Martin Scorsese's After Hours (1985): A Labyrinth with No Minotaur
The Masculine Unconscious and the Architecture of Containment
The Gates Close: Repression and the Daylit Order
When we first meet Paul Hackett (Griffin Dunne), he is not yet lost but he is already vacant. A mild, clean-sweatered man adrift in his own life, he sits in an anaemic Manhattan office surrounded by the white noise of corporate inertia. The lighting is flat, the dialogue, antiseptic. The only disruption comes when a new employee mentions he’s only here to get by, that he doesn’t intend to stay. Paul’s reaction is subtle but seismic. Something collapses in him. The camera lingers just long enough to register it, not anger, but exposure. A mirror has been held up.
This moment is less about narrative propulsion and more about psychic rupture. The trainee’s indifference to structure destabilises Paul’s own repression. In Freudian terms, this is a puncture in the ego’s veneer, an early tremor in what will become a night of total collapse. Paul is not offended by the youth’s lack of ambition; he is haunted by it. It is the life he didn’t choose, the freedom he never allowed himself. The film does not say so, but the psychological groundwork is laid. Paul is not merely bored. He is exiled from desire, adrift in a symbolic order whose rituals no longer bind.
As Paul leaves the office, the film marks his exit with visual formality. Enormous, industrial gates close behind him. They are out of scale with their surroundings, too heavy, too fortified, resembling something from a prison or a medieval city. It is the first of many spatial metaphors that structure the film. These gates are not just barriers; they are borderlines between repression and release, the superego and the id. They close with finality, and Paul crosses into the night that awaits.
But what is he crossing into?
From the beginning, After Hours is a film obsessed with thresholds. Doors, staircases, elevators, windows; they all become psychic portals, transitional zones between stability and disintegration. The journey downtown, ostensibly a trip to meet Marcy (Rosanna Arquette) from the diner, is framed not as transit but as descent and not coincidentally. Engrossed in Henry Miller’s Tropic of Cancer, a novel banned for its explicit engagement with sexuality, transgression, and existential defiance, is when Paul is brought out of it – or through the looking glass – when Marcy, a stranger at that point, informs him that she loves the book. That Paul happens to be reading it and that it is Marcy’s favourite book is no accident. It is a loaded gesture, a cinematic intertext that cues the audience to what lies ahead: a night governed not by order, but by compulsion and desire.
In Miller’s world, the narrator rejects bourgeois routine in favour of erotic chaos. He wanders, drinks, writes, has sex, all outside social time. Paul is on the cusp of this world, teetering. He is not a Miller protagonist, but he is drawn to the promise, or illusion, of liberation and so, when he meets Marcy (Rosanna Arquette) in a diner, she appears as Eve did to Adam, an emissary of temptation, unpredictable and vaguely damaged, her every word dipped in both invitation and warning.
The encounter is awkward, incomplete. He gets her number, carving it into the pages of Miller with a dry pen, before she vanishes, but the seed is planted. That night, he calls her and in doing so, Paul doesn’t just pursue a woman, he sets off a regression. The call is the first real act of the id; the return of desire, unmediated by social code.
To borrow from Lacanian theory, Paul’s journey is not a quest for sex, but for subjectivity. He is not searching for pleasure, but for the lost co-ordinates of selfhood. Downtown, as it turns out, is not just a neighbourhood but the unconscious made spatial and once he crosses into it, the rules collapse. Gravity changes. Time warps. Women offer keys that open nothing. Doors lock without cause. Every apartment is an uncanny theatre, staging his latent fears and repressed drives but this begins with the gates.
That early image, Paul stepping out, gates slamming shut, is loaded with finality. There is no suggestion he will return. No narrative mechanism ensures safe passage. In classical myth, a character who crosses a threshold must pay a price. And in After Hours, Paul will pay, not with blood, but with sanity. His night will be a ritual stripping-away of social identity, each encounter a symbolic castration but first, he leaves the gates.
And so the dissection begins.
