Simply Perfect

Purely Joyful Movie!

If the ambition is to provide two hours of instantly forgettable, popcorn-munching escapism, it succeeds.

While it doesn't offer any answers, it both thrills and makes you think.

An engaging movie filled with powerful performances and a wonderful payoff directed by Martin Scorsese. Tell me what else is new?

It's not necessary, but you'll probably want to watch The Hustler before you watch The Color of Money. In 1961, Paul Newman played "Fast" Eddie, a pool hustler who took on a master player before he was ready. In 1986, he plays "Fast" Eddie, a pool hustler who teaches and trains a younger version of himself. Basically, in the remake he's Paul Oldman instead of Paul Newman. Oh, and he won a make-up Oscar.So, if you liked The Hustler and it won't break you up to see "Fast" Eddie with gray hair, getting made fun of by a cocky, young upstart, you'll probably be able to sit through The Color of Money. But the original is so much better; there's tension and drama rather than comic relief jokes. Tom Cruise plays the younger version of Paul Newman, but he's not as likable as his predecessor. And in this version, Paul Newman doesn't even try to act. He walks through it, as if he knows he's going to win an undeserved Oscar and he's ticked off about it. My advice: just watch The Hustler twice instead.

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).

Like the man said sequels rarely equal let alone eclipse the original and this is no exception. We are, of course, comparing a glitzy colored movie replete with 'fancy' set ups, with a gritty black and white original that was happy to rely on the performances to 'sell' it, and secure in the knowledge that it had the performances nailed. There was also the tempo, leading up to the final showdown between Fast Eddie and Minnesota Fats - the very same technique employed - with equal success - in The Cincinnati Kid - where everything is leading to the showdown between the Kid and Lancey, the 'Man'. Clearly we can't do that here, otherwise Newman would have to double as Fast Eddie AND Minnesota Fats. On the other hand it is watchable, even although the vastly overrated Scorcese will never be as good as Rossen.