I’m a little late to the party on this one, but I finally got around to watching Zodiac this week. Despite being one of the most notorious serial killers in U.S. history, I knew fairly little about the case, so I was very curious going into this. The plot basically revolves around the newsroom of a major newspaper which received letters from the Zodiac killer in the late 60s. You do witness several murders that the Zodiac commits, but the majority of the story is based on the investigation itself.
The movie appears to have been based on a book that was written about the investigation. The author plays a fairly large role in this movie, so there’s no real surprise there. This doesn’t mean that the story is particularly one-tracked, but it is obviously biased to his experiences.
If I had any complaints, it’s that the movie seemed a little long at times, although it was never really dull. I was also fairly disappointed in the quality of the video transfer, but others have suggested that the yellowish hue and soft picture may have been done stylistically to represent the times.
If you’re curious about the case and investigation surrounding the (unsolved) Zodiac killings, this is definitely a film to check out. I followed-up my viewing with some research on the web and most of the movie seems to be a fairly accurate representation of the events that took place.
Recommendation – Rent it, but make sure you set aside time for the 2.5 hour show


I was very much looking forward to this one at the theater, because it looked so interesting on the trailers. When it pretty much bombed at the box office, I lost hope for it. When it finally came to DVD (somewhat under the radar), I decided it was at least worth a rental.

I honestly wasn’t expecting much from a movie that didn’t see much action at the box office and hasn’t been hyped on TV, but I was pleasantly surprised.
Subwoofer Q&A with ToastedPirate
October 8, 2007I have to apologize for my lack of posting lately, things have just been hectic at home and work. I’ve seen several movies in that time, including a few good ones, so I’ll have to make a note to post those reviews later. I have been asked a few questions about the best bang-for-the-buck in both budget subwoofers and receivers that handle HDMI.
First off, the subwoofer…
There are three real options in the budget range, which I consider to be under-$300. These are:
Each have their pluses and minuses, so you’ll have to choose based on your exact budget and requirements. The AV123 option is a heavyweight 8″ sub with a 500-watt (150w RMS) amp, adjustable phase, gain and crossover. It’s rated down to 28Hz and is the punchiest of the three, mostly due to the size and design.
The BIC is a larger 12″ sub, with a 500-watt (150w RMS) amp, adjustable phase, gain and crossover. It’s rated down to 24Hz and provides a bit more “oomph” for the home theater environment. This is the particular sub that I own, and I can vouch for both the power and clarity behind it. Your walls and windows will likely begin to shake before the sub ever bottoms out – assuming you aren’t trying to fill a large room.
The Cadence is a fairly new offering, but it’s also a 12″ sub with a smaller amp. It has adjustable gain and crossover, but no phase control (to my knowledge). I have not heard this one before, so I can’t really comment on it – but as I understand it, the Cadence competes fairly well with the other two. I have also heard that it needs a little more tweaking that the others to really sound good.
Unfortunately, there just aren’t many good options at the big box stores without spending a lot of money. Both JBL, Polk and even Infinity offer some decent subs…but most of those start at around $500. For the best price/performance ratio, I would definitely recommend one of the three subwoofers above – with my biased opinion picking the BIC H100 as the top dog.
In my next post, I’ll be covering HDMI-based A/V receivers…
Posted in Commentary | 1 Comment »