Chinatown - Movie Reviews - Rotten Tomatoes

Chinatown Reviews

Page 2 of 259
June 25, 2016
noir at its (70's) best.
½ June 25, 2016
One of the best mysteries I saw. Jack Nicholson is such a beauty to watch.
Must watch.
June 23, 2016
A triumph: The music, the script, the directing, the photography, and Jack Nicholson's outstanding performance.
May 7, 2016
I used to think of this as a perfect film. It's not. It can be pretentious. It can be slow. The movie is about three hours(!!!) long. But then again, everything is needed. No part of this film could be cut without leaving the film incomplete, and if it had been done any differently, it wouldn't be the great film that it is. It's brilliant. It's Chinatown.
March 21, 2016
Great acting directing with ending that is unforgettable
March 7, 2016
"Chinatown" wouldn't ever just be an exercise in modern film noir. It was the film that cemented Roman Polanski's status as one of cinema's greatest living filmmakers, the film that propelled Jack Nicholson to the status of a bona fide star, the film that reminded the nation why Faye Dunaway was always destined to be more than Bonnie Parker, more than Vicki Anderson. It was the film that went for the subversive when most of its kind safely turned to the arms of the homage; it was the film that stripped sexy romanticism away from the noir genre and ensured us that the detectives of Raymond Chandler and Dashiell Hammett's best works had it much better than their real-life counterparts.
There has, perhaps, never been a time during which "Chinatown" hasn't been gazed upon as being among the finest films ever made. Upon release, it grossed almost five times more than its budget, was nominated for eleven Academy Awards, and was instantaneously deemed a classic of a genre most had previously thought to be dead. It's a manifestation of what we consider to be a great film, marked by uncompromising, detailed direction, note-perfect performances, and a screenplay that, by the standards of the most serious of film circles, is one of the best ever written. We don't just watch "Chinatown"; we grab onto it with our beings, hypnotized by its storytelling, its visual opulence, its unforgettable cynicism. For a little over two-hours, we are lifted from our theater seats and transported to 1930s Los Angeles, where illicit encounters are a thing of the everyday and where one's character has to toughen to survive.
We cannot look for more when going to the movies; "Chinatown" is intoxicating in ways few films are. We can smell cigarette smoke as it dangles in the air, the liquor on the breath of its focal private detective, the European perfume that licks the aura of its bewitching femme fatale. Excitement runs as thoroughly through our veins as cryptic dread does; in a world as cruel as "Chinatown's" Los Angeles is, an expectation of eventual euphoria seems as close as it does far. It's a mystery of a mystery movie - it's as familiar as it is foreign, a film noir we at first believe to be like all the others until we're gobsmacked with the realization that no noir has ever gone quite as far in its prevailing pessimism. It traps us in its web of conspiracy, never to be released.
Formidable, too, is the way it avoids the easy use of the noir stock character, a downfall for most contemporary films trying to be "Kiss Me Deadly." Some of "Chinatown's" biggest successes revolve around the conception of its characters, which fill the roles of "types" we've come to know before (the sardonic private dick, the secretive femme he calls sidekick and lover, the ruthless villain easily able to hide his true evil) but do more than just stew in old characterizations and let the writing, the attitude, do the talking for them. Its cast gives performances, with Robert Towne providing them with roles of distinguished depth.
Take, for instance, its hero, J.J. "Jake" Gittes, who is of the Phillip Marlowe type but sidesteps rose-colored bitterness for forlorn optimism. He is a private detective that smokes too much, who drinks too much, and who cares too much; take off his layers of put-upon snakeskin and you'll discover that he's kind, obsessed with the idea of making right. Usually, he specializes in adultery cases, able to jump back and forth in-between them without emotion. But in "Chinatown," he is presented with a case that just might change his perception of the world he's come to know, and might leave him wounded instead of merely jaded. Played by a scorching Nicholson (a risky but soundly advantageous casting choice), he's the first PI we've met in the movies that doesn't make dwelling in unremitting danger seem cool. Peril is authentic, and Gittes doesn't always retain placidity a la Sam Spade - fear is a reality he'd like to escape.
