WasAnnon Slow pace in the most part of the movie.

WiseRatFlames An unexpected masterpiece

BelSports This is a coming of age storyline that you've seen in one form or another for decades. It takes a truly unique voice to make yet another one worth watching.

Teddie Blake The movie turns out to be a little better than the average. Starting from a romantic formula often seen in the cinema, it ends in the most predictable (and somewhat bland) way.

gavin6942 The sequel to "Chinatown" (1974) finds Jake Gittes (Jack Nicholson) investigating adultery and murder... and the money that comes from oil.Made 16 years after its famous predecessor, the film had a very troubled production, and was supposed to be made around 1985. Originally, producer Robert Evans was to play the "second" Jake, but Towne, who was going to direct the film at that time, did not think he was the right choice and fired him. After this, Nicholson ended up directing (and it would be his last film to date).Obviously, it was never going to be as good as the original. But it did not deserve to flop, either. Jack Nicholson is commanding in his performance (and direction), and I would suspect that the film would have a growing fan base as Harvey Keitel's star rose post-Tarantino. This is the same great underworld as before, and I wish a third film would have come to pass.

punishmentpark I've seen this one before, but hardly remembered a thing of it when watching it again last night - not a good sign, I suppose. This is the only one of three films that I saw that were directed by Jack Nicholson himself, and I really wonder how much help he got. Some cinematography is dazzlingly beautiful, but did he really - for instance - find that exact location (the one with the wooden poles) at the Californian coastline where Rawley and Gittes have their conversation by himself? Maybe that's not what directing is all about, and I'm a bit of a laymen in that respect, but isn't directing also about keeping an eye on the development of the story and coaching your actors? The story is not uninteresting, but it's a somewhat uninspired carbon-copy of its predecessor with rather mediocre acting, and, I guessed straight away that the 'mystery lady' was indeed Miss Mulwray... And that soundtrack could have been toned a bit, couldn't it?Then, there are some really odd scenes, seemingly thrown in for the 'good measure' of simply trying something different, like the sex scene with Stowe and the 'suck my gun' scene with Keith. They cóuld have worked, but they felt (way) out of tune here.I can't say that 'The two Jakes' is a bad film, it is much too easy on the eyes and the story and acting are entertaining enough, but - unsurprisingly - it has almost none of the magic of its predecessor 'Chinatown'. The cinematography is pretty much impeccable, the story was worked out pretty well and the overall atmosphere was more than doable, but that's about it. By the way, did anyone notice Jack rambling on an on (he could talk the balls off a...) while that one tune set in, that same tune that the Coen brothers used in the film noir parody 'The big Lebowski'? Another fun bit was when Jake broke into a house when an old-time commercial was on. I hope it was an original, but I really don't know.Well entertaining, for sure, but also quite bleak compared to the original. 6 to 7 out of 10.

bkoganbing Fortunately for the movie going public, Jack Nicholson got to do another version of one of his most popular roles as private detective J.J. Gittes in The Two Jakes. It's not as good as Chinatown, few films are, but Nicholson is right back in stride as the laconic Philip Marlowe like private eye from the Raymond Chandler era of fictional detectives.In fact repeating their roles from Chinatown besides Nicholson are James Hong, Joe Mantell, and Perry Lopez. And the plot is a continuation in many ways of Chinatown and the case that we knew would haunt Nicholson the rest of his days.It's now post World War II in Los Angeles and Nicholson has been retained by real estate mogul Harvey Keitel whose first name is also Jake in a divorce matter. He's hoping to catch wife Meg Tilly en flagrato with his partner whom he's been thinking has been two timing him with his wife. Nicholson keeping up with the times as a good gumshoe has now the latest recording device and he's got the trysting place bugged with he and Keitel in the next room.But when at one point Keitel produces a revolver and bursts into the two of them and shoots the partner it looks at first like a case of Keitel acting on the unwritten law. But appearances are quite deceiving, as deceiving as they were in Chinatown. And a lot of people want that recording of the event Nicholson most of all because it has a mention of the child of Faye Dunaway from back in the case he Nicholson was involved with in Chinatown.The rest of the film is Nicholson stalling everybody while he tries to find out just what all this is about. Along the way he meets criminal attorney for Keitel, Eli Wallach, a Mickey Cohen like mobster in Ruben Blades, and the widow of Keitel's partner, Madeline Stowe who is ready and willing to make Nicholson an offer he will find it hard to refuse.Nicholson directed himself in this version, taking over for Roman Polanski whom as we know was in exile from the USA back then. He knew his character well and smoothly continued the saga of J.J. Gittes. The atmosphere of the Forties Los Angeles is well done. It's mentioned that a third Gittes film was planned. Hopefully those plans are not scrapped and we'll get to see Nicholson once again in one of my favorite roles of his.

jzappa Knowing this Chinatown sequel's detested reputation, I was too interested in seeing a movie directed by Jack Nicholson to turn away. I was surprised to find that it is very under-appreciated. Nicholson is quite an inventive, if a little show-offy, director. His confident helming of the very late sequel to a highly revered contemporary classic is full of interesting shots and his performance realistically portrays an older, wiser Jake Gittes who has been seasoned with philosophies on the pain and importance of the past.It is not simply on account of Nicholson. Robert Towne's own continuation of his predecessor is quite creative. Harvey Keitel plays the second Jake, who has hired the initial Jake to catch his wife cheating on him red-handed. In the course of the sting, Keitel up and shoots the adulterous lover, who turns out to be his real estate partner. Nicholson is now under intense scrutiny for his unwitting part in the crime and has to figure out if it was justifiable homicide or straight murder. The case proceeds to elude to California's booming oil industry as well as his own past after he stumbles upon a wire recording during the investigation that mentions the daughter of Faye Dunaway's ill-fated character in the last film.The Two Jakes, to me, can stand on its own with Chinatown. Polanski directed the first film much much differently than Nicholson addresses this follow-up. I don't believe in the case of Chinatown a sequel needs to be a comparable continuation. Making a second installment sixteen years later allows a lot of license for it to be its own beast. Some such sequels done that way are disasters. The Two Jakes stays afloat. And Madeleine Stowe remains the most insatiably attractive woman of any superlative comment that I've made within the past month, at least. And I've made a lot.The film's theatrical trailer is actually incredible. It's narrated by Gittes, telling us how the war was good for Los Angeles in so many different ways that contribute to his business, as extremely dry bits of humor throughout the film punctuate it here and there and provocative, often voyeuristic shots from the movie are included.