User reviews

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."

The Morning After opens with an extraordinarily effective scene prototypical of director Sidney Lumet's pared-down building of tension. As Jane Fonda crawls out of bed, we sense her hangover, one of those inordinately miserable mornings when nothing about you is sufficiently functional, and we also sense how accustomed she's become to these mornings as she is not only passably functional but also recognizes herself in the mirror and indeed spills some gin into a glass, speculating about the guy in her bed. Who is he? She doesn't comprehend the true gravity of her predicament until she turns him onto his back. She sees no cop is going to buy her story, so she attempts to remove all the evidence of her stopover. And then she rambles back out, into the intense Los Angeles light. And in a shot from high overhead, she seems like a lab rat, ensnared in some sort of a experiment. It's so well directed that we almost forget how preposterous it is to think this frame-up would ever work. This beginning promises an exceptional thriller. Alas, The Morning After never matches its initial potential, not as a thriller, at least. The narrative has some gaping disparities in it, and thrillers need to be impermeable. This one chalks various elements up to pure coincidence, the ultimate motives are flimsy at best and the fact that the body keeps reappearing like a cartoon or a take-off on The Trouble with Harry brings the movie too close to qualifying as '80s schlock for one to become seriously absorbed in the plot. But The Morning After merits a look anyhow, owing to the characters that it cultivates, and the performances of Fonda and Jeff Bridges in the two leads. She plays an alcoholic actress long past her heyday. He plays an ex-cop who happens to be fixing his car right where she topples into his back seat and implores him to get her away from there, quick. Bridges stays in a petty, manufactured shed, where he repairs appliances. This is all Fonda needs. She's a veteran of the live-fast-die-young subscription, her friends all bartenders and drag queens, her separated husband Raul Julia the most upmarket hairdresser in Beverly Hills. Nevertheless Bridges is reliable and sound, and she could do with a friend. Naturally it's axiomatic that they fall in love. The plot of The Morning After is not nearly as well captured or interesting as the day-by-day grinds of these characters. Actually, I can picture a movie that would omit the murder and just trail the genuine human development between Fonda and Bridges. The thriller filler isn't needed, although given that they used it, couldn't they have made it credible? The entire murder plot gets such slapdash treatment that perhaps I oughtn't have been startled by the big scene in which the killer's exposed. I've seen innumerable revelations in innumerable thrillers, but seldom one as transparent as this one, where the surprises are just announced in an improbable monologue. Indeed, the fact that nearly every opinion I've heard or read of this film seems unanimous in terms of James Hicks' script, including mine, even down to the 'It starts off well but then it gets really forced and jerry-built' gist, it seems pretty clear-cut what makes the film not quite work, though it'd be a misstep to write this movie off simply because the story is so rickety. It's worth making an allowance for due to the performances. Fonda and Bridges are superb in the film, and their rapport, founded on skeletons in the cupboard, bitterness and ulterior motives, gets especially remarkable. They create tangible unspoken feelings together, and they have some dialogue that feels more alive than most starry-eyed chatter in the movies. Before the schmaltzy final scene, not even close to prototypical of Lumet, there's a single shot in which all Bridges and Fonda do is face each other, and we know, and fee, that they want to have sex with each other. It's just energy, and it works wonders. I also admire how Lumet reinforces every color. Living in Los Angeles is part of the debilitating influence on the character played by Jane Fonda. All color is exaggerated: red redder, blue filters, orange hazes. He creates an L.A. comprised of vast flat surfaces of pastels and aggressively sunlit exposed areas. He traps the inebriated Fonda on this landscape like a helplessly insignificant insect sought for squashing by unknown feet, and the imagery makes the whole first hour of the movie much more ominous than it merits. Too bad they couldn't have take steps with the script.

THE MORNING AFTER is one of those films that begins with an intriguing opening--JANE FONDA wakes up in bed next to a murdered man and, because she was in an alcoholic daze, can't remember even entering the man's apartment. So far, so good. Nice hook to draw the viewer in.

But as the story unwinds, it becomes clear that the writers ran out of material for a substantial story about midway through. The weaknesses are offset somewhat by the good performance of JEFF BRIDGES as a helpful policeman who agrees to help Fonda solve the who-dun-it aspect of her plight.

