The Two Jakes has the misfortune of following an absolutely exceptional original in Chinatown. Few sequels live up the original and one can only wonder at how different, and presumably better it would have been if Polanski had directed again. This is not a bad movie.It was nice to see the character of Jake Gittes again. It does have its moments of private eye noir and intrigue. Jack Nicholson and Harvey Keitel are always fascinating to watch. Some of the action and word play is really enjoyable. Unfortunately it has no rhythm. The plot is long winded, confused and tentative. On too many occasion's I felt my interest waning. However I decided to see it through and felt the pace gather a bit towards the end. The acting is good and there's enough in it to keep it fairly interesting, but at times I felt like I was just hanging in there watching and hoping for it to become great, which it never does. If someone asked me to explain what happened in the film I think I would actually struggle to make sense of it. Nicholson and Keitel make it watchable, but not memorable. It's not not great because Chinatown was so good. It's just not great full stop. It was an average sequel. Not the first and certainly won't be the last...

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.

...of course i don't mean Jack Nicholson, he brings his A game to just about everything he does. This one was rather dull IMO. It just didn't have any pop. The story throughout just didn't have any wow moments like Chinatown did.Now for the miscasting. Harvey Keitel's tough guy persona just didn't work in this one. Richard Farnsworth was odd as a choice for the demon oil man and to round it out, If Meg Tilly wasn't miscast, then the casting agent was either sick that day, deaf or dead on blind. She's never been one to hit the Hollywood signs for popularity or bring in the crowds so for her to be in this was just a last minute choice or a bad choice.A little about this being too long. For something to carry on for 2 hrs and 37 minutes and slowly dribble out bits and pieces with bad casting and and average screenplay(watch for a few brief, has nothing to do with scenes with the PI's supposed wife. Didn't belong in the movie), I was just waiting for the end to say I actually finished it.I recommend anyone who's seen Chinatown to finish it off and watch this but if you haven't and aren't planning on seeing it, you aren't missing anything by skipping this one .BTW...is it me or could anyone else see Nicholson having a recurring character as a PI in some movies nowadays? He hasn't had a hit in a while, he could do more of these as his character in this. I could see it working.

It comes as no surprise to learn that this follow-up to Chinatown was ravaged by all manner of funding and directorial crises. It appears to be a film that is limping, carried to it's conclusion on the shoulders of one or two people. Nicholson is one of these St Christophers of the big screen but he needs more help than this. The film's story is extremely difficult to follow, an unmodulated trickle of obfuscated cause and effect and voice-over. Because Nicholson is directing there's none of the objectivity that gives a rocking tension between episodes and characters - we feel further isolated from the story, entirely dependent on a single perspective. The acting is reasonable but doesn't really make much of an impact: Keitel as the other Jake and Meg Tilly as his wife are the choicest. This film's greatest triumph is in demonstrating just what a good film Chinatown really is. 3/10