Shining a spotlight on you, Where were you on the night of July 4th? So I think it's a kind of cast, a direction for this episode. I identified a couple movies that are like really obvious influences on this film and then also films that I think were influenced by this movie. But I want to start on the top with All the President's Men, which is one of the most famous newspaper movies ever made. And it's also an investigative, you know, it's about the Watergate scandal and how Bernstein and Woodward cracked that case. And it is just a meticulous recounting of all the leads they had to follow up on. You watch the procedural.

12:20 It's not a police procedural, but it's a journalistic procedural. And it's a movie that I believe you. You've never seen, have you? What? What's the movie called? All the president's men. I have never heard of that film. Yeah. So this is this is a big problem because I think it's like, A, it's a classic film, and B, it is kind of like when we watched the movie Spotlight later this year, Spotlight was consistently referred to as like this generation's All the President's Men. And I kind of wish that we had watched both Spotlight and the Denis Villeneuve movie Prisoners before this movie, because those are both kind of procedural dramas.

13:02 One of them has Jake Gyllenhaal in it. One of them is about working at a newspaper. And I, I, I can't wait till we get to those movies so we can kind of call back to Zodiac and start comparing and contrasting. But I think part of the reason that you may have been bored by this movie is that we've never really done a procedural movie on this podcast, especially not set inside of a newsroom. I mean, I think that I, I guess I don't know if it would count in the exact same way, but I'm curious if you would consider goodnight and good luck kind of a procedural newsroom like. Maybe a little bit, yeah. Especially in the pacing of it 'cause that movie had that kind of like not even slow pace, but just like almost documentary vibe where they're just documenting each step of the process.

13:49 That's that's fair. Yeah, and I very much so like that movie. I would also call Vertigo a procedural drama. The the way he goes about solving that mystery feels very procedural, you know, like he's just kind of walking through a garden following this lady around. So I, I think both of those could fit in that category. And fun fact, I think I gave a 10 out of 10 to both of those. Yeah, you're right. We've done a couple that I would say if not like a perfect example like you're saying, they're at least tangentially related to the genre. So is the problem more that it's hard to sustain that type of narrative over 2 1/2 hours?

14:31 I I think that's definitely one of the issues. OK, well, let's go in on those issues a little bit like so. We've identified the form, the form of the movie as part of the problem. What else did you just not jive with here? I I mean Jake Gyllenhaal doesn't know how to act in this movie. I like he has. The I love it when you come in with incredibly spicy takes, but you don't say like, you don't preface it with like, I've got some thoughts. You're just like, this is objective fact. Jake Gyllenhaal doesn't know how to act. You don't know it in like, I think that this is a bad performance. It's in this film. He forgot how to act.

15:11 Yeah, 'cause he has the exact same face every single scene of the movie except for when he gets a little bit scared in that guy's basement. Like he like he's, he's afraid for one scene and he's like kind of earnest and blank stare the rest of the film. And I like, I just think his performance, which is supposed to carry the movie is so boring and he he doesn't have any ability to draw others to him. And that the way that Fincher shoots his date with the the girl that he ends up marrying that I don't even know what her name is because who gives a RIP about her?

15:54 Like the, the way that he acts on that date is so ridiculous and boring and frustrating. And he doesn't like the, there's a lot of this movie that doesn't follow. Like, it doesn't follow in any semblance of the real world that those two human beings would get married based on what they have shown you in the film. And so I think it's like stuff like that that just frustrates me beyond any belief that it made it into the film. Like, give your character something other than this obsession to understand why things are happening in the world.

16:37 But like, there's just so much happening that we have to get through. We have to rush through that. Meh. Joel Hall just kind of has to flow from 1 angstiness to the next. There are times where I'm thinking, as you're talking about, like, we have to fill 60 minutes of audio here, Brad. And I feel like we could just kind of call it here if we wanted to. Like, yeah, I think you said what you want to say. I now, again, we're not going to do that. But it's hard for me to think of, like, where to go because it sounds like literally nothing about this movie worked for you. Is that fair? I don't know if I would say nothing. Like I said, I I think that this is a competently made film like I think the cinematography works pretty well.

17:23 I I think that the the lighting and the color of the film makes sense within the world of what Fincher is creating. I think that for me, there's not really any interesting characters and like the whole mystery of the film, like whodunit, like they, there's no question about it. Like once they show you Lee, there's no question that he's the guy who did it even after they get it wrong. So it's just kind of boring to watch them stumble around throughout the whole film. You said something a few minutes ago about how you have to give these characters more than just the obsession for the movie to work.