It's all beautifully staged and photographed in a sunlit Los Angeles and worth watching for the performances alone. Fonda is at her best as the worried alcoholic who refuses to believe she could have committed the crime and Bridges provides some good chemistry as a co-star.

But the ending (with its revelation) is a bit disappointing after all the build-up to a conclusion. RAOUL JULIA and KATHY BATES have minor roles but the weak ending is hard to dismiss.

Fonda won an Oscar nomination and deserved it for creating a dimensional character in a story thin on believable characters.

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.

While Jane's last Oscar nominated performance (before she retired from films) has its moments, the film falls apart after she takes off her blonde wig. I thought she looked like a knockout with it on. Some really well photographed scenery pops up near the first half and there's a long extended sequence that has her clean up the dead man's apartment, which is filled with many sly touches; alas the beginning is ten times better and more developed than the weak conclusion. Jeff Bridges adds a nice touch to the story but was it really wise for the Fonda character to place all her trust in a total stranger? Kathy Bates has a cameo as a neighbor before she hit the big time scaring everyone in Misery. She's on the screen maybe 10 seconds to a minute, tops. Overall, the parts, as other reviewers have stated, are juicier than the whole.

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. Hopefully, most of us have not experienced a morning that shocking.

Jane was up for an Oscar for her role as an alcoholic has-been actress, and while she looked absolutely gorgeous as the boozy ol' broad, it's not her career-best performance. You'll have to check out The Doll House and They Shoot Horses, Don't They? To see her dramatic acting chops. Even those who like this movie admit it's pretty much a cheap thriller. It's entertaining, with two great pieces of eye candy (Jeff Bridges is her leading man), but if it starred a B-actress, it would have been remembered as a B-movie.

If you like sexy mysterious thrillers, you're definitely going to want to rent The Morning After. There is a fair amount of tension as you wonder who committed the murder and framed Jane for it, but not much. If you really can't guess the ending, you probably haven't seen many thrillers in your time. I'm always a bit critical when characters' lives are in danger and they can take time to smell the flowers, hop into bed with someone, or complain about how hungry they are. This movie features a cute Thanksgiving dinner date, but it's a bit out of place. If Jane really didn't know whether or not she stabbed a man to death in her sleep, would she feel like a turkey dinner and Jeff Bridges for dessert?

This movie once again proves that Jane Fonda is simply the best actress alive today. She will always be remembered in the same way Bette Davis or Katherine Hepburn is remembered. Her performance here is stunning, and there is no doubt that she is the best thing about this film. I don't think Jane Fonda is capable of giving a bad performance, although her choices of film roles is sometimes questionable. Fonda plays a down-at-the-heels actress who used-to-almost-be a star, but wound up playing to a bottle of Thunderbird. Now a hopeless boozer, one step away from homelessness, she blacks out and wakes up in bed next to a stiff with serious heart-trouble: A butcher knife in his chest. Enough to give anyone the DTs... Jeff Bridges is a disabled marginally-functional ex-cop who takes in stray lushes; the perfect foil for Fonda's neurotically manic but sympathetic character.

The suspense is fairly well placed, if at times heavy-handed, the plot thickening when a sympathetic former cop, Turner Kendall (Jeff Bridges) comes onto the scene who may or may not be trustworthy. Fonda's scene with Bridges over an impromptu dinner is simply superb where she says, "I used to be an actress," her biting sarcasm mixed with self-pitying pathos and bile. The interior sets are perfectly designed and decorated. An apartment all in Mauve with matching furniture and a glowing turquoise pool beyond a balcony. Buildings in Yellow and Red. Everything designed to draw you in. There are times when the dialogue seems a bit cheesy and dated but it is so much fun watching Jane here I don't care. I dig this out once a year to watch and I think most Fonda fans will love it.

Overall rating: 7 out of 10.

