After Hours (1985)

n

nTitle: After Hours (1985)

n

nDirector: Martin Scorcese

n

nCast: Griffin Dunne, Rosanna Arquette, Verna Bloom, LindanFiorentino, Teri Garr, Catherine O’Hara, John Heard, Dick Miller, BronsonnPinchot, Cheech Marin, Tommy Chong

n

nReview:

n

nEvery once in a while a director will take a project that couldnhave otherwise turned out to be bland or formulaic and elevates it, makes itnbetter then it has any right to be. I think this was the case with After Hours.nYou kind of get the feeling that had this comedy been under the command of anlesser director, it simply would not have been as good as it is. Had legendary Americannfilmmaker Martin Scorcese not been behind the camera, it could have ended asnjust another romantic comedy, lost in the shuffle and forgotten in time. But innthe hands of Scorcese, this dark comedy is a superior form of comedy film in mynbook and I might add, criminally underrated.
n
n

n

nAfter Hours tells the story of Paul Hackett, a New York City computernprogrammer who’s fed up with his life. He’s got a boring job, doing the samenthing over and over again; when he goes back home, it’s to watch the same boringnchannels on television and judging by Hackett’s one tone face, there’s nothing unique orninteresting on it;  he surfs through the channels with a blank stare on his face. So after a while he decides to  go out and venture to the outside world, searching for human contact,nsearching for something other then the numbing loneliness he lives in. Thenstreets he ventures to are the perilous streets of the big apple, circanmid-eighties, which means dark, dangerous and manic. He stops at a coffee shop to read his favorite novel and stumblesnupon a beautiful girl whom he apparently has a couple of things in common with. Theynexchange phone numbers and part ways, but Paul’s loneliness gets the better of him and so he ends up calling her up on that very same night! They meet again at her apartment and Paulnseems to think he’s going to be getting lucky, for what is wrong with casual sex? A random night of passion? Absolutely nothing! Unfortunately for Hackett, Marcynends up being a true wacko! He sees the signs and decides to abort mission, but as Hackett will soon find out, going back home is not going to be an easy task.  

n

n

nMany things make After Hours a good film, notnjust the fact that Scorcese directed it, though that is the big bonus in my book.nActually a lot of good things came together to make this as special a film; for example, thencast is amazing! The film is mostly centered on Griffin Dunne’s character PaulnHackett, he plays the every man. A blue collar worker type that’s fed up, henwants human contact, he wants something more then just his own self to talk tonat night. Unfortunately, the universe seems to be conspiring against him onnthis night, this is one of those movies where everything goes wrong for thenmain character. He runs out of money, gets mixed up in all sorts of trouble andnmeets the craziest people! True blue Newn York people who live jaded lives in a jaded city. Tonyou or I these characters that Hackett meets through out the course of thenevening might seem nuts, or too crazy for real life, but to a New Yorker, thisnfilm is merely an exaggeration of every day New York life. Every character is brought tonlife by a gifted actor. Terry Gar for example, whom I always remember as Inganfrom Mel Brook’s Young Frankenstein (1974), is hilarious on this one as a waitressnwho’s a lonely desperate woman, looking for the right man to snatch up andndevour! Catherine O’Hara plays this psychotic woman who has her own Mister SofteenIce Cream truck, her character is hilariously jaded out of her mind.  I mean we even get freaking Cheech and Chongnon this film! The cast is very well rounded out, it makes watching the film anpleasure.

n

n

nBut of course, the big draw here for me is that Scorcesendirected the film. What I’ve always loved about Scorcese is how very New York he is. He isnenamored with the city, same as Woody Allen is, can’t say I blame ‘em, thenplace can be rather magical, vibrant, alive. It is a beautiful city and a darkncity; it can be the stuff of dreams or nightmares depending which corner you turnnon. New York City’s ambiguity is what  shinesnthrough so well in After Hours. You can meet a beautiful girl in a coffee shop innthe middle of the night, but said girl can turn out to be a total head case.nIt’s these little details that the film has that make it such a New York film,nthe crazy taxi driver, the cold crazy people, the dark haunting city streets,nthe bums, the punks, the night clubs, the gay bars, the unexpectedly friendlynpeople, the film effectively captures the dark beauty that was New York of then80’s, I loved that about it, so my hats down to Scorcese for capturing New YorknCity life so well, it’s something he’s gotten very good at through out hisncareer. I mean, this is the director who made New York, New Yorkn(1977), Taxi Driver (1976), Raging Bull (1980) and Mean Streets (1973) all of whichntake place in the big apple. Scorcese is without a doubt a director that displays his love for the city that never sleeps; he’s the most ‘New York’ director ofnall. The fact that the entire film was shot in New York City streets and entirely at nightnis what gives After Hours its unique look.
n
n

n

nBut aside from that, the film has these amazing cameranshots, which is really what let’s us know there’s a master filmmaker behind thencameras, it’s little details, like when we follow these keys that someonenthrows from a building, or when Hackett’s twenty dollar bill flies out the taxincabs window and the camera follows it. My favorite shot is the one with whichnthe film ends, the camera simply sweeps through an office building filled withndesks and computers and telephones…loved that. This is the camera work andndirection that brings After Hours up for me, it elevates the film. So as you cannsee my friends, many things make this one special. After Hours is without andoubt an extremely underrated Scorcese film! Same as with Scorcese’s BringingnOut the Dead (1999), this is a film from Scorcese’s repertoire that many seemsnto be missing out on, but should definitely be seeing. Scorcese made AfternHours in order to regain his love for filmmaking, you see, before making AfternHours Scorcese had been trying to get The Last Temptation of Christ (1988) going,nbut had an incredibly hard time making it happen, until finally he let it go. He ended up makingnit anyways a few years later, but at the time, he was incredibly frustrated atnthe fact that apparently The Last Temptation of Christ was not going to happen.nSo he went on and made After Hours, to regain his love for making movies. Hisnlove and passion for the medium shows through in the film, this is a masternstoryteller giving it his best to make us laugh and achieving it, in a verynartful stylish way. This is a wonderfully dark comedy.

n

n

nHighly recommend it if you want to see one of these films that’snvery paranoid, and fast, the film moves at a frenetic pace. It’s the kind ofnfilm that takes places during the small hours of the night, in these seedynplaces that are open when most of humanity is sound asleep. It’s a film thatnshows us that the freaks most certainly come out at night. Which is probablynwhy Hackett is always shown running from someone, which was a nice motif Inpicked up while watching the film; that image of Hackett just running,  running from the freaks, from the crazies,nfrom scary life. Paul Hackett is a character that just wants to ‘get home’ whichnreminds me that in some ways, this is a dark version of the Wizard of Oz, withnit’s main character trying to get away from all the craziness and back to thencomfort and warmth of home. By the way, the films connection to The Wizard of Oz is alluded to at one point in the film. But aside from wanting to get home,nHackett just wants to live, which I think is an awesome message in the film. Henwants more out of life, can’t say I blame him for going after it even if itnmeans going through hell.

n

nRating: 5 out of 5 

n

n