StunnaKrypto Self-important, over-dramatic, uninspired.

Supelice Dreadfully Boring

SteinMo What a freaking movie. So many twists and turns. Absolutely intense from start to finish.

Portia Hilton Blistering performances.

HotToastyRag Everyone knows the dreaded and proverbial phrase "the morning after", and most of us have experienced it at some point in our lives. In this film, Jane Fonda experiences a disastrous morning after. She wakes up next to a dead man and has no memory of the night before.Jane was up for an Oscar for her role as an alcoholic has-been actress, and she gives a fantastic performance as a boozy ol' broad. Her leading man is Jeff Bridges, a former policeman recovering alcoholic, and he's the only ally in her quest to prove her innocence.If you like sexy mysterious thrillers, you're definitely going to want to rent The Morning After. I'm not really a fan of Jeff Bridges, but Jane more than makes up for it. She's beautiful, does a great job, and is really easy to root for. I mean, do you really think Jane Fonda would stab someone to death during a heavy night of drinking? Well, you'll have to watch the movie to find out if she did.

brefane The script is as scatter-brained and uncertain as its lead character. It's the first and last script to date by James Hicks aka James Cresson. A comedy thriller romance mystery character study, it contains gaping wholes in logic, red herrings, inconsistencies in characterizations, lengthy expositions, and a preposterous plot to frame Fonda's character. Nonetheless, the talents involved particularly Fonda and Bridges make it consistently watchable and involving starting with the opening scene. It's inoffensive and low key with funny dialog and good interaction between the two leads. An entertaining and pleasant way to kill time. Sidney Lumet's direction lacks the necessary urgency and tension to make the suspense aspects work and the viewer assumes from the start that Alex Sternberg aka Viveca Van Loren is not the murderer. The film captures LA well enough and provided Fonda with her last good film role and Oscar nomination to date.

sunznc 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.

manuel-pestalozzi 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.