In the film, Gittes is forced to take a break from his standard assemblage of adultery cases after he becomes involved in an all-encompassing conspiracy that works as an embodiment of the corrupt nature of the California government of the 1930s. The investigation is prompted by the murder of Hollis Mulwray (Darrell Zwerling), the reigning chief of the Department of Water and Power. As the man was the subject of a former case (an imposter posed as his wife to attain pictures of Mulrway with a younger woman), Gittes cannot help but be drawn in, especially when suspicions are aroused that some corrupt happenings are occurring within the underbellies of the department.
In his process of probing and exploring the sea of enigmas before him, Gittes hardly goes unnoticed by Mulwray's many enemies - he's beaten to a pulp on more than one occasion, almost losing his nose in one of the scuffles - and he hardly goes unnoticed by those closest to him, particularly the man's wife (Dunaway), who is collected and beautiful but also knows much more than she lets on.
"Chinatown" has the fatalistic personality of "The Big Sleep" but lacks the incomprehensibility. With a tight handling of its central mystery, it, unlike many detective noir movies, is just as much about plot as it is about atmosphere and character. It could have been released sometime in the late 1930s, early 1940s, but then again, could such a disillusioned piece make it past the hit seeking heads of studio executives? With its callous ending, which is both devastating and integral to its overall impression, I hardly think so. It is very much a work of the 1970s, a decade I consider to be the best in cinema (it's an explosion of all the masterworks prohibited by the Hays Code in previous years), but it simultaneously doesn't seem to belong to any decade, any category, choosing the 1930s as its setting yet remaining timeless in its nihilism.
You can see the care that went into its making; look at the way Towne so comprehensively elicits a forgotten era through the film's dialogue and historical foundation, the way Polanski exhaustively captures every bit of period detail possible. Especially prestigious are Nicholson and Dunaway, two of the greatest performers of their peer group and certainly the best matched to the type of material presented. With his self-confident drawl and smarmy swagger, we expect Nicholson's Jake Gittes to be a private eye even more confident than Mike Hammer. But his poise is only a masquerade for doubt, and Nicholson evokes that impossible bridging of outside discernment and sense of self with a subtlety one normally doesn't associate the actor with. And Dunaway, who battled with Polanski on set, is as pensively unblemished. With her milky white skin, penciled-in eyebrows, seductive way of speaking, and immediate glamour, she is a femme fatale of the highest caliber until the film betrays her and reveals her to be a victim of life, not a dame out to cause trouble. It's the deflection of the character types Nicholson and Dunaway undergo that makes "Chinatown" all the more arresting of a movie - the turmoil they face is sweepingly real underneath the pristine sheen of period influence, and our empathy, and interest, seldom ceases.
But the best thing about "Chinatown" is how it can both work as grand entertainment and serious cinema. It bridges that gap between artistic intrigue and public accessibility, and that's how a film should be, easy to be appreciated, to admire. It's unparalleled and unyielding - that's how it goes in Chinatown, anyway.
February 23, 2016
An absolute classic. This film-noir detective story is the perfect vehicle for Jack Nicholson's brilliance, all guided carefully by the masterful hand of Roman Polanski.
Nicholson plays a private detective, hired to investigate claims of adultery, but he slowly uncovers a much greater conspiracy.
Please please watch this film as many times as you possibly can!
February 14, 2016
"Do as little possible you can"... Not pessimism, but a melancholic cynicism, reflected by its music, as if the hero had fallen into a trap, hoping things had changed.
February 8, 2016
Stylish and intriguing.

