The Morning After

I was entertained. The murder mystery isn't going to impress anyone since you can count the number of suspects on one hand with a couple fingers left over. But the characters are interesting and are brought to life well by capable actors. Bridges' character is what would be termed today "casually racist." Fonda's character keeps bringing it up too despite getting further involved with the guy. It's kind of fascinating honestly. Both actors do well making you care about people that, on paper, seem pretty unlikable. Raul Julia steals every scene he's in.

I've come to appreciate Sidney Lumet's later work more as I get older. Not saying you have to be older to like his films but in my case it worked out that way. He wasn't afraid of complex characters, even offensive ones. It's hard not to respect that as we get closer to Demolition Man's vision of the future every year.

The film takes place in LA in the 1980's. So you know what that means- I don't even need to say do I? Any film from the 80's has a very distinct look and while you see glimpses here and there of that era it's not too much to be distracting even if some screen time takes place in a beauty salon.

The film is interesting to watch because of the actors. They all do a good job here. Jane especially. Jeff Bridges and Raul Julia also are very good here. So it is the acting, the performances that make the film. The sets too are great-they almost are a character themselves from Alex's Pink and Mauve art deco place to the low budget but homey place of Turner's garage pad.

The flaws. There are some. Some of the dialog is cheesy and clichéd with laughable lines. The references to different cultures here in crude and crass terms. This was way BEFORE "politically correct".

This is not the greatest movie but I still love it and drag it out to watch about once a year.

This film most closely resembles the Film Noir of the 40's & 50's in feel and form. The only difference is the open light of LA on the Thanksgiving weekend. The scene at the airport communicates how much this City (LA) is a city where everyone comes from somewhere else. The great evacuation scene at LAX leaves lonely people like Fonda and Bridges behind, and is meant to explain the relative vacant feel of the town throughout the rest of the film.

The bright autumn light and vacant cityscape during the film is a surrealistic version of LA, which even a native like me seldom gets to see. The rest of the film is much like a "B" film noir picture, where we wonder (but not seriously) whether Jane's character may have actually done the deed in a drunken haze, and whether the Cop's will be able to get the right killer.

I love this film, not only for the scenes of LA, but for the good suspense generated by the unseen evil lurking in the all too limited shadows.

This movie was much better than I had reason to expect after reading the comments on IMDb. Its biggest flaw must be the way The Morning After is marketed. It is not really a taut whodunit thriller but rather a study of a particular place in a particular era with particular characters – a dark comedy and a love drama at the same time. The second biggest flaw is the grating, almost ever present musical score. But for the rest this movie is nearly perfect.

I should call The Morning After an expose of Southern California in the mid 1980s. The sets and the photography (a lot frontal or near frontal wide angle shots of curbside sceneries) are very accomplished – Schrader's American Gigolo came to mind. The sun is always shining, the air seems to be absolutely pure, even places that should be dirty (back yards, industrial sites etc.) are painted in gaudy colors and squeaky clean. But the minds of the principal protagonists are desperately foggy and muddled. California appears to be a big, decaying fake idyll. People go there to die, I once read in a novel by Nathanael West (The Day of the Locust – also made into a great, underrated California movie, by the way). And that more or less sums up the feel of it.

The cast is kept wonderfully small. Jane Fonda is brilliant and she would have deserved the Oscar for this part. For several long scenes she acts alone in front of the camera and she really conveys the desperation and the natural charm of the character (and she's really attractive, too, despite the boozing). Jeff Bridges is a reliable support here. Also very good is Raul Julia as Fonda's somehow estranged husband. He plays a high end hairdresser with a snazzy salon and at times displays an unexpected but highly welcome gentlemanly charm.

Until now I always thought of Sidney Lumet as an American East Coast director. It is the only one of his movies I know that is set in California. He seems to have his own way of appreciating that place. There is a director's comment on the DVD I purchased and I am looking forward to listening to that.

It's a shame the filmmakers decided to make this a murder mystery, because the "mystery" is the only bad part of the film. Fonda and Bridges are both terrific, as usual, and the story of their meeting and falling in love along with the moral rebirth that love sparked in both would have made a fantastic movie. Jeff Bridges is the USA's stealth great actor: he quietly nails every role without an ounce of flash. His chemistry with Jane Fonda (hell, he has chemistry with every actress he's ever costarred with) is the best reason to watch this. Unfortunately, the heart of the plot is a lackluster murder/conspiracy story which undermines the rest. It takes "The Morning After" from a "must see" to a "see if there's nothing better."