Marcy and the Feminine Threat: The Uncanny Object of Desire
Marcy enters not with warmth, but with confusion. Her sentences trail, her stories don’t align, her laughter comes too easily and ends too quickly. She is not erotic so much as enigmatic. Yet Paul pursues her. Or rather, he pursues what she appears to offer: escape, affirmation, access to a world beyond the one that is slowly choking him.
In psychoanalytic terms, Marcy functions not as a character but as a screen; a site for projection, where Paul’s repressed desires and fears return distorted. She is simultaneously inviting and inaccessible, maternal and erotic, tender and threatening. She tells stories that suggest trauma (a rape, a burn injury) but offers them with disjointed affect. Her body is both exposed and concealed, her presence both beckoning and unstable.
This is classic femme fatale territory but After Hours rewrites the trope into something more surreal. Marcy isn’t a fatal woman in the traditional noir sense; she is the feminine as chaos, as psychic destabiliser. In Lacanian terms, she embodies the objet petit a; the unattainable object of desire that both structures and frustrates the subject. Paul wants something from her, sex, intimacy, reassurance, but what she offers is fracture. Each time he moves toward her, she shifts. The desire intensifies not because she is seductive, but because she is incomplete. She cannot be known and so she becomes symbolic of the entire night: a promise that folds into a trap.
The apartment itself intensifies this reading. The interiors are suffocating filled with strange décor, shadowy corners, and tormented sculptures embalmed in paper mâché. The lighting is low, the angles askew. Scorsese shoots it not as a home but as a maze, a claustrophobic theatre of misreading. This is not a place of connection; it is a stage for projection, where Paul’s inability to engage with women as real subjects becomes his undoing. He listens but does not hear. He flirts but recoils. He touches but withdraws.
When Marcy is removed from the narrative it is less a narrative turn than a psychological inevitability. She cannot persist in the story because Paul cannot integrate her. She is too erratic, too wounded, too suggestive of his own instability and so the film erases her. What remains is the residue: guilt, panic, and a rapidly escalating sense that things are slipping beyond control.
It is worth noting that After Hours is littered with women who unsettle. Marcy is only the beginning. Throughout the night, Paul encounters a parade of female figures; each one coded as threatening, absurd, or incomprehensible. There’s Kiki (Linda Fiorentino), the androgynous sculptor; Julie (Teri Garr), the waitress who accuses him of robbery; Gail (Catherine O’ Hara), the ice cream truck driver who leads a mob against him and June (Verna Bloom) who embalms him in plaster. None of these women are romantic interests. They are figures of punishment, containment, and loss of control. In a genre where men usually dominate the cityscape, After Hours flips the dynamic and Paul is never in charge. He is surveilled, seduced, judged, and finally entombed by women.
This not a misogynistic fantasy; it is a depiction of male psychic crisis. Scorsese isn’t mocking these women. He is showing Paul’s unravelling through his inability to relate to them as full subjects. They are threatening because he cannot decode and relate with them and his failure to do so reveals not their complexity or absurdity, but his fragility.
Marcy, then, is the initiating figure, the Eve who offers not a forbidden apple but a glimpse of incoherence. After her, nothing stabilises. The night fractures. The city contorts. And Paul, once mildly discontented, is now fully at the mercy of forces he cannot name.
The Architecture of Collapse: New York as Psychic Landscape
New York in After Hours is not a city; it is a psychic map. What begins as a recognisable downtown transforms into something unfamiliar and threatening, a liminal zone where geography loses coherence and cause yields to coincidence. The streets are mostly empty. The few inhabitants Paul encounters seem to operate by rules unknown to him. Each location, from the artist’s loft to the punk club to the all-night café, is less a place than a set piece, designed to expose a different layer of Paul’s psychological unease.
Scorsese shoots these spaces with the precision of a fever dream. The camera floats, pans, and spins with increasing volatility, reflecting Paul’s mounting disorientation. Hallways are narrow; staircases seem endless. The city becomes a labyrinth with no Minotaur; only Paul himself, lost in its folds. There is a cold theatricality to it all. Windows are lit from strange angles; neon signs flicker like unreliable synapses; rooms hum with unseen energy. The mise en scène becomes metaphor: external space mirrors internal fracture.
