The Color of Money (1986)

"The Color of Money" stars Paul Newman as Fast Eddie Felson, an experienced snooker player who leads his protégé, Vincent Lauria, played by a young Tom Cruise, to the wonders of pool hustling. Beware of your expectations. If it was directed by a newcomer or an unknown, this movie would pass as enjoyable and above-average. When one finds out, however, that Martin Scorsese is behind the cameras, that is not enough. Consequently, the overall result is a tad frustrating. Scorsese, here, is a victim of his own success.Arguably, this is one of Scorsese's most conventional movies. For a start, the plot is disappointingly predictable. From the very beginning, we are able to foretell that Felson would pick Vincent as his protégé, that they would eventually split up, and that the two of them would have their final showdown. By the way, that last aspect is what keeps the audience invested through the whole movie. Precisely because of that, the ending is frustrating. Albeit Scorsese's intention is evident, I'm pretty sure the public would opt for a different finale.Having said that, these downsides don't prevent the movie from being a pleasure ride and from leaving a good impression. Newman, Cruise, and Mary Elizabeth Mastrantonio (who plays Claire, Vincent's girlfriend) all deliver fascinating performances - especially Newman, whose work granted him his only Oscar.The movie also benefits from a well-constructed character development, as all the main personalities include confidence, vulnerability, and reluctance. Felsen is a shrewd, charming, and strategist man, which contrasts with his late lack of confidence, frustration and lost of control. In turn, Vincent is at the same time tender, cocky, and impulsive - carpe diem seems to be his tacit motto. Finally, Mastrantonio's Claire is enigmatic and enticing, with a strong personality and an intriguing background. The technical issues are also worth praising. Scorsese's good taste when it comes to music is there. The camera-work and editing are unsurprisingly excellent, as that's where lies more vividly the director's touch. "The Color of Money" doesn't rank among Scorsese's best works, but it is still worth watching. Apart from its predictability and the lack of a decent payoff, the movie offers great interpretations and riveting characters. Vote: 7,5.

This sequel to The Hustler (1961) was directed by Martin Scorsese. It's not necessarily the most typical type of film you may expect from him. It was in fact one that he did for the studio and was not one of his more personal efforts. By working on a commercial project like this, Scorsese then had leeway to make his next film, the ultra-personal and controversial The Last Temptation of Christ (1988). Consequently, because this wasn't material he was fully passionate about, it's not so surprising that this isn't amongst his best work. That said it is still a good film. Scorsese still manages to employ much of his typical energetic style into the flow of things, making even the game of pool pretty dynamic to watch.The film is maybe even better known for its acting though, with Paul Newman returning to play an older version of the character Fast Eddie Felson who last appeared in The Hustler twenty-five years previously. His character now manages young hustlers like he once was and, in doing so, takes a huge slice of their winnings. It's a role-reversal for the character and Newman is once again very good, although despite the Oscar win, he was even better in The Hustler. Tom Cruise plays off him as the cocky youngster in a type of role that we've seen him perform many times in fairness. He is good enough though and the two actors do work off each other well. The dynamic between them is reasonably predictable to an extent with a plot arc where their relationship starts off shaky, gets worse then finally clicks. But, off course, success breeds complications. Events do ultimately reach an unusual and ambiguous conclusion, which I wasn't too sure about personally but at least it ended things on a less obvious note.