18:03 And I'm wondering because you've obviously hit on the theme of the movie, which is like this all consuming obsession and its effect on people. Like it's it's as much about the killer and the killings as it is about the toll it took on the people that were investigating it and kind of the futility of that. Like it's AI don't want to say it's a downer of a movie, but I think if you're trying to crack the code of like, what's the message here? Fincher is really giving you a story to which there is no resolution. And I'm and I'm wondering like if he is trying to communicate that the obsession is the point of these characters and of this movie, what's a more successful way to portray that? I don't.

18:48 I don't know if there's a more successful way to portray it. I'm just saying that it was very boring. Well, let's compare it to like Vertigo then. Like Vertigo is a movie about obsession, you know what I mean? Like, is it an obsession? I think is like the core theme of that movie too. Now, there's other stuff going on in the mechanics of the movie, not to distract you from the obsession, but to kind of just keep the wheels of the movie turning. And I guess that's what I'm asking. Like, is there just not enough other things going on to keep them the wheels turning for you? Or like, what about Vertigo and its themes work better than this movie's themes? I mean, I, I think part of it is just the fact that nobody ever stops talking in this movie that like the amount of information that is dumped on you, the audience. Like when you see date after date after date after date, it forces you to check out as an audience member. It's like, oh, he doesn't care about me, the audience member anymore.

19:46 He's just trying to hurdle down these train tracks as fast as he can. And I have no ability as a audience member to keep up with the information being provided in a way that helps me make meaning of what's going on in the story. Whereas Vertigo moves at a nice slow pace so that you you the audience member. Are swept along in this mysterious story that is being crafted whereas Zodiac is just like, here's some more information kid, here's more information here's more information 47 years later there's more information and it's like I like I just lose interest when it's just slamming me over the head with a baseball bat over and over with information and names and numbers and dates and people and. Yeah, I I think do you?

20:40 Want me to follow this? I think that we have to get you, and maybe we don't because it sounds like this is just not a genre that's gonna work for you. But I was just thinking like, we got to get you to watch more investigative, like journalistic movies like this, like All the President's Men, like Spotlight, 'cause that's just, that's just the genre, I think. And I think that might be what you're kind of butting up against here a little. But it also sounds like this is the rare movie for you where the faster pace of the movie is a detriment to the film as opposed to a slower pace. Yeah, I I think that a faster paced film shouldn't last two hours and 37 minutes. Like there's there's no change in the pace either. Like if, if I'm if I am speaking and I never take a pause and I always speak at this exact thing over and over and over again. And I never stopped my cadence anything. I just keep talking at the same rate. People lose interest.

21:37 Like you have to change the pace at which you speak for people to be interested in what you're saying. You go faster at times and slower at times. And Fincher just has this monotone, like 70% fast. Like, it's not like it's a Terrence Malick film where you're just like, seen, seen, seen, boom, boom, boom, cut, cut, cut. Like, like, it's not like this film is wildly fast-paced, but the entire movie is like between 65 and 75% fast. And there's no change in the pace. And so, yeah, I'm going to lose interest. All right, here's the thing, Bob. I came in thinking I would give this like A7 7 1/2 and the more I talk the more I'm like, Oh no, I really, really didn't like this.

22:23 Movie. That's crazy to me, man. Yeah. So I'm going to be under the operative assumption that your reaction to everything in this film was it was bad until you correct me. So I want to talk about the cast, but I also don't want to hear you repeatedly say everybody in the cast was bad. So why don't we just throw it to you and say who was good or who surprised you in this cast? I I was OK with Robert Downey Junior. Like I think he was fine. I think he was himself. And I like, at this point, I don't know if I've ever seen a movie where Robert Downey Junior wasn't just Robert Downey Junior.

23:09 Like, is that fair? I mean, yeah, I've, I've seen a couple, but I know that the ones that we've watched, you definitely have not. Yeah, So I don't think he was bad. I don't think he was good. I think he was himself and wasn't like wildly interesting. I liked Mark Ruffalo decently well. I think he, I think he does a really good job of showing the toll that obsession takes on a person and the way that he tries to shut the case out, move on, try to be a healthy human being. I like that was the only character as written and as portrayed that I thought had like a healthy sense of development and movement. And, you know, he's willing to entertain it, but only to a certain point, you know, in the years that followed the killings way beyond the originals.

24:08 So I like, I, I think that Ruffalo does a really good job of, of showing how freaking hard it would be to be the police officer. I, I think the moment when he looks at Gyllenhaal and says, like, you're a cartoonist, I'm a police officer, this is my job. This shouldn't be taking the toll on you that it is on me. Like great moment. I think for me, first of all, I have wanted you to be able to articulate why you didn't like this movie. I freaking love this movie. I think this movie is a is a absolute yes on the classic scale. For me, I think this is Fincher's best movie. Like, I'm just going to put it out there.

