Watch The Jewel of the Nile For Free

I think this is a new genre that they're all sort of working their way through it and haven't got all the kinks worked out yet but it's a genre that works for me.

what a terribly boring film. I'm sorry but this is absolutely not deserving of best picture and will be forgotten quickly. Entertaining and engaging cinema? No. Nothing performances with flat faces and mistaking silence for subtlety.

The film never slows down or bores, plunging from one harrowing sequence to the next.

While it doesn't offer any answers, it both thrills and makes you think.

The film disappoints a bit, but what sequel doesn't? Douglas and Turner still have on-screen chemistry, and that carries the movie. Movies made decades ago are usually interesting in illuminating the mores of the times in which they were made. While by 1985 political correctness had reared its ugly head, it did not totally dominate Hollywood yet, so it was fun to go back to the days when one was allowed to make Moslems the movie villains. And even to mock them. This script would never be green-lighted today, when all movie villains must be white.

This is a lesser follow-up to the blockbuster hit ROMANCING THE STONE that aims to repeat the same formula for maximum box office business. Unfortunately, it's a little off. While I enjoyed the first film, I didn't think it was any masterpiece and this film follows the law of diminishing returns in that everything we see is less, not more.There's a greater focus on silly comedy here, as in the nonsensical dream sequence that re-introduces Douglas's character, and the characters seem more shrill and annoying than we saw previously. The story this time around takes place in the Mediterranean and North Africa, but the plot is even more lightweight and superfluous than before and there's precisely nothing to remember it by. It's pretty well paced, for sure, but in all other respects it's a forgettable film: a cheesy '80s grab for cash and nothing else.

I loved (Romancing the Stone). I was quite amazed when I knew that it has a sequel. For a long time I didn't come upon it at all (some channels hate it ?!). It took me 13 years to get to watch it. And did I love it? Yes. But lesser than the first. So why is that ?! First of all, the script. Compare (Romancing..) to this one, and you'd know the difference between the Hollywood perfect script and the Hollywood draft. Simply the first had more emotions; being like a romantic comedy about the opposite attract, more talk about the dreams; which makes the characters humans to be related to, before heroes to cheer on, more hard choices; there was a scene where the lead had to decide between a gem and a girl, and more twists; namely : more heat. This one is only a fine skeleton for all of the above, however empty. Looking to the movie as a whole assures that it's not the matter of the action-with-more movie and its pure-action sequel, rather the memorable B movie and another B movie !True after the jungles in the first they went to the desert in this one, and after pursuing a gem, this time the gem is a man, but that was it concerning any "changing" ! The movie is enjoyable but hyped. Everything runs very fast. In one scene : Joan is at a book signing engagement, meets Omar, a charming Arab ruler, he offers her the opportunity to live at his palace while she writes about him, she agrees, leaves Jack, and travels with Omar…JUST LIKE THAT ?!! The characters don't think, they just do. There is no gag thrown in-between or special emotional moment. And it lacks the surprises along the way. To say the least : It's tangible that the time spent in writing (The Jewel..) was less than the time spent in writing (Romancing..).The title character, "The Jewel", is extremely pathetic! Who is that man anyway? Sometimes he's a very poor street magician, sometimes he's a man of miracles, and all the time he seems like A-one fool ! And more than that I was forced to believe that this fool is a religious leader and beloved icon ???!!! It mirrors dumb writing for sure, especially when he uses naive tricks to rescue Jack at one moment, while – at another – we discover that he can walk into fire with no harm whatsoever!! Or it's part of many Hollywood movies' dogma while dealing with Arabs; whereas they're pictured, eternally, as throng of idiots (the movie, this round, resorts to giving them a funky look sometimes to change the flavor of the pretty old idea though !). Or maybe it's the way things work in a movie about American adventurous leads, where the American must be the cowboy, and the rest must be Red Indians !Then, THE MUSIC ! Jack Nitzsche produced electronic weak thing that doesn't live up to what it expresses of non-stop action and adventures. It's a major let-down which almost turned the movie into a cheap, hasty and cheesy TV episode. And take it from me, don't beat a dead horse by comparing the first's music, by Alan Silvestri, to this; it would sound like a comparison between Charles Chaplin and Tom Arnold ! The special effects took a lot from the movie's personality as something done by big production company. They, instead, fit a B movie from independent destitute company! The walking into the fire scene is clear example.The 3 stars, (Kathleen Turner), (Michael Douglas) and (Danny DeVito), aren't playing their roles inasmuch as playing at them, with not much of fun. However (Kathleen Turner) is still a treat to watch apart. She reminds me, with that husky voice of hers, with (Lauren Bacall). Back then, at her young non-fat phase, she was so sexy. And since her long legs couldn't be resisted, they have been put, exactly like the previous movie, in always torn skirts, so with a lot of running and jumping around you might have a pretty sight indeed. Even at one moment (DeVito) calls her "LEGS", and obviously he has a point. By the way, for every male viewer who missed it; its color was white (You know well what I'm talking about !). The character of (Omar Khalifa) is none other than a handsome version of (Muammar al-Gaddafi), see how the smallest details refer to him (the picture with the commander's white suit). At the time (al-Gaddafi) was a favorite laughingstock in the American movies. Albeit, the Nile doesn't flow in Libya.The stars' glow, not glee, and the action sequences are the sole facts in this movie. Director Lewis Teague, who made many TV series, mastered a good comic book. He was as vigorous as (Robert Zemeckis), the director of (Romancing the Stone), yet with less saturated script and more speedy pace. I bet, with not much time between the 2 movies, they quickened the sequel. Overall (The Jewel..) made money as huge as the first (rarely when a Michael Douglas production goes wrong), it works in terms of being flashy flash, and it shows the nature of the initial scripts in Hollywood, and the initial ideas at understanding other nations in the same city too !

I remember when I first viewed this action adventure romp in the 80's after its entertaining predecessor "Romancing The Stone" and being disappointed then but gave it another chance recently, unfortunately with the same underwhelming impact as before.The main fault here is that it's an almost exact remake of the original so that there's no plot surprises or character development to compel the viewer's interest. It also makes the same mistake as the second Indiana Jones film in devoting the bulk of its length to an extended chase sequence which for all its pyrotechnic interludes actually ends up boring you to indifference. It's also weighed down with a lumpen synth-driven soundtrack completely at odds with the Eastern locations.In its favour, it's colourful and bright, has one or two smile-inducing lines and the leads try hard, Douglas handsome and stylish as the matinée dare-devil idol, Jack, Turner pretty and vivacious as romantic adventurer Joan and DeVito his usual waspish self as Jack's perennial rival for the imaginary gem of the misleading title.You can certainly see where the money's been spent, with exotic locations, literally hundreds of extras and enough expensive hardware to supply a small third-world country. However, like so many things from the decade that style forgot, namely the 80's, it hasn't aged well and looks like nothing so much these days as about a hundred Duran Duran videos welded back to back, which I don't mean as a compliment!