À double tranchant

******SPOILERS****** A brutal double-murder of prominent socialite and newspaper heiress Mrs. Paige Forrester, Maria Mayenzet, and her house-maid Consuela Martinez occurs one rainy evening at the Forrester Estate outside San Francisco.

Page's husband Jack, Jeff Bridges, who was also injured in the attack, is indited for murder by the San Francisco DA Thomas Kersny, Peter Coyote. DA Kersn feels that Jack not only murdered his wife and her house-maid but also faked his own injury to throw off the police's suspicions about him being the killer. DA Kersny also has it in for Jack personally in that being the owner as well as editor of the influential San Francisco Times he's been writing unrelentingly negative editorials about him.

Being indited for his wife's murder Jack seeks out former DA Teddy Barnes, Glenn Close, who used to work with Thomas Kersny at the DA's office. Teddy quit some four years ago because of a case that she helped him with in which a defendant Henry Styles was convicted. Teddy later found out that Kersny withheld vital evidence that would have found Styles innocent. Later in the movie Teddy finds out that Styles hung himself in his cell from non other then Kersny himself! This got her even more upset then she already was about that case.

This sets up the movies storyline: A brutal double-murder is committed and a DA who has it in for the murder suspect jumps into the case for personal more then for professional reasons. The lawyer who defends the murder suspect has guilt feelings for working with the DA prosecuting the case against her client. Added to all that she's almost driven into a serious depression when she finds out that the person that she helped the DA convict, who she later found out was innocent, has just killed himself. With all the "red herrings" flying around in the movie does the murder weapon a hunting knife with a jagged edge belong to Jack? Most of all did the affairs, by both Jack and Page, one or both lead to Page's murder?

It's also a mystery if the dashing and handsome tennis gigolo Bobby Slade (Marshall Colt),who was having an affair with Page, killed her when she threatened to leave him and then frame her husband Jack for her murder?

The movie "Jagged Edge" holds itself together pretty well until the final fifteen minutes and then just falls apart like a house of cards. The totally contrived as well as unrealistic ending hits the viewer like a solid punch right in the stomach and knocks all the wind out of him or her. It's hard to believe that the killer would end up being so careless and stupid after bing so smart and cunning during the entire movie. This after he got away with the crime Scot-free and having nothing at all to fear from the law, why did he have to blow it all in the end?

"Jagged Edge" is not a bad movie it's a very good murder/mystery/court thriller but with a terrible ending and it's a good ending that's the most important thing in a movie like it.

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.

If you have never seen this film, then stop reading reviews and watch it because the film really works better if you don't know anything about it.

Now, the film is certainly flawed, but it's still interesting to watch.

I love courtroom thrillers, and there's plenty of court drama here, but not enough to make the picture work. I think another 20 minutes would've added much more depth to courtroom sequences.

The acting is excellent, but the direction could've been sharper. I found the romance to be contrived, never had a flow to it, it just happened.

Some blame must go to the screenplay, it wasn't strong, not enough depth to the characters, and some of the courtroom stuff was unrealistic.

The photography is excellent, it hooked me into the picture.

Overall, a good film, but I think the writing was a bit lazy.

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

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.