The story of the Zodiac killer is one that has continued to fascinate the public for over fifty years. While not the first serial killer to terrorize America, the Zodiac was unique for speaking publicly about his murders via letters that were published in San Francisco newspapers.

RELATED: David Fincher's Movies, Ranked By Rotten Tomatoes

Though the case of the Zodiac killer remains unsolved, it has been the subject of interest in Hollywood for years, with the most famous depiction being David Fincher's 2007 Zodiac. The film is often praised as being one of the most historically accurate films based on real events. Of course, it does still take some liberties as well as exclude key details. Here are some things Zodiac gets right about the case and some things it gets wrong.

Updated on February 7th, 2021 by Kristen Palamara: Although David Fincher's Zodiac is an older movie released in 2007, it was a very comprehensive representation of the real-life events of the Zodiac killings that lasted decades. The movie takes its specifics from Robert Graysmith, who was involved in the events as he was a cartoonist at the newspaper the Zodiac Killer frequently sent letters to and Graysmith became obsessed with solving the case. Fincher's Zodiac is a well-researched movie that tries to stay as close to the truth as possible, but of course, there are a few differences between real-life and the movie. 

Right: Robert Graysmith And Arthur Leigh Allen Meeting

arthur leigh allen zodiac fincher

The movie depicts a meeting between Robert Graysmith and his main suspect he believes is the Zodiac Killer, Arthur Leigh Allen. The movie shows Graysmith going inside the hardware store that Allen works at and the two staring each other down, which is pretty similar to actual events.

Graysmith claims he went to the hardware store that Allen worked at and Allen drove up next to him in the parking lot, blocking the driver car door, and the two stared each other down.

Right: Almost Catching The Zodiac Killer

The movie depicts the Zodiac Killer killing a taxi cab driver and when Dave Toschi arrives at the crime scene he learns that a few officers had seen a civilian leaving the scene when they arrived.

The officers had received an incorrect description of the shooter and didn't think anything of the man walking away, but eye witness accounts of the shooter and the description from the officers were very similar meaning that they had a chance to possibly stop and catch the Zodiac Killer then, and this seems to be pretty similar to the real-life events.

Wrong: Sherwood Morrill

sherwood morril zodiac

While it's true that Sherwood Morrill (Philip Baker Hall) was the main handwriting expert working on the case, in real life he wasn't really an antagonist to Graysmith and Toschi's investigation.

He was a well-respected expert in the field and most agreed with his findings and although some disagreed it was typically in a respectful manner. The movie depicts Morrill as somewhat of an antagonist to the two even though in real life Morrill backed Toschi when some accused him of manufacturing Zodiac letters.

Right: Zodiac Threatening School Children

san franciso chronicle letter from killer

In the movie, the Zodiac Killer sends a letter to the San Francisco Chronicle and claims that he'll blow up a school bus and shoot any of the survivors that escape the crash.

This was a real threat from the Zodiac, and like in the movie, the Zodiac Killer never did this but it was certainly enough to terrify everyone who knew about the letter and the threat.

Wrong: Michael Mageau's Eye Witness Account

end of 2007 david fincher movie

Although it's true that in real life Michael Mageau did claim that it was Arthur Leigh Allen who attacked him and his girlfriend and he narrowly survived, Zodiac seems to imply that this is an important part of the case at the very end of the movie.

In reality, even Mageau himself said there was no way he could be certain that it was Allen because he barely saw the man's profile, was disoriented by a bright flashing light and was shot at close range. Police didn't believe this to be valid or important evidence to the case because Mageau's eyewitness account was so fuzzy.

Right: Robert Graysmith's Obsession

Jake Gyllenhaal in Zodiac

The movie focuses on various people involved in the case, but the main focus is Robert Graysmith (Jake Gyllenhaal). Graysmith was a cartoonist at The Chronicle, one of the newspapers Zodiac communicated with. He eventually began his own investigation and wrote a book on the subject.

The movie shows Graysmith becoming consumed with the case and his obsession leads to the end of his marriage. By Graysmith's own admission, this is accurate as the investigation took over all aspects of his life and his family-life suffered as a result.

Wrong: Paul Avery

Paul and Robert talking at the newspaper office in Zodiac

Another one of the main characters in the film is Paul Avery (Robert Downey Jr.), the crime reporter at The Chronicle. Avery was a central figure in some aspects of the investigation and was indeed named by the killer as a future target, but large aspects of his characterization in the film are fictionized.

RELATED: 10 Robert Downey Jr. Roles Most Iron Man Fans Don't Know

While Avery and Graysmith did work together, their close collaboration on the Zodiac case is something largely invented by the film. Avery is also depicted as falling into poor health and living a reclusive life, still obsessed with the killings. Those close to him have claimed this is inaccurate.