Overripe concoction in a shiny, sterile package. Jane Fonda plays a glamorously burnt-out alcoholic in Los Angeles who wakes up one morning after a bender and discovers a bloody corpse next to her in bed. Jeff Bridges (talking slowly with narrowed eyes) is an ex-cop who helps Fonda piece together the previous night's events. Soaper-cum-mystery-thriller, directed by an uninspired Sidney Lumet, defies logic and credibility at nearly every turn. Fonda works hard to elevate the proceedings, and received a surprising Oscar nod for her efforts, but she can't overcome the clumsiness of the plot's conception (nor the lousy screenplay). A huge disappointment for noir buffs. ** from ****

For what it is, MORNING AFTER is good, but could have been great with a sturdier screen play. Interesting premise, but somehow it really doesn't take off. The ending is denouncement is convoluted and not very satisfying. Hard to believe that what happened actually happened! One major error is when Jeff Bridges leaves Jane Fonda off and she goes back into the loft. Bright daylight. When she enters its completely dark out as she closes the drapes. Bad continuity. This is basically a two character movie, maybe three with the Raoul character. Noboby else has anything than a bit. Look close for Kathy Bates before she hit it big. All toll, worth a look, but don't think too hard.

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.

Even though this movie is not what it could have been, it is still a pleasant sit. Jane Fonda is convincing as a distressed alcoholic actress who couldn't quite make it and Jeff Bridges is perfect as a sluggish mysterious well-doer. Although the script is a major failure, it does contain some very enjoyable close to real-life dialogues. The music is at times irritating and suggests more than is actually happening. If you're going to watch this movie, you'll have to watch it for some of its scenes, not for the overall quality.

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.

The Late/Great Sidney Lumet's 'The Morning After' is a A Well-Done Mystery Thriller! The narrative holds you, at most times. Also, the performances are ace!

'The Morning After' Synopsis: A woman wakes up next to a murdered man. Did she do it herself, and if not, is she in danger herself?

'The Morning After' is definitely a worthy watch. But, the Writing could've been tighter. James Hicks's Screenplay is good, of course. But, I wasn't thoroughly engrossed in the first-hour. I did like the characters all through, but they deserved a more interesting fate in the first-hour. The second-hour, however, picks up momentum & the culmination, when the culprit is revealed, is superb.

Lumet's Direction is excellent, as always. He has handled every scene with conviction. Cinematography & Editing are fine.

Performance-Wise: Jeff Bridges is natural to the core, enacting his part like a pro. Jane Fonda is terrific, despite a few hammy moments. The Late/Great Raul Julia is the scene-stealer, undoubtedly. What a stellar performance!

On the whole, 'The Morning After' packs a punch.

Fonda and this film both look good, she as a haggard, fas been alcoholic, and sunny Los Angeles nicely photographed. Bridges also gives a solid performance in this story that starts off on good fitting but gradually grows thinner as it progresses. The final disappointment is the films weak ending. If you love Fonda and/or Bridges you might still enjoy this film, but for others I wouldn't go out of my way and seek it out.

The headline sums it up pretty well. The writing isn't great, but Jane Fonda and Jeff Bridges absolutely crush it. Raul Julius is not bad either. Fonda & Bridges have great chemistry, and although the story is ludicrous the dialogue is not terrible. The directing is good too. There is not a lot else to say about this film without going further into the plot, but character requirements... it was shot well, the sets and costumes were fine, aside from it taking place in Hollywood it did not look expensive to film. The soundtrack was okay, the score enhanced elements of the film, above average movie, the end.

"The Morning After" had such bad internet reviews that I thought it was going to be terrible. It's not great, and would probably be utterly forgotten if not for the fact that Jane Fonda received a Best Actress Academy Award nomination for it (and it might be mostly forgotten even with that), but once I settled in and realized it wasn't going to be as god awful as everyone else led me to believe, I had fun with this.

The ending is a let down and the climactic scene is directed with uncharacteristic ineptness by Sidney Lumet. But there's quite a bit to like here, especially the performances of Fonda and Jeff Bridges. Their romance feels forced and obligatory, but hey, this was the 80s, and you couldn't have a thriller without someone getting together by the end.

Fonda tears into her role as a has-been drunk and leaves no scenery unchewed.

Grade: B.

It's a thriller set in Los Angeles on Thanksgiving Day in 1986 and several days after. It follows the reactions of an alcoholic ex-actor who, on Thanksgiving morning, wakes up next to a dead man with a knife in his chest.

Alexandra Sternbergen (Jane Fonda) is a blackout alcoholic who once played a significant role in a movie. She's separated from her hairdresser husband, Joaquin Manero (Raul Julia). After a night she can't remember, she wakes up next to the body of Bobby Korshack (Geoffrey Scott), a sleazy photographer she didn't previously know.