This is the city as symbolic regression. Uptown with its closed gates, sterile offices, and architectural stability represents order, repression, the symbolic law. Downtown, by contrast, is the return of the repressed. It is a place where the unconscious reigns, where Paul’s carefully managed persona buckles under the weight of dream-logic encounters. Every attempt to regain control, to explain himself, find a phone, get a cab, ends in failure. Language breaks down. Objects betray him. Time refuses to pass in any predictable way.
This spatial collapse is not random. It is recursive. Paul returns repeatedly to the same streets, the same buildings, the same dead ends. The film creates a subtle loop; a structure that mimics the obsessive repetition compulsion Freud describes in his writings on trauma and neurosis. Paul is not simply trying to get home; he is compelled to relive the moment of rupture, to repeat the night’s events in the vain hope that mastery will be achieved through sheer endurance, but the structure of the film denies him resolution. The more he moves, the more stuck he becomes.
Loop Logic: Repetition Compulsion and the Death Drive
In Freud’s late work, he introduces a concept that stands in tension with the pleasure principle: the death drive; a compulsion toward repetition, even when that repetition brings pain. This drive, Thanatos, opposes the ego’s desire for cohesion. It seeks not integration but undoing and this is the logic that governs After Hours. Paul does not learn, does not adapt. He reacts, recoils, reroutes only to find himself trapped in the same structures.
Every encounter on his journey repeats the same pattern: approach, misunderstanding, punishment. He moves from woman to woman, door to door, each promising resolution, each delivering disintegration. He is not chased by real danger, but by the threat of meaninglessness and by the fear that nothing adds up. His frantic energy is not survivalism; it is anxiety in its purest form. He is caught in a neurotic loop, the city now a self-repeating circuit.
There is something perverse in how After Hours refuses catharsis. Every convention of the narrative arc is denied. There is no climactic confrontation, no moral growth, no revelation. Instead, there is the slow erosion of ego boundaries. Paul becomes a character who no longer expects escape, only continuation. His descent is not into hell in the mythic sense, but into a state of permanent non-resolution. This is the nightmare of the neurotic: to suffer, to understand the suffering, and still be unable to break the cycle.
And yet, Scorsese frames this with black comedy. The tone of After Hours is cruelly funny, absurd, almost slapstick but the laughter it elicits is uneasy. We are not laughing at Paul; we are laughing at the impossibility of sense. The repetition compulsion becomes structural, not just in the plot, but in the rhythm of the film itself. Scenes rhyme, events echo, the mise en scène circles back. Even the score, sparse as it is, seems to loop.
By the final act, Paul has been symbolically killed, embalmed, and encased in plaster, not by violence, but by the sheer accumulation of absurdity. It is not death in the literal sense, but ego death. The cast that covers him is not punishment; it is containment. His limbs are immobilised, his speech muted. He has been rendered object, no longer subject. It is only through this transformation, this psychic stillness, that the loop can end.
And so he is dumped, like garbage, outside his office gates just as they reopen.
Rebirth and Return: The Office as Paradise
The end of After Hours arrives not with resolution, but with restoration. After a night of psychic disarray, Paul is reborn, not as a changed man, but as a man back in his place. The body cast that imprisons him becomes a chrysalis. He does not escape by agency or logic; he is simply ejected. Dumped outside his office like detritus, he breaks free of the plaster, a relic from some other dimension, as the gates open.
The gates that closed with such finality at the start now open to the soundtrack of synth church-bells. Paul is passively accepted back into the daylit order, the symbolic world of the office and the ego. The plaster cracked, his form re-emerged. The world has not changed, but it has reassembled itself. The trauma of the night is not resolved. It is contained, repressed once again beneath the rituals of daily life.
