Life: A grim and sordid mess in which the predators among us prevail. That is the dark message of this deeply atmospheric tale of private eye Gittes (Jack Nicholson) and Evelyn, the rich but emotionally moribund woman he tries to save (Faye Dunaway). Gittes's dialogue is great and Evelyn's every gesture speaks to her traumatic past. Their chemistry offers Evelyn perhaps the only moments of joy she has ever experienced and her smile in bed offers the scarcest of glimmers of hope in a world that is rotten to its core. Maybe the message here is that human connection offers a moment of succor in a hopelessly corrupted terrain. We're lucky if we stumble upon it. But it surely won't last. The plot here is complicated and difficult to follow at times, but well worth the effort. It is beautifully accompanied by a sultry jazz-trumpet score. Poor Evelyn. She made an effort to fight back. One shudders for the child she fails to save.

*NO SPOILER YET* In case you're wondering why the incredibly high ratings, bear in mind this is a Polanski (all the cinema lovers, "intellectuals" and critics' favorite) starring now classic Jack Nicholson in a typical film noir that takes itself so very seriously it's almost telling you you have to love it or else you're not a true cinema purist.To be honest, Nicholson as the other actors put in a good performance. Dunaway is alright but not nearly brilliant, but anyways the point is even incredibly talented actors couldn't make mediocrity into greatness. The script is fine if you're a fanatic of crime films, but if you just so happen not to be particularly this is the slowest 2hrs10min you've seen in a long time. In a long time. The pacing is S-L-O-W, you couldn't quite call this piece exactly "stimulating". The very plot is completely ordinary - big powerful bad guy covers up his horrible crimes and wants more money more power, complicated story about L.A.'s water and who owns it (wow no fascinating) - and has no edge to it whatsoever for the genre. What is considered "superb structure" can just as easily feel like a ton of events that pile up and further sinks the film into a delirium of enduring boredom where instead of being uneventful, it is full of stuff happening, but all of which are dull and typical.What's more, there's nothing else about the film that helps lift the bland quality of the whole: dialog has no particular wit and also subscribes to the typical formula, the humor is corny, there's no real moral or actual greater point, the emotional dimension is fake and cold, the cinematography is flat and linear, and there isn't even that big old ending at the end that could've perhaps given legitimacy to the darn thing.*SPOILER* - the Dunaway mother/sister thing is ridiculous and unnecessary and brings no strength to the plot, the fact she dies in the end right in front of that poor traumatized kid is senseless and also with no worth, how it's strongly implied the grandfather wants to sexually abuse her too and grabs her and takes her away is just insanely unnecessary and anti-climactic. And the clues towards the end are technically ridiculous: so of all places he drowns the guy in his pool in his backyard (conveniently the only place with salt water in the whole entire perimeter), of course drops his glasses in there and in order to read that paper at the end he pulls out and wears the exact same pair...Lots of flaws there. You can like it and all, but the flaws are certainly there.

There's a certain elegance that grabs you immediately with this movie. The cinematography is incredible but not showy. It follows the action but never chases it. I was endlessly struck with thought that they just don't make movies like this.After finally viewing this film it's not difficult to see the many movies that borrow from it. I immediately thought of Brick and so aspects of the Nice Guys.That aside, it's just a detective tale that is simple on the surface but once he starts scratching, it's ugly underneath. The 2 leads are excellent and seeing Jack Nicholson in his younger days I was reminded how hammy his performances have become. Faye Dunaway was perfect as well and I could easily forget she was in the Bye Bye Man last year.Not really much else to say other than if you haven't seen this movie, watch it asap. It has aged wonderfully, looks fantastic on Blu-ray and quite frankly one of if not the best Polanski movie.

By now it's only redundant to heap more praise on this film. The writing, acting, cinematography, direction, editing, etc. seamlessly come together as if predestined. And yes, I think Polanski's decision to go with a downbeat ending was the correct choice - that final scene is unforgettable. What I'd like to focus on is Faye Dunaway's remarkable contribution to the film. She reportedly did not get along with Polanski, in fact, was labeled "difficult" on several of her movies. Yet she turned in an incomparable, complex performance. Starting with her look. Hitchcock placed great emphasis on each character's outward appearance, which told us just about all we needed to know. Here Dunaway takes a page from his book and immerses herself in the trappings of a wealthy woman of the 1930s. Compare the way she looked in "Bonnie and Clyde," also set in the 1930s. The eyes and hair are straight out of 1967. Keep in mind that she was 33 when she made 'Chinatown." That's a knowing performance from someone so young. Her cool demeanor when we first meet her turns out to be misleading. She embodies the classic femme fatale until just toward the end, in her famous "She's my sister. She's my daughter" scene, when we suddenly understand she's the only character with an ounce of integrity. There's been quite a lot going on beneath the surface. Next time you watch this film, pay close attention to Dunaway. You won't find a better female performance anywhere.