After Hours review

 Number 625 on the top 1000 films of all time is Martin Scorsesee's 1985 black-comedy 'After Hours.'

Paul Hackett (Griffin Dunne) is an office worker trying to get home from Manhattan's Soho district. However, a series of misadventures makes this task more difficult than it sounds.

What do you think when you think of a Martin Scorsesee film? Endless swear words? Gangster flicks? Robert De Niro? I bet you wouldn't think of this 1980's black-comedy. Compared to the likes of Raging Bull or Taxi Driver, it's definitely not as explosive or well-known.

It was definitely one of his zaniest, most-off-the-wall films with plenty of off-beat humour to keep the plot running along nicely. The premise is simple enough: an office worker desperate to get home keeps coming up against increasingly outlandish barriers. Yes, the film does stray into the world of absurdist fiction, but you're willing to suspend your disbelief.

It helps that you had Griffin Dunne who gave Paul Hackett an everyman quality, which kept the film grounded. He was in a relatable situation; I'm sure there are many of us have had desperate journeys trying to get home after a late night. I certainly have, although I haven't remained as affable as Paul did, despite everything happening to him.

It certainly might not be as memorable as the Departed, but it might be a nice palette-cleanser after Scorsesee's more violent efforts like Gangs of New York. Either way, this is one of Scorsesee's more overlooked efforts with a great ending that brought everything full-circle.

Manhattan review

 Number 293 on the top 1000 films of all time is Woody Allen's romantic, comedy-drama 'Manhattan.'

Woody Allen stars as Isaac Davis, a 42-year-old TV comedy writer living in Manhattan. He is dating the 17-year-old Tracy (Muriel Hemingway) but soon falls in love with his best friend's mistress Mary Wilkie (Diane Keaton.)

This was a comedy, right? Woody Allen directed it, right? He wrote it too. So, why was it so unfunny? The film was only ninety-six minutes, but it felt so much longer. It wasn't until the forty-sixth minute that I even cracked a smile. The rest of the film rarely elicited more than a chuckle.

And that comes back to Woody Allen who effectively always plays the same character - a neurotic, middle-aged Jewish man with a tendency to psycho-analyse everything. it's all well and good, once or twice, but after a while, it becomes tedious. Tedious is the best way to describe this film. It was just a bunch of would-be academics name-dropping philosopher after philosopher.

Manhattan was also uncomfortable in its depiction of Isaac and Tracy's relationship. He's old enough to be her father. And the romantically inexperienced Hemingway also experienced a lot of discomfort in the role. Considering the allegations that have since been levelled against Allen and considering how he is married to his step-daughter who is over thirty years his junior, it only made things ickier. I know that nothing ever came of the allegations, but it still felt creepy.

If I were to praise the film on anything it would be its cinematography, which was wonderful. Allen shot the film in black-and-white, which gave it a timeless, vintage feel. The scenes of Allen and Keaton in the planetarium where they were silhouetted against the stars were gorgeous.

I've seen a few Woody Allen films in my time. I can't say I like them very much. Even though, they're comedies, they're just not funny.