The sequence that follows is deceptively simple. Paul walks through the office as if in a daze. The camera, echoing his disorientation, begins to pan and spin, as if mimicking a kind of ecstatic dizziness. There is no dialogue. The ambient noise of keyboards and machines replaces speech. We are back where we started yet everything feels different. The office, once mundane, now glows with the serenity of the familiar. In psychoanalytic terms, this is not simply return. It is a reinscription into the symbolic order. The world of language, law, and repetition has reasserted its grip.
This return is not triumphant; it is euphoric in a hollow way. Paul has not grown. He has not transcended his condition. But he has survived the storm of the unconscious, and survival, in this schema, is enough. The journey downtown, into the psychic underworld, has produced no knowledge, no liberation, only exhaustion and yet the very structure of the symbolic grants comfort. At least the rituals are legible. At least the signs match the referents. At least the elevator goes where it says it will.
We might be tempted to read this as satire, that Paul is grateful for his computer which wishes him good morning, for his keyboard, for the dull hum of machines but that would be too easy. What Scorsese stages here is more primal: the need for psychic enclosure. The night exposed the cost of total freedom. Downtown was supposed to be escape. Instead, it became a trap of excess, of unbound signifiers, incomprehensible women, erratic architecture, and absent logic. Uptown, by contrast, offers coordinates. It is boring but it is safe.
In mythic terms, Paul has completed a katabasis; a descent into the underworld and return but unlike Orpheus or Odysseus, he brings back no prize. There is no wisdom, no boon. His only transformation is that he has seen the architecture of his own anxiety and survived it. The trauma, like the plaster cast, has been cracked open, but not metabolised.
The final image, Paul at his desk, welcomed by the screen, closes the loop. The camera circles him one last time, not in horror but in affirmation. The spinning mimics the logic of the film: cyclical, recursive, obsessive. The trauma will happen again, in different form but for now, Paul is whole. He is back in his shell. The symbolic order with its rituals, its repression, its daylight logic has reclaimed him.
But underneath that order, After Hours leaves something unsettled. The trauma has no name. The cast is gone, but the scar remains. What we witness is not resolution, but the return of the repressed, postponed, not prevented.
Scorsese’s Comedy of Compulsion
After Hours is often dismissed as Scorsese’s strangest or most minor film. It is certainly his most claustrophobic but what appears on the surface as farce or digression reveals itself, under scrutiny, to be one of his most psychologically coherent works; a cinematic exploration of compulsion, projection, and the fragility of masculine subjectivity under the weight of its own repression.
Through its recursive structure, surreal pacing, and unnerving character encounters, the film stages a collapse of ego, a breakdown of the symbolic, and a night governed by unconscious repetition. Paul Hackett is not a protagonist to root for; he is a subject in crisis, a man undone by the very desires he cannot name. His journey downtown is not an adventure, but a descent into the unassimilated, the feminine, the grotesque, the absurd, from which he must be reborn, not transformed, but re-contained.
What Scorsese achieves here is not satire, but structure. After Hours is a film about what happens when narrative, time, and space lose their stabilising function, when the city becomes a dreamscape and every door leads inward. It is a work of cinematic metapsychology, where the joke is not on Paul, but on the belief that we are ever fully in control.
In the end, Paul survives not by mastering the night, but by submitting to its logic and when the plaster cracks and the gates open, he returns not as a hero, but as a symptom reabsorbed by a system that thrives not on clarity, but on containment.
Freud, S. (1920). Beyond the Pleasure Principle. The Standard Edition of the Complete Psychological Works of Sigmund Freud.
Lacan, J. (1977). Écrits: A Selection. Trans. Alan Sheridan. London: Routledge.
Kristeva, J. (1982). Powers of Horror: An Essay on Abjection. New York: Columbia University Press.
Miller, H. (1934). Tropic of Cancer. Paris: Obelisk Press.
Mulvey, L. (1975). “Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema.” Screen, 16(3), 6–18.
Žižek, S. (1992). Looking Awry: An Introduction to Jacques Lacan through Popular Culture. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Neale, S. (1990). Genre and Hollywood. London: Routledge.
Williams, L. (1991). “Film Bodies: Gender, Genre, and Excess.” Film Quarterly, 44(4), 2–13.
