Showing posts with label Rosanna Arquette. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Rosanna Arquette. Show all posts

Wednesday, September 12, 2012

After Hours (1985)



Title: After Hours (1985)

Director: Martin Scorcese

Cast: Griffin Dunne, Rosanna Arquette, Verna Bloom, Linda Fiorentino, Teri Garr, Catherine O’Hara, John Heard, Dick Miller, Bronson Pinchot, Cheech Marin, Tommy Chong

Review:

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


After Hours tells the story of Paul Hackett, a New York City computer programmer who’s fed up with his life. He’s got a boring job, doing the same thing over and over again; when he goes back home, it’s to watch the same boring channels on television and judging by Hackett’s one tone face, there’s nothing unique or interesting 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, searching for something other then the numbing loneliness he lives in. The streets he ventures to are the perilous streets of the big apple, circa mid-eighties, which means dark, dangerous and manic. He stops at a coffee shop to read his favorite novel and stumbles upon a beautiful girl whom he apparently has a couple of things in common with. They exchange 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 Paul seems 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, Marcy ends 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.  


Many things make After Hours a good film, not just the fact that Scorcese directed it, though that is the big bonus in my book. Actually a lot of good things came together to make this as special a film; for example, the cast is amazing! The film is mostly centered on Griffin Dunne’s character Paul Hackett, he plays the every man. A blue collar worker type that’s fed up, he wants human contact, he wants something more then just his own self to talk to at night. Unfortunately, the universe seems to be conspiring against him on this night, this is one of those movies where everything goes wrong for the main character. He runs out of money, gets mixed up in all sorts of trouble and meets the craziest people! True blue New York people who live jaded lives in a jaded city. To you or I these characters that Hackett meets through out the course of the evening might seem nuts, or too crazy for real life, but to a New Yorker, this film is merely an exaggeration of every day New York life. Every character is brought to life by a gifted actor. Terry Gar for example, whom I always remember as Inga from Mel Brook’s Young Frankenstein (1974), is hilarious on this one as a waitress who’s a lonely desperate woman, looking for the right man to snatch up and devour! Catherine O’Hara plays this psychotic woman who has her own Mister Softee Ice Cream truck, her character is hilariously jaded out of her mind.  I mean we even get freaking Cheech and Chong on this film! The cast is very well rounded out, it makes watching the film a pleasure.


But of course, the big draw here for me is that Scorcese directed the film. What I’ve always loved about Scorcese is how very New York he is. He is enamored with the city, same as Woody Allen is, can’t say I blame ‘em, the place can be rather magical, vibrant, alive. It is a beautiful city and a dark city; it can be the stuff of dreams or nightmares depending which corner you turn on. New York City's ambiguity is what  shines through so well in After Hours. You can meet a beautiful girl in a coffee shop in the middle of the night, but said girl can turn out to be a total head case. It’s these little details that the film has that make it such a New York film, the crazy taxi driver, the cold crazy people, the dark haunting city streets, the bums, the punks, the night clubs, the gay bars, the unexpectedly friendly people, the film effectively captures the dark beauty that was New York of the 80’s, I loved that about it, so my hats down to Scorcese for capturing New York City life so well, it’s something he’s gotten very good at through out his career. I mean, this is the director who made New York, New York (1977), Taxi Driver (1976), Raging Bull (1980) and Mean Streets (1973) all of which take 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 of all. The fact that the entire film was shot in New York City streets and entirely at night is what gives After Hours its unique look.


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


Highly recommend it if you want to see one of these films that’s very paranoid, and fast, the film moves at a frenetic pace. It’s the kind of film that takes places during the small hours of the night, in these seedy places that are open when most of humanity is sound asleep. It’s a film that shows us that the freaks most certainly come out at night. Which is probably why Hackett is always shown running from someone, which was a nice motif I picked up while watching the film; that image of Hackett just running,  running from the freaks, from the crazies, from scary life. Paul Hackett is a character that just wants to ‘get home’ which reminds me that in some ways, this is a dark version of the Wizard of Oz, with it’s main character trying to get away from all the craziness and back to the comfort 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, Hackett just wants to live, which I think is an awesome message in the film. He wants more out of life, can’t say I blame him for going after it even if it means going through hell.

Rating: 5 out of 5 

  

Wednesday, April 25, 2012

The Divide (2011)



Title: The Divide (2011)

Director: Xavier Gans

Cast: Michael Biehn, Rosanna Arquette, Lauren German, Milo Ventimiglia, Michael Eklund

Review:

So this is a very polarizing film, you’ll either love it or you’ll hate it. Either you’ll appreciate the themes and issues it addresses, or you’ll feel like you lost two hours of your life. It’s interesting that a film that causes such polarizing effects is called ‘The Divide’. Me? Im a weirdo, so I personally fell somewhere in between. I loved some things about it, but I also felt I could have gone further with it's ideas, as it is, it feels like a film held back by budgetary limitations.  