24:49 We don't have to investigate that at all. Like, it's fine. I know we're at odds here. I do feel like I need to say I think this movie works perfectly and I think part of the reason it works perfectly is this cast. And it's not just it's almost like when you look at championship teams in the NBA, very rarely is it just like the Oklahoma City Thunder had Russell Westbrook and James Harden and Kevin Durant at the same time. Yes, they did, but there's a reason they didn't win the championship. Like their their bench didn't go deep enough, you know what I mean? And I think on a movie like this, it's all of the supporting players, and not even just supporting players, but like 3rd, 4th tier players. When you have, you know, Anthony Edwards playing Toski's sidekick and you have Philip Baker Hall playing the guy that analyzes the handwriting and you have Brian Cox show up for one scene as Melvin Belli, the guy that they're calling in on the air for.

25:44 It's just like everybody in that zone is guys that I recognize from other movies. And it's like, oh that that's awesome that they came and did one day on a Fincher movie 'cause it makes everybody in the movie that much better. And for me, I think that the unsung hero of the movie is John Carroll Lynch as Arthur Lee Allen, because we've seen him in other movies. Brad, he's a really good actor, and I can't ever shake him as the Zodiac Killer. Now that I've seen him as the Zodiac Killer, he's really creepy in this movie and he does a really good job. Yeah, I I think he does like almost too good of a job to the point where you like, you know that it's him the entire movie once they show you him. So like the the whole thrust of the tension is gone. But I'm with you that the scene of him at the plants where you know, wherever he works being interviewed by Gyllenhaal, his partner and I think the local Molinax maybe like incredible scene the.

26:54 Editing the way that they keep cutting to the little like insert shots of the watch and everything else, the boots like it's, it's so well done. Yeah. And so I, I don't have anything else to say. Bob, he, he, he does great. He's a great performance. All right, so you've covered everyone in the cast that you like now, right? Which was basically Mark Ruffalo was pretty good. Yep, I liked Mark Ruffalo. I would say beyond pretty good. I think he was really solid. Is that a good? That's an upgrade. We need to start reviewing whiskeys like that man. Yeah, really solid. Brian Cox is Brian Cox, and he's fine. I don't understand.

27:36 I don't know if I just missed something, but all of a sudden he's in the movie and then all of a sudden he's not. And I don't know who. Melvin it is I I don't know why he's there, but hey, that is that's a OK. I I think my struggle is all of the secondary characters in this movie are really solid. But as you were talking about the names, I don't I didn't recognize almost any of the secondary cast from anything else. I I recognize the Zodiac Killer, whatever his name is, but other than that I think I recognized Jake or no, not Gyllenhaal's wife. Mark Ruffalo's wife is from Parks and Rec. June Diane Raphael.

28:26 Yeah. Yep, Yep. That's the that I recognize her. You did it, man. I did it. All right, so God, this is a fucking bummer. You didn't like this movie. I don't know where to go from here. Maybe it's time for us to go drink some whiskey and then we'll get into some fun stuff in the back half of the episode. What do you say? Let's get to it, Bob. I'm excited. Woo. All right, so today we are checking out Rebel Small Batch Reserve Bourbon. Now our history and love for Rebel Bourbon. Is well documented. Well documented, Bob. Almost as well documented as everything in this film. Very much so when they go into Vallejo and he he gives them the classic, all of these files, right, It's like. But no pens.

29:20 Yeah, yeah. No pens, Bob. No, no pens. Only whiskey. All right, so small batch reserve is the latest release or one of the latest releases in the Rebel line from Lux Row. We love Lux Row, we love Rebel. They used to source it, they make it in house now. This is a small batch version that is 110 proof. So it's a slight bump up from the Rebel 100 that Brad and I love very much MSRP is around $30. You might you might be charged a little bit more depending on where you live. So this is still kind of in that low mid range bourbon. Like I wouldn't call this a budget bourbon anymore, but it's still cheaper than like a bottle of Elijah Craig, which is kind of where I start pricing mid range bourbons.

30:04 So very affordable, Brad, I'm very excited to get into it. It's a non age stated bourbon. We don't know the mash bill, wink, wink. Let's dive in, man. Yeah, When I got into the nose on this, it had some really nice cherry tart notes. It's a little bit grain forward and I there's a little bit of spiciness here, some cinnamon notes that I thought were interesting. I think it's a decent nose. I'm going to give it a 7 1/2. Yeah, I'm a little bit lower than you. This was like, fine, but I think it's probably right in line with a Rebel 100 in terms of what you're getting on the nose. Pretty simple, but I can't shake the fact that it's $10 more expensive. It had a little bit of peanut butter and then there was like a slight kind of off dill pickle note, which we've gotten dill on Ryze before, but this is a weeded bourbon, so you really wouldn't expect to have dill on anything here. It threw me for a loop and I didn't like it that much. And so I, I dinged this for that note all the way down to a 7 out of 10.

