MovieChat Forums > Jagged Edge (1985) Discussion > casting the ashes (spoilers)

casting the ashes (spoilers)

posted 10 years ago by denham
6 replies | jump to latest

In a film like this, the script typically alternates between indications that Mr Smith is the murderer and other indications that he isn't. But at the same time it's required to play fair with the cinema audience. It should all be consistent with the way the suspect turns out to be. Is the scene where Jack Forrester solemnly empties his late wife's ashes into the sea and then casts two red roses playing fair? It would be if he was mindful of a within-the-film audience. This could have been his grieving brother-in-law accompanying him on the boat. But the script didn't make that choice. Alternatively, the audience could have been police or media on the shore watching him through powerful telephoto lenses. Again, it could have been scripted so we see this, but it wasn't. The cinema audience is given the impression that Forrester is not acting for the benefit of any within-the-film audience. So, is this scene playing fair with the cinema audience? (And mightn't it have been better if shot with either of the options suggested above?)

"I beseech ye in the bowels of Christ, think that ye may be mistaken."

[–] BoSoxRule 10 years ago

Maybe the movie was showing us the one ounce of humanity that Jack Forrester had. I thought it worked.

I'm happiest...in the saddle.

[–] ccbeachgirl 8 years ago

I don't think he had an ounce of humanity. I also questioned that scene.

[–] manram24 10 years ago

Perhaps it shows that killing to him isn't a big deal, he wanted her out of the way, and killed her but felt the need to respect her wishes to have her ashes spread, just speculating after all since he is a psychopath.

Y'know, I could eat a peach for hours

[–] olliemankz 8 years ago

Yeah, I didn't have too much of a problem with it.

If anything, I felt that the spreading of the ashes could have been more graceful ... cast far out to sea.

If you think about it, perhaps it shows a lack of compassion precisely because brother, etc., are not there. When we spread my dear stepfather's ashes in the Gulf of Mexico, it seemed his whole Power Squadron crew was there.

Also, as I'm sure you did, I studied Forester's face very carefully during the proceeding and thought I discerned a glimmer of a smile at the end.

I think it is a possibility that the whole of Jack's mystery was embodied in the power of Bridges' acting. I thought Bridges did a very good job of "acting" traumatized by his recollections of the murder scene.

As mentioned in another thread, I also was extremely suspicious of his explanations of how he met his wife ... that he didn't know who she was ... oh, sure. The meeting her at a party and crashing her father's country club, read climbing out of the pool in wet bathing suit, sounded very calculated to me.

I know the script had problems, but, over all, I found it to be a very good concept pulled off well. At least it was good enough in memory to make me wish to to revisit the movie after all these years.

[–] filmklassik 7 years ago

Damn! This is not only an excellent point you're making, it's one that never occurred to me despite my having seen this movie at least 7 times in the last 30 years.

And yes, they could've had their cake and eaten it too by simply having "Mr. Smith" being in the presence of some second party (you're right, having one of his in-laws with him on the boat would've worked just fine) or had him being under close visual surveillance by the police.

[–] Mehki_Girl 7 years ago

Absolutely agree. Though you could say he was staying in the character of grieving husband 24/7 to stay in character with less chance to slipup. Someone who was married to a sociopath said, he would stand in front of the mirror practicing various facial expressions, then would say he could go to work now that he'd perfected looking human for the day.