Watch Jade For Free

Why so much hype?

Did you people see the same film I saw?

The story, direction, characters, and writing/dialogue is akin to taking a tranquilizer shot to the neck, but everything else was so well done.

A terrific literary drama and character piece that shows how the process of creating art can be seen differently by those doing it and those looking at it from the outside.

Jade has a pretty straight forward story with a murder and a love triangle between the three main characters. Because of the love triangle, it creates a conflict of interest between the two male characters. The plot sounds interesting enough. However, the way the final product was executed did not deliver an exhilarating or satisfactory story, conclusion, or thriller. Although, the unrated version, which is 12 mints longer, does assist in creating additional development for some of the characters.The film does inhabit i think some of Friedkin's finest work. An example would be the car chases sequence, which is in fact one of the most spectacular and thrilling chases ever filmed. I think it's his best to date. Cinematography for the film is beautiful and very noir like in the night scenes. Although he did a decent job with directing the leading characters, only Chazz Palminteri came across as really inhabiting his character. To me the problem with the film is that the story probably got lost in the editing or through rewrites.The bluray for this film, by Lionsgate, is one of the worst transfers I've ever seen. I wish paramount would put out both version of the film on a bluray. The theatrical version is not impressive at all but the unrated cut does a better job.

In the stock market most people buy long with the hope the price of their stock will go up. Others buy short, which is the opposite of long. Many of the reviews of this movie are long. I see this movie as short. A well acted poorly written/directed story. Several examples follow. One example is when Caruso's character shows the governor a group of pictures and never asks for the name of the woman in the pictures. Another is the unrealistic and unbelievably slow motion car chase scene to, through and beyond Chinatown. Another example is the idea of multiple murderers each killing for different reasons. Ultimately no one is punished for any of the deaths. In fairness to Caruso his performance is CSI Miami 7 years early. Regardless, this is a very poorly thought out and presented movie.

Ignoring a plot line that is recycled, a climax that is a bit shaky with a twist that is strangely predictable, I'd say Jade could pass for an entertaining neo-noir. Starting with a delicious title sequence, the movie is stepped mostly in style. Something about it recalls Brian de Palma. Within the frame, it is staged quite theatrically, and it works. Jade maintains enough coherency to keep us involved, and director William Friedkin avoids overselling the sex factor (which was the mistake Paul Verhoeven made when adapting Joe Eszterhas' previous script, Basic Instinct, and also Showgirls). It is definitely worth noting that Jade is exceptionally well shot. Everything looks rich and elaborate, including a car chase sequence that feels like a roller coaster ride. Based on the appropriate lens choice and camera angles, cars appear to leap into mid air when driving over San Franscso's many street bumps. The film is also well scored, even though it borrows a bit much from Igor Stravinski's Rite of Spring. The only thing I wasn't too comfortable with was the story. It is derivative and cheesy, but even at that, it could've been worse. When all is said and done, Jade (even with its problems) has enough to sell to make it worth a ninety minute time investment for noir fans.

This is a Basic Instict rehash plain and simple, actually it's a pre draft of basic instict. The directing is a mess, I can't believe this guy shot the french connection. But now he's old and where he tries to be different here, he is instead just plainly bad...Tight close ups for no reasons, boring set scenes, saturated photography...the cast is decent but with such a trite script...the dialog is worse than trivial.Its only saving grace is an unintended one, and maybe with that meditation in mind this can actually become a good film: Because the grotesqueness, blandness and stupidity in the realisation and script of this film reflects the world of powerless unsexual morons acting all powerful and sexual. Obviously this is unintended as this tries to be edgy, erotic and smart. It tries to be a murder mystery, a who done it on coke a la BI, but it ends up being a who gives a ..., I 've never been so emotionally detached at the end of any mystery. But in this way it poetically conveys within it's form the artificiality of power and sex, the dead end that is pleasure without sentiments and sensibility.A bland, derivative, tasteless film about power, sex and wealth, that fails so miserably that its failure becomes a medium of expression and gives the film an unintended second narrative level. It's also starkly realist, because what can be more real than a failed Hollywood flop on sex, money and power. You don't see people doing realistic actions, but you see people acting, directing badly, writing scripts badly. The epitome of decadence. It could even be quite a good sobering experience, even weirdly lyrical if one watches it with that in mind.