31:09 When it comes to the taste, I liked it a lot. It was really viscous, super dark in terms of like the fruit that it was bringing up on my, you know, on my palate, lots of chocolate notes for me, definitely not as sweet as other Rebels were. And that again, it threw me for a loop because we've drank enough Rebel that I can tell what the flavor wheelhouse of Rebel is. Now, this wasn't that dark stone fruit, really heavy kind of dark notes. I gave it a 7 again, Brad. Yeah, I'm in a 7 1/2 on the flavor. I I think that the palate has some really nice mixture of like a cinnamony spice with the classic cherry and it, you're right, it gets into like a little bit of a cacao dark chocolate kind of vibe. I like, I I'm not crazy about it. I think it's pretty good though, I think. I think the finish drops off a little bit for me. It gets oaky and and much more grainy. That grain finally starts to come through a little stronger than I'd like.

32:15 There's a little bit of a black pepper. The vanilla. There's like hints of vanilla for me, which I didn't get quite as much on the nose and the palate. 7 out of 10 on the finish. 7 as well. There's a just a little pop of cinnamon. I did get quite a bit of ethanol and usually the ethanol is present like on the front of the pallet or the mid pallet it it burned quite a bit and you could feel the 110 proof here. After that, the notes that were left behind were just really, really dark red wine. And I, you know, again, I didn't take good enough notes to pinpoint exactly what kind of wine it brought up. You know, whatever kind of wine you associate with the darkest red wine, go for it.

32:56 So that's where I'm at on this one. It's a 7 out of 10 on the finish. And in terms of overall balance, all I wrote down was it's good. But this is far from my favorite in the rebel line. I gave it a 7 out of 10 again, Brad. So I was sevens pretty much across the board here on our first four categories. Yeah, I'm I'm not far off from you. I give it a 7 on balance as well. I think that there's some interesting things going on here, but it's not standing out enough to really make me love this whiskey. Now, I will say when you and I first tried this whiskey, which was down at the Kentucky Bourbon Festival about two months ago now, we took note that MSRP was $45.

33:39 And I'm looking online and I don't see it that high anywhere. So I don't know if we just maybe they're raising the price and it hasn't really taken effect yet. I don't know. At $45.00, I was like, this is a 7 at best. I will say at $30, this is a much better value than I had originally taken note of. So I'm going to go ahead and up it to, I'll say 7 1/2 out of 10. I was going to go up to an 8, but I think it's just marginally better than that at a 7 1/2. Yeah, if you're getting this around the $35 mark, I'll give it a 7 1/2 as well. I think, Bob, I think this might be the first time we've ever had every single score be 7 or 7 1/2 on a product. I.

34:23 Mean this is like the quintessential average whiskey. See, that's funny because I always think of 7 1/2 as like when you I used to look at the movie reviews in the newspaper and they were on a four-star scale. So three stars was the like, OK, like this is worth my while. Two stars is average. That's 5 out of 10. And like, so I always think like, oh, this is like a 7 1/2 whiskey. It's the three star movie. It's worth the money, it's worth your time. You're not going to regret it, but it's also not going to be like a life changing, memorable experience. And I kind of think of it that way. I wouldn't call it average. I think it's definitely above average, but it's the three star movie of the Rebel lineup. See your Your definition of average is off though, because the the grading scale you think of is like 99 to 100 is an A&A minus, so. I will have you know, I had multiple people contact me after that episode came out and tell me like I was on that scale all the way till high school or my high school used that scale. Like once again, Brad G thinks that his life experience is everyone's life experience.

35:30 I Bob, I am 100% sure that the common experience is the 10 point scale I like. I have so little doubt that that has been the reality for most people. Like whatever the off scale is, I'm telling you 75 or a 7.5 is an average grade because that's AC. All right, so Brad thinks it's a sea whiskey. I think it's like a bee whiskey. That's totally fine. What is your actual score? We're arguing about the smallest stuff today. 36.5. 36.5 So we're coming out to an average of a 36 out of 50 or a 72 out of 100. It has just cleared the bar at 35 where we start recommending to try a pour or to buy a bottle. I think I would do both, but it's like a soft recommend because IA pour of this is only going to cost you like 6 bucks. So you want to try it.