Los Angeles in the early-1930s. A private detective, JJ Gittes (played by Jack Nicholson), is hired by a woman to investigate her husband, as she suspects he is having an affair. Her husband, Hollis Mulwray, is the chief water engineer for the city of Los Angeles. Soon after Gittes delivers the photos that seem to confirm her suspicions, he meets the real wife of the man. Intrigued, Gittes investigates further. Then Mr Mulwray turns up dead...

A clever, slow-burning thriller from director Roman Polanski. Information is gained slowly, heightening the intrigue. Many red herrings, and detours. Nothing is obvious. To make things even more complex, there's not just one plotline in play...

Very film noir like in its feel. You could easily see Humphrey Bogart as Gittes...

Good work by Jack Nicholson and Faye Dunaway in the leading roles. Good support from John Huston.

Not perfect though. The movie loses momentum in the last third or so, focusing on a lesser plot and amplifying the detour by an extended wild goosechase. Ultimately this sub-plot is necessary, to an extent, but it needn't have had so much time devoted to it. Just when the movie was ready to kick up a gear, having idled along previously, it went sideways rather than forward.
January 25, 2016
Per usual, i'm gonna divide my review into 5 parts i will talk about: Directing, Cinematography,Writing,Score and finally Acting.
Directing - Is really impressive, but for me it was the weakest part of the film, even though i think this movie is a masterpiece. Roman Polanski did phenomenal job directing, and even was good at acting. The director managed to get all of the actors to be on the same page. You could see that Polanski did put some work into directing. But on times scenes seem to be purely driven, by Nicholsons acting, and star power. All in all, still a solid directing job. I would rate it 16/20.
Cinematography - Even considering, that the film is quite old, and cinematographers didn't have all the modern equipment, job was done to perfection. John A. Alonzo managed to achieve marvelous work. Even though the film was filmed in sunny California, you can still fill the film noir atmosphere. There were few really impressive shots which you don't come across very often nowadays. Including mirror shots, that give viewer the illusion of following someone, and the other worthy mention is shot of chase in the lemon fields. The last really adds to intensity and made me wanting for the shot to be longer. A worthy Oscar nominee. I would rate it 20/20
Writing - An amazing story, with even more amazing characters. Story develops it self beautifully, and it seems like Gittes is always in front of the action. The story doesn't force itself on the viewer. Script paces itself perfectly although at the very end it felt a bit rushed and jumped straight to the very conclusion. I would rate it 20/20
Score - The score was amazing. Some of the tracks hit the perfect spots and gave me the goosebumps. Textbook film noir soundtrack, that really adds up to the whole movie vibe. I would rate it 20/20
Acting - Was phenomenal Jack Nicholson was a true powerhouse in this movie and fit the role perfectly. His acting seem effortless and charismatic. All of the actors had this mystery shroud around them. And seemed they were hiding their true intentions. Actors chemistry was very mesmerizing to watch, because it seemed like every actor was pushing not only his own performance, but the colleagues as well. Even though through out the movie extras don't get a lot of screen time, you can definitely feel their presence in the movie. I would rate it 20/20.

All in all, this movie is a truly masterpiece, a modern jewel of film noir. Worthy of being in the study program for any film school. Finally i would rate this movie 96/100. 1712. Alameda.
January 20, 2016
Jan. 4th, 2016- This noir classic is arguably the most important picture that made Nicholson the star that he is and for good reason. Roman Polanski does an incredible job of capturing the corruption of LA through satire but is equally disturbing when necessary. Probably the biggest aspect and something that's hard to see a lot nowadays is how all parts of production work together to bring a brilliant film. Polanski's work never stands out over Nicholson work which never stands above the great script by Robert Towne but when they all come together it becomes great filmmaking. And so as a result it stands as one the best films of Hollywood. A must watch if you want to see some quality old timers.
January 5, 2016
Excellent detective movie. The story was good, and the acting was spot on. Jack Nicholson is a brilliant actor. This happens to be one of my favorites in the handful pile of movies. I am a very picky reviewer.
January 4, 2016
classic mystery...full of intelligent and complex twists
December 27, 2015
When you're right you're right and this movie is right!
December 20, 2015
I was really into Chinatown 3/4 of the time.
December 20, 2015
Will take multiple viewings to appreciate (and unravel the plot).
December 13, 2015
Chinatown is a remarkably ferocious mystery that's handsome production and fine performances only add to the weight of its story. Jack Nicholson is magnetic as he slowly unravels the thick history between the people he investigates.
December 10, 2015
Forget it Jake, she Chinatown, ya get me?!
November 20, 2015
decent, but I'm not sure what the hype was about
Page 2 of 259