Right: Arthur Leigh Allen As Suspect

police questioning arthur leigh allen

Though the case remains unsolved, the movie does narrow in on one prime suspect, Arthur Leigh Allen (John Carroll Lynch). The movie shows Allen to be a favorite suspect of detective Dave Toschi (Mark Ruffalo) who has a mountain of circumstantial evidence linking him to the crimes.

Allen was indeed a person of interest in the case who Toschi favored as the killer. Also, much of the evidence against Allen that is presented in the movie was real. He did wear boots that matched the crime scene footprints, he did wear a watch that had a Zodiac symbol, and he did talk to friends about ideas that eerily match the later killings.

Wrong: Cecelia Shepard And Bryan Hartnell

zodiac killer in Zodiac

The second Zodiac attack depicted in the film is of Cecelia Shepard and Bryan Hartnell on September 27, 1969. The film shows the young couple cuddling by a lake when they are approached by a masked gunman who then tied them up and stabbed them. Only Hartnell survived the attack.

While the movie follows Hartnell's account of the attack incredibly closely, the movie does make one small and false insinuation. The scene gives the impression that the two are a romantic couple whereas they were simply friends at the time. Interestingly, Fincher added in a line about Hartnell's major in school to hint they might not be as close as we'd assume.

Right: Rick Marshall

One of the tensest scenes in the film finds Graysmith visiting a colleague of suspect Rick Marshall. Graysmith thinks he finds a sample of Marshall's writing that perfectly matches Zodiac, but the man informs him it is his own writing. As Graysmith's nervousness increases, he hears footsteps from the floor above and leaves in a hurry.

Remarkably, this is based on a real incident Graysmith claims happened to him while looking into Marshall as a suspect. Some other investigators have theorized this friend of Marshall's helped him in some way.

Wrong: Woman In The Car

Golden Gate Bridge in Zodiac

Another extremely disturbing scene finds a woman and her baby who is given a ride by a stranger after being stranger on the highway. While the man appears to be a helpful good Samaritan at first, he soon threatens to kill them both before the woman escapes the car with her child.

This is based on a true incident, and not only did the woman claim it was the Zodiac in the car, but the killer took credit for it in another letter. However, as time past, police began to have major doubts that this was indeed the Zodiac.

Right: Zodiac's Lies

Though the movie does seem to present that particular case as one involving the Zodiac, it also mentions the doubt surrounding the case which leads to an interesting revelation. Paul Avery identifies a number of crimes Zodiac claimed credit for without offering any evidence, unlike the other murders. This suggests Zodiac was trying to appear more deadly than he really was.

This is something that police discovered as the investigation went on and Zodiac's letters continued. He took credit for murders they knew he had nothing to do with. Many see this as the killer's attempt to remain in the spotlight.

Wrong: Codebreaker

Robert Downey Jr. and Jake Gyllenhaal in Zodiac

The movie shows that the first letter Zodiac sent to newspapers included a code which he claimed included his identity. While the killer presented it as a brilliant and unbreakable code, it was solved fairly quickly by a high school teacher and his wife days after it was published.

An interesting aspect that the movie leaves out is that the man who broke the code became a suspect in the crimes for a short time. Police were suspicious of how quickly he broke the code as well as some very circumstantial evidence. Many believe it was simply a desperate movie by police.

Right: The Zodiac On Live Television

The movie does a great job of showing how the public became so obsessed with the Zodiac and the story around him. This is best seen in the sequence in which the killer calls into a news program live on the air to speak with Melvin Belli (Brian Cox).

RELATED: David Fincher's 10 Most Unsettling Scenes, Ranked

The idea of a serial killer calling into a news show seems so farfetched, but this incident really did happen. While there's no way to confirm that it was the real killer who was speaking on live television, given the killer's apparent desire for the spotlight, it's entirely possible he would do such a thing.

Wrong: Other Suspects

Real Horror Movie Origins Zodiac Killer

While the movie doesn't come to any conclusions about the case, it does strongly hint at the fact that Arthur Leigh Allen was the Zodiac killer. This isn't surprising as much of the movie is based on Robert Graysmith's book who came to that eventual conclusion.

However, the movie does ignore some important things to arrive at Allen as such a convincing suspect, which is something Graysmith has been criticized for. There were several other key suspects, including Richard Gaikowski who, similar to Allen, had a lot of circumstantial evidence against him. It also fails to mention Allen's DNA failing to match DNA found at the scene of one of the crimes.

NEXT: 10 Best Serial Killer Movies From The 70s