36:26 It's worth 6 bucks to try. If you want to buy a bottle, it's worth $30 to just get a bottle. I just don't think that it is as good of a value, or maybe as good of a bourbon as Rebel 100. I I think I'd agree with that. The Rebel 100 still stands out. I I might, yeah, I might call it a better whiskey. Well, there you go all right folks, so it's a soft recommend on Rebel small batch. It is a firm recommendation once again on Rebel 100. Go find it, go buy it Rebel, we love you. We're going to try some more of your product again next week. Brad, what do you say we get back into this love fest we have going on today with the movie Zodiac? Let's get to it. All right, everybody.

37:12 That was Rebel Small Batch a whiskey that we were in agreement on that it's decidedly decent. And we're basically in agreement that 2 Facts and a Falsehood is the greatest segment that any podcast has ever come up with. Woo. Hoo. Brad is going to try to stump your ball. All right. And what is wrong? 2 facts and a falsehood. 2 Facts and a Falsehood is the part of the show where Brad presents me with three items as fact about the making of this movie, one of which is a complete lie. Brad, I'm excited to see what you came up with today. I did do more research than normal today 'cause I wanted to talk about all the cool things I like about this movie.

37:57 I have I realized very quickly I will get to mention very little of them, but hopefully it will come in Andy at 2 facts and a falsehood. I am writing A1 game win streak, but I think I'm six and one overall on the season. So let's see how I do today. Brad hit me with those two facts and a falsehood. Fact number one In one of the Zodiacs letters he muses on who would portray him in a film about him. In this film he is portrayed by three separate actors and in any shot featuring the Zodiac the actors faces are always out of focus or obscured, partially so that the Zodiac killer himself would not be portrayed by a visible or famous actor. Fact #2 Jake Gyllenhaal grew up with a fascination of the Zodiac killings, as his parents lived in California when they occurred and had told their children all about it when the book came out in 1989.

38:52 Fact #3 The shooting script for the film was 200 pages long, and in order to prevent any problems with a link that such a long script might cause, director David Fincher decided to ask his cast members to speak faster. OK, I think #1 is like true just because I looked at the cast list and there's like 1 actor is listed as like Zodiac one and two, one is listed as Zodiac 3 and 1 is listed as Zodiac four or something like that. So I think that's true. They they wanted it to be kind of this, everyone reminded you of each other. But you can project those rememberings onto somebody like a John Carroll Lynch later in the movie.

39:34 So I think 1 is true. 2 sounds true to me as well. I'm gravitating towards 3 because I know that Fincher had final cut on this movie and this might be a good place to really briefly mention this. Brad, this movie was intended to be released at the end of O 6 for Oscar consideration. Fincher turned in a cut of the movie that was three hours and 8 minutes long. And then Paramount was like you, you got to cut it down. But he had final cut and so he said OK, it's probably too long, let me cut some stuff out. He landed at 2 hours and 40 ish minutes and then said like that's it I'm not making another cut put it out. And Paramount was like, cool, we'll dump it in February or whatever. So it got it got no love from Paramount, partially resulting in the fact that it didn't do very well at the box office. And so anyway, all that to say, I'm gravitating towards 3 is the falsehood.

40:29 Now, he may have told his actors to speak longer or to speak faster, but I also don't think he cared that much about the length of the movie 'cause he turned in a three hour cut. So my gut says #3 I may be wrong, but I'm going to roll with it. Brad #3 is the falsehood. Bob #3 is not the falsehood. Wow. #2 was our falsehood today. OK, is there any smidgen of truth in #2? I 100% made that up. Nice dude. Yeah, I did. I I I guess I don't know if this is true or not. I looked up where Jake Gyllenhaal is from and seeing that he was from Los Angeles, CA, I assumed that his parents lived there in the 60s and 70s since his dad is a screenwriter. So maybe it's true that they lived there, but other than that it it basically was 100% made.

41:25 Up if we ever get famous enough that we can start going back through Brad's made-up things and asking the people involved if they actually happened. I want I I want retroactive points because like if there's a serial killer around you, you're going to be like, hey, mom and dad, tell me about this thing that you grew up with and they're probably going to tell you about it. So it it still seems plausible. You write it down when we interview Jake Gyllenhaal someday, you can ask him if his parents ever talked about the Zodiac Killer. That's the first question of the interview. There's no like, warming him up, getting on his good side, no. Now I will say I changed the date that the book came out because the book came out in 1986 and Gyllenhaal was in born in 1980.

42:11 And I was like, well, if, if Bob knew that Gyllenhaal was born in like 80, then he's probably not going to think that the parents talked to him about it when he was 6. There you go. And so in the first eight weeks of our season here, Brad, I think this is episode #8 I am 6:00 and 2:00. Yeah, you're killing it. Now I will also say just like the Zodiac, 6:00 and 2:00 is a 75%. So apparently according to you I am just doing average at. Apparent to the American grading system, you have a C. Because. If you had an 8 question test and you got 6 right, that's a 75% Bob. So I would see your big red pen at the top that said see. And then also the comment.

