I remember hearing whispers of the low-budget heist thriller Killing Zoe back in 1993, mainly because of its link to Quentin Tarantino, the then up-and-coming indie writer/director who was quickly becoming the poster boy for '90s cool following the controversial success of his debut Reservoir Dogs. Killing Zoe was directed by Roger Avary, the film enthusiast who worked in a video store with Tarantino. When the writing duo won an Academy Award for Pulp Fiction in 1994, Tarantino was the best thing since sliced bread, and Killing Zoe enjoyed a brief cult success due to the motor- mouth's name being plastered above the title, although only serving as executive producer. Almost a quarter- century later, Avary's film has faded into obscurity, and deservedly so.American Zed (Eric Stoltz) arrives in Paris and quickly befriends a talkative cab driver, who offers to set him up for the night with a girl. Back at his hotel room, he is soon joined by the young and beautiful Zoe (Julie Delpy), who insists that she is not a prostitute but an art student looking to make some quick cash to get by. She inexplicably falls for the overwhelmingly passive Zed, until Parisian Eric (Jean-Hugues Anglade) barges in and throws her out. It turns out that Zed is in Paris to assist his old friend with a bank job, where he will use his expertise to crack open the tricky vault. Eric insists that the heist happens the very next day, and rather than take the time to mull over the plan in detail, Eric, Zed and the rest of the gang indulge in a night of excess, involving drink, women, and lots and lots of heroin.It's no surprise that the eventual robbery goes spectacularly wrong, with the gang (including Gary Kemp) still tripping from the night before and feeling particularly trigger-happy. What occurs in the final third is a hateful and tedious orgy of blood and shouting. The crew aren't endearing in their ineptitude, but completely annoying and charmless. It certainly has a deliberate manic energy to it, but is done so with a lack of real substance. The movie is at its best during the moments building up to the heist, which use a mixture of out-of-focus photography and garbled dialogue to create a truly whacked-out atmosphere. It's almost like that moment when you realise you've had too much but your friends won't allow you to leave, only with a bunch of junkie psychopaths in your face spouting their own nonsensical philosophy. Overall, it's an unpleasantly nihilistic experience that offers only a glimpse into Avary's talents and obvious fondness for cinema. Keep your eyes peeled for a bizarre cameo by Ron Jeremy.

This movie is exceptional. In same way Reservoir Dogs and Pulp Fiction are. Story is well thought out, down to the point, not all characters are fleshed out (Reservoir Dogs does fleshing out much better), but they are not meant to be for reasons that become obvious once you watch the movie.Acting is superb. Casting is great. Story is believable. Ending is perhaps predictable (or I saw too many movies, perhaps both), but it is fitting. There should be lot more movies like this one. A rare gem!This movie had rating of 6.4, I gave it a 10. I don't really understand why would anybody give it less than 8. If you are not into genre, don't watch the movie, or at least don't rate it down for all the wrong reasons. I rate movies either 1 or 10 for very simple reason. All the other numbers are meaningless. I either recommend you see a movie, or advise you to stay away as when compared to other movies of its type falls too short to bother with. I neither rate, not review average movies.

with this film being directed by Roger Avery and Quentin Tarantino doing the screenplay i was sure this was going to be a gem. i was wrong. i don't hate this film but in no ways do i like it.i love Roger Avery because of his amazing direction in rules of attraction and his screenplays to pulp fiction and silent hill but he made a mistake making this. do i really need to comment on Tarantino, we all know hes a genius.this movie is just set around a gang robbing a bank but fails due to silly people participating in the robberyi'm disappointed in Tarantino and Avery for doing this film but doesn't change my mind on how amazing they both are. everyone makes mistakes......... 3/10...........j.d Seaton

Quentin Tarantino's partner in crime Roger Avary (co-writer on "Pulp Fiction") ventures out on his own (Q.T. goes exec. prod. this time) for this over-boiled French thriller.Eric Stoltz is Zed, safe cracker extraordinaire who has drifted over to France from the U.S. at the request of an old friend. There he teams up with a motley crew of drugged out hippies who, with little or no planning, think they can knock off a bank vault full of gold bullion on a French national holiday.Avary has reworked the robbery gone wrong theme that Tarantino developed so well in "Reservoir Dogs", only "Killing Zoe" is not good enough to survive on the strength of this alone, so Avary has thrown in a rather beautiful distraction. Julie Delpy is Zoe, a student come call girl who entertains Zed on his arrival in Paris. A stunning distraction she certainly is, but nothing more.I guess our director wanted to add a different angle to this basic theme, but sadly the move did not help to add the depth his shallow plot so desperately needed. There was never a story in this idea, which was nothing more than that, an idea. Even the surreal journey into the seedy dives of Paris is uninspiring. I figure one would have to concede that there was never much of a movie in the story of a bunch of gangsters shooting each other up over a botched jewellery heist either, that is until you add intricate characters and snappy dialogue. "Reservoir Dogs" had it, "Killing Zoe" did not.Stoltz's strong interpretation of the doubtful Zed and Jean Hughes-Anglade's mad portrayal of the obsessive ring leader do nothing to lift proceedings. In short, Avary has unsuccessfully attempted to conjure entertainment out of nothing.Friday, September 15, 1995 - Astor Theatre