January 9, 2026
FILM: ZODIAC KILLER PROJECT
DIRECTED BY: CHARLIE SHACKLETON
RATING: 3 ½ out of 4 stars
By Dan Pal
Several years ago, I taught a course called Documentary Production which explored the different approaches filmmakers have taken to tell true stories. If I were teaching the class today, I’d include this film on the must view list. Documentaries can be based on events that are currently happening or that took place many years or even centuries earlier. Zodiac Killer Project is a very unique documentary based on the search for the infamous serial killer back in the late 1960s and 1970s. Filmmaker Charlie Shackleton had planned to make a film centering on the details described in a book by Lyndon E. Lafferty who attempted to follow George Russell Taylor, believed to be the killer. Shackleton researched the story and started finding sites he would use to shoot his film. However, he lost the rights to the book and had to abandon the project. The new film is a depiction of how he planned to shoot it and where – essentially telling Lafferty’s story without actually using the book.
The opening shot of Zodiac Killer Project is a long, extended shot of a rest stop where Lafferty and Taylor may have once crossed paths. Shackleton narrates what he believed happened at this location and details how he would have shot the scene. It’s a strange way to begin a documentary, making it feel like a cheap way of telling the story he couldn’t tell. However, as the film goes on and this becomes Shackleton’s entire mission, his approach is affecting. His story is made especially interesting to see and hear because the director is so engaging and personable in his voice-over delivery. His British accent and friendly demeanor, which we eventually see on screen, comes across like a buddy telling you about something he couldn’t quite make happen.
This might sound like a goofy approach for a documentary, but Shackleton also infuses the story with images and scenes from other television true crime series which essentially do what he was trying to do. The result is less a film about not being able to make a film and more about the genre itself and the various tropes that are copied in many of these docuseries. For instance, Shackleton describes what visuals he would have used to bring the story to life. He points out how so many of these shows feature images of flashing camera bulbs, swinging lamps, and interrogation tables that seem almost required for any true crime series. They’ve become conventions of the genre. As such, Shackleton is also exposing the various contrived elements of documentaries that border on director created falsities which draw viewers in suggesting the productions might be less real than they are.
It's also interesting to hear how some filmmakers bypass not getting rights to books or other forms of intellectual property. Even though Shackleton couldn’t use Lafferty’s book, he could use other details the author described during radio interviews or other print sources. As such, it is a lesson on what’s required to make a documentary and how filmmakers can circumvent some of the roadblocks to telling their story.
Shackleton includes many empty shots of spaces he could have used in his original proposed project. In so doing, he also exposes how some filmmakers use settings that stand-in for actual locations in which the real events occurred. For instance, he discusses AA meetings that Taylor attended that took place in a church somewhere. Shackleton uses the exterior of a random church to set such a scene. It’s not the actual church but another stand-in. Some who might believe that everything in a documentary must be as authentic as possible for it to come across as truly non-fiction and believable might be bothered by what must be created to establish some sense of reality even though it is manufactured by the directors and producers.
When I first heard of this film, I wasn’t interested in seeing it because I thought the focus would rely on the actual zodiac killer case. I’m glad that isn’t what Shackleton decided to do. That story is out there in books and other films. Instead, he has created a primer on the challenges of documentary filmmaking and how, with a little bit of humor and creativity, potentially abandoned projects could be resuscitated, and the stories can still be told.
Zodiac Killer Project had a brief theatrical release in the Fall. It is now available to rent/buy on streaming services including Amazon Prime.
FILM: ZODIAC KILLER PROJECT
DIRECTED BY: CHARLIE SHACKLETON
RATING: 3 ½ out of 4 stars
By Dan Pal
Several years ago, I taught a course called Documentary Production which explored the different approaches filmmakers have taken to tell true stories. If I were teaching the class today, I’d include this film on the must view list. Documentaries can be based on events that are currently happening or that took place many years or even centuries earlier. Zodiac Killer Project is a very unique documentary based on the search for the infamous serial killer back in the late 1960s and 1970s. Filmmaker Charlie Shackleton had planned to make a film centering on the details described in a book by Lyndon E. Lafferty who attempted to follow George Russell Taylor, believed to be the killer. Shackleton researched the story and started finding sites he would use to shoot his film. However, he lost the rights to the book and had to abandon the project. The new film is a depiction of how he planned to shoot it and where – essentially telling Lafferty’s story without actually using the book.
The opening shot of Zodiac Killer Project is a long, extended shot of a rest stop where Lafferty and Taylor may have once crossed paths. Shackleton narrates what he believed happened at this location and details how he would have shot the scene. It’s a strange way to begin a documentary, making it feel like a cheap way of telling the story he couldn’t tell. However, as the film goes on and this becomes Shackleton’s entire mission, his approach is affecting. His story is made especially interesting to see and hear because the director is so engaging and personable in his voice-over delivery. His British accent and friendly demeanor, which we eventually see on screen, comes across like a buddy telling you about something he couldn’t quite make happen.
This might sound like a goofy approach for a documentary, but Shackleton also infuses the story with images and scenes from other television true crime series which essentially do what he was trying to do. The result is less a film about not being able to make a film and more about the genre itself and the various tropes that are copied in many of these docuseries. For instance, Shackleton describes what visuals he would have used to bring the story to life. He points out how so many of these shows feature images of flashing camera bulbs, swinging lamps, and interrogation tables that seem almost required for any true crime series. They’ve become conventions of the genre. As such, Shackleton is also exposing the various contrived elements of documentaries that border on director created falsities which draw viewers in suggesting the productions might be less real than they are.
It's also interesting to hear how some filmmakers bypass not getting rights to books or other forms of intellectual property. Even though Shackleton couldn’t use Lafferty’s book, he could use other details the author described during radio interviews or other print sources. As such, it is a lesson on what’s required to make a documentary and how filmmakers can circumvent some of the roadblocks to telling their story.
Shackleton includes many empty shots of spaces he could have used in his original proposed project. In so doing, he also exposes how some filmmakers use settings that stand-in for actual locations in which the real events occurred. For instance, he discusses AA meetings that Taylor attended that took place in a church somewhere. Shackleton uses the exterior of a random church to set such a scene. It’s not the actual church but another stand-in. Some who might believe that everything in a documentary must be as authentic as possible for it to come across as truly non-fiction and believable might be bothered by what must be created to establish some sense of reality even though it is manufactured by the directors and producers.
When I first heard of this film, I wasn’t interested in seeing it because I thought the focus would rely on the actual zodiac killer case. I’m glad that isn’t what Shackleton decided to do. That story is out there in books and other films. Instead, he has created a primer on the challenges of documentary filmmaking and how, with a little bit of humor and creativity, potentially abandoned projects could be resuscitated, and the stories can still be told.
Zodiac Killer Project had a brief theatrical release in the Fall. It is now available to rent/buy on streaming services including Amazon Prime.