The Divide starts out with what a lot of post apocalyptic films avoid; the actual apocalypse! This I liked because most post apocalyptic films only talk about their apocalypse by way of newspaper articles or a simple voice over, but not The Divide. This film actually shows us the nukes cutting through the skies and landing right smack in the middle of New York City. The film focuses on a group of people that watch the bombs fall from their building, suddenly, chaos ensues and it’s all about seeking shelter! The masses run, searching for a place to hide! A group of strangers end up in a buildings basement because it’s the only safe spot they can find. According to the buildings super, all they have to do is wait for the radiation levels to go down, then they can go out.  The real question is how much time will pass before they all go nuts? Will they survive each other? 


So this is the kind of film in which a bunch of people end up enclosed in a room in which slowly but surely their true colors begin to surface; kind of like in Vincenzo Natali’s Cube (1997), a film in which a series of strangers suddenly wake up inside of a room;  they don’t know how they got there; nobody is related, nobody knows each other, the only thing that connects them is the room and the situation they are in; same thing with George Romero’s Night of the Living Dead (1968). In films of this nature, characters have to learn to work together in order to survive; but can they work together when they can’t even stand each other? Usually, in these films the personalities that are forced to live together end up being vastly different; so you get the quiet one, the funny one, the nerdy one, the tough one, the alpha male and the unequivocal asshole. With so many different personalities in one room, it’s only a matter of time before they are at each others throats.


The Divide is no different, only in The Divide, almost everyone is an asshole, or at least ends up turning into one. Imagine a film in which almost everyone is despicable. This is the kind of film The Divide is, it’s a very bleak film that has little to no faith in humanity, some people will end up hating the film simply because of this. There’s so much negativity on this picture! It’s the kind of film that says that under strenuous circumstances, humanity will end up eating each other; which in a way is true. The tougher things get economically speaking, the trickier everyone gets, suddenly you pay three times more for something that use to cost a whole lot less a couple of years ago. Suddenly your mechanic finds a way for you to come back in a couple of weeks. Suddenly gas prices skyrocket. Humanity eats itself in a never ending vicious cycle. Now imagine if suddenly food was no longer available in supermarkets! Imagine if there was no power, no electricity, no money. Would chaos ensue? Would people end up turning into cannibals? Would we loose all our moral fiber? Our humanity? Would we all go nuts if suddenly no cameras were taping our every move? Would we steal? Cheat? Lie? Kill?


The problem with The Divide is that it tests your patience because 90% of it takes place in the basement. After a while you grow tired of the same setting and wish you could see something different. You end up feeling as claustrophobic as the characters. For example, Cube had this premise of people locked up in a room, but the room always changed, and the characters were always confronted with a different situation. In The Divide the locations don’t change, it’s the characters that change. The nicest people end up turning into the biggest monsters. So before you watch this movie you need to ask yourself if being inside of a room with a bunch of complete douche bags is what you want, cause that’s what your gonna get! This is the kind of film that wants to explore humanities darker side, so you’ll see humans turning into metaphorical monsters. If you’re not ready to go down the rabbit hole of craziness, you know, the deep dark side of the human psyche, then don’t bother. Though to be honest, I thought the film was going to be sicker, more depraved, it isn’t all that.


I enjoyed the sci-fi elements they infused into the film, but honestly I wish they could have explained more, shown more. As it is, they only give us a glimpse of coolness. This is a movie that can wear you down, by the mid way point you don’t want to be in the room with these people anymore, at least that’s how I felt. To me this is the kind of film I watch only once, and never bother to revisit again. Director Xavier Gans works with a minuscule budget, and obviously this limits how much you can show in terms of effects and action, but this is the kind of film that relies not on effects, but on its performances. It was cool to see Michael Biehn on a film again, in my opinion he is so underused in movies. The rest of the cast really go for this descent into madness, Rosanna Arquette does a great job as well. In the end, this is a very dark picture, which gets kind of stale because it only takes place in once place. The Divide is an overdose of darkness, despair, betrayal, lust and violence, which will test your patience. Prognosis for this one: you’ll either endure it, or turn it off at the half way point; I doubt you’ll love it.

Rating: 2 1/2 out of 5 

  

LinkWithin

Related Posts with Thumbnails