She attempts to cover her presence in his studio and runs into an ex-cop, Turner Kendall (Jeff Bridges), who says he's on disability. "The Morning After" follows their efforts to figure out who killed Korshack if it wasn't Alexandra. We also meet Manero's new girlfriend, Isabel Harding (Diane Salinger), the daughter of a prominent judge. In a final confrontation, we learn the identity of the killer and the reason for the killing.

"The Morning After" features some good acting by Fonda as a middle-aged manipulative alcoholic. The other actors are average. The plot takes jumps that make little sense and leaves many unresolved threads. Alexandra develops a hard-to-believe trust in Turner, whose intrusive behavior was unacceptable already in the 1980s. The chemistry between Fonda and Bridges was only OK.

Would you ever think that Jane Fonda and Jeff Bridges had chemistry on screen? Well if you want to see it then you won't really find it here. What you will find is good performances from the two, but with a fairly weak script and a story that mildly entertains. The Morning After is the story about a washed up actress who wakes up with a hangover next to a dead man one morning. She has no recollection of the previous night and no idea what to do with herself in this situation. She finds help from a mysterious young man named Turner Kendall, played by Jeff Bridges, but suspense and mystery build as her situation becomes increasingly dire. She doesn't know if this strange Turner character is a blessing or a curse and whether she should trust him, or be deathly afraid of him. And so the mystery begins in this halfway decent suspense thriller of which there's not a whole lot to say.

The Morning After is helped by strong performances and an engaging story that leads you on to want to know the outcome. It is hurt by a weak script and the lack of originality it faces in its midsection. It starts out strong, opening with Jane Fonda's character waking up in bed next to a man with a knife in his chest. She panics and leaves the apartment she is in and tries to get her situation under control before she decides what to do with the body. During this panic she meets Turner, and this is where the mystery begins.

The film builds its suspense nicely, but after a while it starts to flat line and doesn't get any more interesting until the end. A romance begins between Fonda and Bridges, not unexpectedly to say the least, and for a while nothing much happens. The two characters are developed and their relationship grows, but after a while it becomes redundant and their back stories don't end up being all that creative. Fonda is an actress who used to be big and has now fallen into obscurity. Bridges was a big shot cop who suffered an injury and is now a nobody. These character profiles are important to the overall arc of the story, but they don't make our two main characters all too interesting, leading the film as a whole to not be all too interesting. Plus, we have a script that leaves a lot to be desired. But when the film finally comes to its conclusion it isn't something I saw coming, but in retrospect I probably should have been able to see it from a mile away. I can, however, give the movie credit for having a very exciting climax, but that leads into a final scene which wraps the film up a little too nicely.

When you get right down to it, The Morning After is just sort of there. It isn't great, it isn't terrible, but it isn't something I will remember. I won't be thinking about this film in a few weeks and I might not even remember watching it. It's a movie that tells a mildly interesting story with mildly interesting characters played by great actors. It's more or less your typical suspense thriller, and there's nothing wrong with that, but there's really nothing here that is going to stick with me.

Jane Fonda, Raul Julia, and Jeff Bridges are the main charactors in this suspense thriller. Jane is excellent as never-quite-made-it / has-been actress with a longterm drinking problem. Jane's falling star crashes right into Jeff Bridges who is always good as a laidback but tragically flawed loner. Lucky for Jane, Mr Bridges likes to "fix things other people have discarded". Raul just shines as only he can. Too bad we lost him early. Great mystery, great suspense, great acting. Another excellent video in my personal collection for rainy days. This movie has all the elements to hold up for an encore performance.

An over-the-hill Hollywood starlet (Jane Fonda, surely not typecast?) wakes up in a stranger's bed, only to find her companion dead with a dagger in his chest. The set up is immediately compelling, but it's the only worthwhile scene in an otherwise strangely unthrilling thriller. The film is a juicy premise with no payoff, presenting just two possible suspects (only one logically implicated), and hustling in a vague motive for the crime, almost out if the blue, just before the final credits. Never mind the actual details, which in retrospect are about as memorable as Fonda's one-night stand. Jeff Bridges co-stars as a benevolent ex-cop from Bakersfield (who meets Fonda entirely by chance), and Raul Julia plays her ambitious hair stylist ex-husband. Which of the two is the more likely killer?