42:59 You're killing it just to confuse me. Yep. Awesome. All right, man, let's get back into talking about the movie a little bit. And I do want to talk about Fincher's craft because this is, I think there's only a few moments in the movie where Fincher is really showing off with the camera. There's a kind of very obviously CGI assisted shot where you're tracking a taxi cab around multiple corners from above. It's, you know, when the guy gets killed in the cab. And that's a very, like, look at the fun, sharp angles I can take with a camera. But for the most part, I'm more impressed at Fincher's restraint with the camera in this movie. It's still very precise, but I don't think there's as much showing off with the camera as there was in a movie like The Social Network.

43:45 And correct me if I'm wrong, this is our third Fincher movie, right? We did Fight Club and Social Network and now this one. Yes, OK. Yeah, I don't think we've done any others. So talk to me a little bit, Brad, about like the Fincheriness of this movie. Does it seem like it belongs in his catalogue? How is it different in terms of the directorial flourishes from the other ones we've watched? I mean the The Social Network feels like the outlier of those three films. This one definitely has a a darkened color palette I guess I'd say. Like if you put a random still from those 3 movies in front of me, like chances are that this film and Fight Club are going to look very similar in my mind. Whereas Social Network has much less of a firm aesthetic. It's more of just like, hey, we're at Harvard and we're in, you know, California and it, it doesn't feel like it's as important to the film.

44:51 Whereas this film, it's like, yeah, we're going to shoot this as a very dark green, grey, brown color palette that seems similar to Fight Club. I do think that the one shot that made a ton of sense to me that I was curious why he didn't do it more often throughout the film. Because most of the movie he just puts up a new date at the bottom of the screen. And that's that's the new date. We've moved forward. And sometimes he says, you know, four years later, three months later, two days later, the best way of communicating that was when he did the shot of the building, the the skyscraper being the timelapse incredible.

45:37 It's like, oh, I know in general how long it would take to do that. It's probably a year or two later. That's incredible. I like, loved that shot very much. So didn't like the computer assisted taxi cab shot. It looked very fake to me. Yeah, well, that's also a function of this being 17 years old now, you know, which is crazy because I think that this movie didn't start catching on with the audience that doesn't appreciate it until a few years after the fact because it wasn't like it got nominated for zero Academy Awards, which to me is wild to you is probably like, yes, you are justified, Academy. Makes a lot of sense, this. Is a very stacked year for movies. We've talked about 2007 as potentially the best year in the 21st century for movies. So it gets shut out of the Oscars and it didn't make any money.

46:25 And I think people slowly started to reclaim it. And so for me, I think about Zodiac and I'm like, Oh yeah, that movie's from like 2011, 2012, 2015. I I just think of it as a more recent movie. And it's getting close to its 20th anniversary here in a couple years. So there are certain things about the film that I'm like, Oh yeah. Like I can tell where Fincher used some CGI fireworks on 4th of July or whatever it might be. And they look a little cheesy now. So I have to, I have to agree with that. I wanted to talk about the Fincheriness of the movie though, because just a couple weeks ago we watched Parasite, a movie that I made mention of and said Hong Joon Ho is doing a David Fincher impression in terms of like the way he's using the camera in this movie, the way that it's like always mounted on a tripod, that there's a lot of like pans and they're very precise movements of the camera. Now that you've like watched Zodiac as just a general Fincher refresher, do you see it in Parasite I? Don't know if I do, partially because they're like there's two hours and 37 minutes worth of camera shots that I I don't know if I can pinpoint any specific way that he used the camera. Whereas, like, to me, Parasite stands out as one of the best uses of a camera that I've ever

47:57 seen in a movie. Like it's so impersonal and it gives you such a detached view of what's going on. I don't like, I just don't know if I've seen that done in many other films. And I I certainly wouldn't say that that's true about Fincher here. I looking back as best as I can through the movie, I can't think of anything about this film that makes the camera work stand out to me. And I'm not saying that like negatively, like there's nothing negative about the camera work. I don't know if there's also anything that makes me go wow, what an incredible film to study camera work on.

