I am NOT a critic. I'm merely an observer. (Books, movies, plays, musicals etc.)

When movies are based on books, I feel sad for the screenwriter because most of the time the people who read the book would say, "I like the book better."  I myself am very, very guilty of this, but when I put myself in the writer for the screen adaptation's shoes, I understand that not all the elements could be included.  There are a few screenplays that are even better than the book and there's this very rare case when book and the movie are on equal footing. This is one of them. Zodiac is very faithful to the book.  Yes, it is still very impossible to include everything, but all the important elements of the book are included here.  The events were checked by the screenwriter, meaning, it is also as accurate as accurate could be. With a great story, powerhouse cast, great screenplay and magnificent direction, how could this movie go wrong? What am I saying? There are movies with the same elements, but still don't go well with their box office resul...