Al filo de la sospecha

This courtroom thriller was one of the films that spawned a huge wave of copycats through the mid '80's and early '90's. Now, of course, these types of stories are on TV nightly in the glut of crime/law based shows. However, in 1985, audiences could still be (and were) riveted to the big screen by stories like this. Bridges plays a newspaper editor whose wife is brutally murdered along with their maid (in an opening sequence that is not overly graphic, yet is very disturbing.) Before long, he is prime suspect in the killings and is defended by a tentative, reluctant Close who is trying to redeem herself after some earlier unethical legal behavior. She squares off with slimy former prosecuting partner Coyote (in a slick, effective performance) to clear Bridges. She then, foolishly, becomes intimate with Bridges. There is constant doubt in her mind, as well as in the audience's, as to whether or not Bridges did the deed or not. Because the story is a tease and exists to manipulate and captivate the audience, there are plot holes galore. However, the film works very well on a visceral level, providing twists and shocks along the way (including one startling break-in near the end which is jarring no matter how many times it is seen.) The film's greatest strength is the acting, notably Close. Unlike later Eszterhas scripts, in which no one is sympathetic, she is a heroine to root for, despite her flaws. She brings great conviction to her poorly conceived role. Bridges does well also as the perfectly moussed, tan dreamboat who might be a savage murderer. Loggia brings a welcome salty edge to the film with his foul-mouthed portrayal of Close's investigator friend. All cussing and cigarettes, he is a stock Eszterhas character, but is acted well. There are other fine smaller roles played by Dehner as a crusty judge, Young as a haughty rich-bitch and Austin (an underrated actress) as an attack victim. Close has two annoying kids and a wimpy ex-husband to make her life that much more unbearable. Drawbacks to the film would be the illogic of the script and the bizarre editing of the courtroom scenes in which the clothing Bridges and (especially) Close wear inexplicably switch! Her hair is also consistently inconsistent throughout...(within scenes!)...flat one moment, curly the next, varying in height and swoop, etc.... The discordant music by Barry is very unsettling and his use of low piano keys doubtlessly inspired Jerry Goldsmith for "Basic Instinct". It's the same type of sound. Folks expecting a watertight story will be disappointed. Those who just want to be entertained and spooked should love it.

San Francisco heiress Forrester is cruelly killed by a black suit clad murderer . Her husband Jack (Jeff Bridges) , a known publishing magnate , is convicted for cold blooded murder . He contracts an advocate-in-law , Teddy Barnes (Glenn Close) , former prosecutor , and now at charge of the criminal defense , in spite of the fact she has not taken a criminal case long time . The widower is allegedly considered guilt , though freed by means a bail until trial celebration presided by an expeditious judge (John Dhener) . Then they fall in love and she's defending the man she loves . The trial takes place and there appears an accusation lawyer (Peter Coyote) , an ambitious district attorney who previously worked for her ...

This court-room drama is a Neo-noir movie with tension , mystery , surprises and , of course , a suspenseful twist in the end . Despite of the fashion-able sex and violence , this is a satisfyingly old-fashioned sort of film that avid fans of the genre will love . Jeff Bridges and Glenn Close are frankly well , there's enjoyable chemical between them . Interesting writing credits by Joe Eszterhas , a successful screenwriter (Basic instinct , Jade , Sliver , Showgirls). The flick is rated ¨R¨ for sexual scenes and some violence . Colorful cinematography by Matthew F. Leonetti and sensitive musical score by John Barry . The motion picture was professionally directed by Richard Marquand . He was hired by George Lucas after seeing ¨Eye of the needle¨ and only non-American to direct a Star Wars film: ¨The return of the Jedi¨, though his career failed with flops such as , ¨Until September¨ and ¨Hearts of fire¨ until his early death.

Teddy Barnes is a conflicted lawyer, still reeling from the dubious methods of a colleague, she takes on the defence of Jack Forrester, who is accused of murdering his wife with a jagged edged knife. Gradually falling for Jack's seductive powers, Teddy falls in love with the man she now has to defend, her problems it seems, are about to become far far worse.

Jagged Edge, directed by Richard Marquand, starring Glenn Close (Teddy), Jeff Bridges (Jack), Robert Loggia (Sam Ransom) and Peter Coyote (Thomas Krasny), is bringing nothing new to the table of a much replicated genre. It does however boast brilliant acting, a tremendous screenplay (Joe Eszterhas) and a production value that demands it be viewed with less than cynical eyes. That it is written by Eszterhas is obvious when looking at the structure of the picture, death, sex, troubled romance, greed and that old devil called obsession (Basic Instinct anyone?), yet aided by a competent director and an exemplary cast, Jagged Edge shines brighter than most other films of its ilk.

It looks a little frayed (not jagged) around the edges now, but that is purely because of the advent of time and the ream of thrillers using this format that have followed this piece. If one (such as I) can transport oneself back to the 80s and view Jagged Edge on its original terms, then its easy to recognise just what a well put together picture it is. Close and Bridges are superb, whilst Robert Loggia steals the picture from under their noses, his interplay with Close is a particular highlight. In spite of some less than great twists and unsubtle scapegoat placings, Jagged Edge succeeds because you are there at the finale, and because its held you in its grip all along, you (hopefully) have invested yourself with these characters, you simply just have to know, for better or worse!

The ending was cause for much discussion back in the day, and viewing it now it still feels like a moment of cheek mixed in with some form of clarity, but rest assured it works well, as does, funnily enough, the whole film. No world beater here, but highly accomplished and worth the time of any thriller obsessed movie fan. 7/10

A man discover's his wife and maid have been murdered, an investigation ensuses and sooner rather than later he is deemed the main suspect and Is hauled in for the crime. he enlists the help of a pretty young lawyer who he eventually falls for,, the two get close,, and she let's her emotions run wild, and cleary she falls for him while defending him against the charges that he brutally murdered his wife,, apparently though his wife was cheating at the time,, and her boyfriend turns up dead later, on, but there is more to this than we think as the lawyer's assistant's dig up more information on her and the boyfriend,, classic edge of you're seat thriller , that will keep you guessing until the end.

San Francisco heiress Page Forrester is brutally murdered along with the maid in a sadistic manner. District attorney Thomas Krasny (Peter Coyote) has the case. Her husband Jack (Jeff Bridges) is soon a suspect with a financial motive. He hires lawyer Teddy Barnes (Glenn Close) who worked under Krasny. She hasn't done a criminal case since a questionable case 4 years ago with Krasny. She falls for Jack but she can't be certain about him.

The problem is that Krasny only has a circumstantial case. I kept waiting for some sort of physical evidence. I know this was pre-CSI but it still feels very flimsy. Jeff Bridges is a little too cold and I can't buy completely that single mom Glenn Close would fall for him so quickly. That's because Close exudes smarts and not the flighty innocent that is required. The acting goes overboard a bit after the second crime is revealed. I don't think she did anything out of the ordinary. The final scene doesn't really make much sense either because he would obviously be discovered later. There is a good whodunnit mystery here but it has a few too many jagged edges.