Every great director makes a few stinkers, and this is certainly one of Scorcesese's. The problem is he committed a movie "mortal sin" - he actually made Paul Newman look uncool playing a character he had played previously who was very cool. That is unforgivable.************SPOILERS AHEAD********************As with so many bad movies it really comes down to a ridiculous script. Eddie Felson, a billiards phenom in his younger days who had been used and tossed away by an unscrupulous gambler, is older and wiser and now acts as the unscrupulous gambler by bankrolling young pool sharks . . . Huh? Did Eddie learn nothing from his earlier experience. A rather unbelievable character flaw considering where Eddie was at the end of "The Hustler"Eddie decides to go on the road with a hotshot young pool player named Vincent (Tom Cruise) who is crazily cocky, dumb as a box of rocks, and presented in a smarmy way-over-the-top manner by Cruise. Vince has a girlfriend named Carmen (Mary Elizabeth Mastrantonio) who early on reveals that she has no scruples herself. Uh, wait a minute. In "The Hustler" Eddie got involved with a girl, took her on a pool/gambling road trip with his evil gambler mentor and, without giving away the twists of that much better movie, lets just say it ended very badly. Wow, it seems Eddie has contracted a real bad case of memory loss which causes him to make every mistake he has made before. Who's is writing this dreck?The implausibility's get worse. Eddie gives Vince a very valuable cue stick, sort of a gift to convince him to become his protégé. Then he tells Vince to not use it when he plays - any savvy pool player will see it and immediately identify Vince as a hustler. Okay, so why give it to the brash and volatile young Vincent? Of course Vince goes out without Eddie and takes the cue and mucks up Eddie's gambling game plan. Eddie gets mad and drives his car away, with Vince trying to chase him down like a jilted girlfriend. Then Vince gets mad and Eddie gets in his car and chases down Vince, like an older jilted girlfriend. Meanwhile Carmen is disrobing in front of Eddie every chance she gets. Then they all make up. Then the wise, sage pool hustler Eddie Felson devises a con job which involves putting his grubby old guy hands all over Carmen, knowing full well how jealous and insecure Vince is about his relationship with Carmen. This leads to a cringe-worthy scene after the con job in which Vince acts like the immature teenager he obviously is while Carmen and Eddie try to placate his anger by saying, "We were just acting!" It made me feel a little dirty, watching the great Paul Newman explaining how actors who kiss in movies don't really mean it. Who put these words in his mouth?There's more, including one of Scorcesese's most gratuitous camera spins, doing 360's around Newman like some drunk teenager doing donuts in his souped-up Chevy in a supermarket parking lot, but why continue? This is simply a bad movie, all the more embarrassing because it almost taints the memory of its superior predecessor . . . almost.On the plus side, Newman looks great, MEM is very sexy, and Forrest Whitaker turns up in a great cameo as a slightly crazy pool hustler. His character was more interesting during his brief screen time than anything Newman and Cruise could muster. The rotten cherry on top of this melted pile of ice cream is the fact that THIS is the film for which Newman won his only Oscar. My advice for Newman fans (of which I am definitely one) is to avoid "The Color of Money" and remember the legendary actor for all his other great performances.

If the performances were so great, why only rate it a 7 out of 10? To begin with, I watched this with my kids back in the 80's and we got hooked on 9-ball right away--we would play in this garage, and I would dominate until one of my younger kids dropped the 9-ball by accident, ending my streak. So, the film has sentimental value to me.In the clear light of day, however, I re-watched it recently, and recalled what annoyed me the first time: Newman's reactions to Vince seem inconsistent and inexplicable. When Vince (Cruise) does what Newman (Eddie) tells him to do, Eddie is angry - when Vince does the opposite, Eddie gets mad (once, even driving off and leaving him). I didn't get it.We are supposed to view Eddie as the mentor here, but, frequently, the roles reverse. For example, when Eddie decides to play a competitive game against a stranger (a young Forest Whittaker), he finds he is the victim of a clever con-artist -- he throws a hissy-fit, but Vince's reaction is the correct one: "Forget it - we'll get this guy next time." Eddie won't listen. Who is the impetuous protegé now?There are some great pool sequences, however, and a glorious scene where Vince - armed with a totebox containing a world-class cue - encounters the Hall #1 player, who asks: "What have you got there?" "Doom", replies Vince with a big smile. Wish I had the game to say that.So, if you can tolerate characters that react unevenly to situations, and aren't always likable, you might enjoy this unique film featuring Paul Newman's only Oscar-winning role (he shoulda won for Cool Hand Luke).