48:38 The more I watched this movie, the more I kind of kicked myself that we placed it so early in the season and we kind of put it around Halloween time and we got pushed back a couple weeks. So like now it's now it's our Thanksgiving movie. It gets spread but but I really think we should have watched a movie like Spotlight 1st. And I like Spotlight. I think it's a competently made movie, but like when you look at the look of that film, it's very flat. Like there's just not much of A palette there. They don't do a great job with the lighting of that film and it's kind of intentionally that way 'cause it's like it takes big and it takes place in a big fluorescent lit office building. This movie, I just think there's such a great depth with the shadows and the way they're playing with light and everything else. But I, I do want to go back to the Bong Joon Ho thing for a minute because I really do see it. I see that so much Fincher in that movie, you know, way more than in a movie like Snowpiercer. I just think that he's like really playing in the Fincher sandbox here.

49:37 And I think it's also bolstered a little bit by the fact that in the Sight and Sound poll that just came out a couple years ago, and in the 2012 version of the Sight and Sound poll, Bong Joon Ho listed Zodiac as one of the 10 best films ever made. That was like one one of his picks. So I know for a fact this is like got to be an influence on the guy or he wouldn't be putting it in his top 10 there. I watched a great video essay right before we hopped on where the the guy that made the video was comparing this movie with another Bong Joon Ho movie called Memories of Murder. And I think the Fincher has just really kind of gotten his hooks into Bong Joon Ho. And it's really cool to see how the same themes and even sometimes the same way of using the camera can be applied in a Fincher movie and then half a world away in a Korean movie. I just, I thought it was a cool little pairing. It's not back-to-back weeks, but having Parasite followed by a Fincher movie and just kind of examining the darkness that's in the human psyche the way both of those guys do, I thought it was worth worth noting I.

50:40 Was going to say, do you think that that is like Fincher's legacy as a film maker is that he's just a really dark director? I think he's AI think he's a pervert like and and and like, I mean that as positively as I can. But like you, you have you accused me of being hot take. I think that Jake Gyllenhaal isn't a good actor in this film. And then you just come out and call David Fincher a pervert. I think that he really likes in this video essay I was watching, he talked about the way he used the camera and he he said that he really likes an objective camera kind of to what you were saying. He said the way that I moved the camera.

51:20 I want it to feel like whatever is happening is doomed to happen. And I really liked that because it's not just the way the camera kind of creeps around sometimes. It could be very precise, but that precision feels like mechanical sometimes, and it feels inhuman. And I think because of that, like, Fincher really likes being making you as an audience member, this helpless observer of wherever he's about to go. And he goes to some really sick psychological places in most of his movies. He loves plumbing the depths of twisted stories. You don't go into a Fincher movie and be like, you know, you're not going to get like step brothers, you know what I mean? Like, it's just it's never going to happen. That's what he's attracted to and it's, I think, more than any other filmmaker.

52:07 Yes, I see Kubrick there. I see a lot of Hitchcock in Fincher in the way that he is really fascinated and kind of tickled by really dirty things, whether that's violence, whether that's murder or torture or sex, whatever it might be. He's he's voyeuristic in the same way that Hitchcock was, and I think that the way he uses the camera shows that. I think that's probably a fair take. I haven't seen enough Fincher to really dive into it, mostly because I like it. Surprises me that The Social Network is a Fincher film. Like how long has it been since you watched that one? Whatever, we watched it for the podcast. So like 3 or 4 years now probably. Yeah, OK, maybe I feel like it's more recent than that, but you know how fast time goes.

52:56 I I think the thing for me with a director who focuses on hopeless dark themes, I I don't see the importance of making movies about darkness that don't have any point like that. They're just doesn't seem to me to be an importance of saying, hey, bad things happen without pointing towards and humans are courageous in the face of it or that you know, they, they will always find the light eventually or, you know, find some sort of message that is redemptive. I guess for me, when I look at the world I live in, I don't need super dark reminders of the brokenness of the world. I I see that in everyday life.

53:50 Yeah, yeah. And I'm not saying that Fincher is my favorite film maker by any stretch. I I don't really, I don't get the perverse joy of watching these sick things happen the way a lot of Fincher fans do. And it's kind of my beef. We talked about this before with the Coen brothers too, like Hurley Cohen's they'll make a movie about like the weird chaotic nature of life, you know, like a movie that you hated. Like Raising Arizona is still like a light hearted examination of like the weird way chaos happens or O brother, where art thou. You know, they take a turn in the mid 2000s and now it's just like nothing has a point. Everything's nihilistic and their response to it is kind of just a shrug into the wind. Fincher's not really a shrug guy as much as he's just like, the world is fucked up.

54:37 Check this out. You know what I mean? And, and I don't like either one of those things. I, I, I appreciate Fincher's craft and I like this movie more than most other Fincher movies because I don't feel him like, you know, getting his rocks off portraying stuff in this movie. I think it's more just like it's a movie about what dedication looks like and what precision is and how your your efforts might be futile in a world that doesn't care. And like, I think it's more affecting for me than a lot of his other stuff. Yeah, and it it kind of ends in a place where we all know who the killer is without know who knowing who the killer is. And I think that the fact that he had to follow real life events kind of gives it a light that he might not have in a lot of his other films.

55:35 I think it's a good place for us to get into our last segment of the day, Brad, and it's a segment that we call Let's Make It a Double presented by Blackwood Distilling Co. We're near the end of the episodes of Things, listening to the film and Whiskey Show. Let's have another film with this one, even if it's struggling. It's the final segment of the day. Now let's make it a double. Let's Make It a Double is the part of the show where we pick a movie to pair. Pair up with this one to make the perfect double feature. Brad, I'll let you go first, man. I'm interested to see if you're going to try to pair this with something that you like better, or if you're just going to roll with let's just make it a double of two movies I don't like. I would say I could go with the Mark Ruffalo of it all and go with Eternal Sunshine. There you go.

56:18 But I'm not going to do that. I am going to pair it with a movie I did like a lot that is also a procedural drama that I think freaking knocks it out of the park. I'm going to go with 1991's The Silence of the Lambs. The further we've gotten from watching that movie, The more I am very comfortable in thinking that that is a good, not great movie, and equally surprised at how much that movie has affected you. Like one of your very first Blu-ray purchases, a movie that you've mentioned many times, and have you returned to it since watching it? Bread. I haven't, it's been on my list of like these are there's like maybe 10 to 15 movies from the podcast history that the, the vault that we have accumulated that I really want to get back to, but I, I have not found the time yet. I'm trying to decide what I want to pair this with. I think All the President's Men is a good journalistic movie to pair it with.

57:14 I think you could look at a movie I've I've brought up JFKA couple times. I think that was also an influence in terms of every movie where a character amasses a lot of information and then reveals it all in one big explosive scene at the end, takes its cues from JFK. So you could do that. I think I will pair it with Spotlight, which we're getting to later this season. And I now have a mission of like half that episode is going to be how is this better or worse than Zodiac, Brad, when we get to that? So we will be making it a double, a very long double, but we'll get to that later in the season. So for Brad, it is Silence of the Lambs. For me, it is Spotlight.

57:59 And that was brought to you by Blackwood Distilling Co. No matter what movie you pick to pair up with this, you can always make it a double with Blackwood Distilling Company. If you go to bourbonoutfitters.com/film Whiskey, that's Bourbon outfitters.com slash film whiskey and buy a bottle of Blackwood, you get 5% off, which is a fantastic deal. Brad, because Blackwood's a luxury whiskey. It is worth every single dollar, but you'll get 5% off with our code film whiskey with an E at checkout. Brad. Let's get into some final scores here. I'll, I'll just without much comment. I don't think it's a 10. I do think it's a 9.5. It's my favorite Fincher movie. I think it's a freaking classic.

58:41 9 1/2 out of 10 for me. Man, you and the Last Jedi in nine and a halfs. I it is forever tarnished, Bob, forever tarnished. I think that I walked away from this movie thinking, eh, boring. Well, made 7 out of 10. I I've talked myself down, Bob, I think this is a 6 1/2. Wow. Well, that lands us at an average of an 8 out of 10, which is kind of exactly where this lands on letterbox instead of four point O out of five S, 8 out of 10. Still a very good average for a movie. It sounds like this is a decisive no for you. The classic thing?

59:24 Yeah, I know. This is not even, not even close. May maybe the furthest from being a modern classic. I was going to say this is your lowest score of the season so far. Yeah. So is this a worse movie than Ford V Ferrari and The Help? Yes. That's crazy. You're you are wrong. That's all there to do it. All right, so it's an 8 from us, but we want to know what you think. You can find us on any one of our social media channels. Who is right and who is wrong here? Tell us on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Tiktok or YouTube at Film Whiskey. Or join the conversation on our Discord server. You can find a link to our server at the end of every single one of our show notes.

1:00:07 Next week we are changing up our programming just a little bit. As you know, each year we do a special Thanksgiving episode called Hanksgiving. Instead of releasing that episode on Thanksgiving, we're we're going to put it out on Tuesday like a regular episode. So we'll be doing our Hanks Giving episode on his 2013 I think modern classic Captain Phillips and Brad gets to look at me and say I'm the captain now. I say you're already declaring it a modern classic. I think so. It's one of his best performances of the century for sure. OK. Well, I'm really excited to get into it, Bob. Is that a first time watch for you? It is wow. OK, so join us next week for Captain Phillips, but until then, I'm Bob Book.

1:00:50 I'm Brad G. And we'll see you next time.