When “The Color of Money” arrived in theaters in 1986, expectations were sky-high. As a sequel to the iconic “The Hustler” starring Paul Newman and directed by Martin Scorsese, hot off masterpieces like “Taxi Driver” and “Raging Bull”, it carried a significant weight of anticipation. Despite featuring a stellar Color Of Money Cast, including Newman alongside rising star Tom Cruise, initial reactions from critics and audiences were lukewarm. Many felt it didn’t measure up to its predecessor and that Scorsese’s touch wasn’t particularly distinctive in this film.
However, time offers a valuable perspective. Looking back nearly two decades later, “The Color of Money” reveals itself to be not just a worthy sequel, but a compelling film in its own right. It’s an intelligent and engaging character study that builds upon the legacy of “The Hustler” while exploring new thematic territory.
One of the initial criticisms was that Scorsese’s direction felt less impactful than in his earlier works. While it might not be his most overtly stylistic film, his signature is undeniably present. The cinematography shares visual DNA with “After Hours,” utilizing dark, rich colors and a grainy 80s aesthetic. Scorsese’s characteristic quick cuts, zooms, and dynamic camera movements are evident throughout. His directorial style was evolving during the 1980s, a shift that becomes clearer when viewing “The Color of Money” within his larger filmography, including later works like “GoodFellas.” This film showcases a Scorsese in transition, constantly refining his approach, as evidenced by the stylistic departures he would take in films like “The Aviator.” The nuanced direction in “The Color of Money” serves to highlight the performances of the color of money cast, allowing their character portrayals to take center stage.
Paul Newman’s return as Fast Eddie Felson is central to the film’s success. While he arguably deserved his Oscar for “The Hustler,” his portrayal of the older, more weathered Eddie in “The Color of Money” is equally compelling. The script thoughtfully charts Eddie’s evolution, making his transformation believable and engaging for viewers familiar with the original film. The dynamic between Newman and Tom Cruise, playing the young, brash pool hustler Vince Lauria, is particularly captivating. Cruise effectively embodies the cocky arrogance of the younger Eddie from “The Hustler,” creating a compelling mirror and contrast to Newman’s seasoned character. The color of money cast is further enhanced by Mary Elizabeth Mastrantonio as Carmen, Vince’s girlfriend, adding another layer to the complex relationships within the film.
“The Color of Money” transcends being just a sequel about pool. It delves into the themes of aging, mentorship, and the cyclical nature of life. If “The Hustler” was a raw exploration of a young man’s struggles, “The Color of Money” offers a mature reflection on that journey and the wisdom gained over time. The film subtly suggests that Vince, in thirty years, will likely mirror Eddie’s current state – a mentor figure guiding a new generation of talent. This cyclical aspect, embodied by the color of money cast and their character arcs, is a key strength of the film. While a further sequel might be unnecessary, “The Color of Money” effectively underscores this point about the passage of time and the evolution of individuals.
In conclusion, while not a cinematic masterpiece, “The Color of Money” is undoubtedly a strong and insightful film from the 1980s. It possesses far more depth and substance than its initial reception indicated. For film enthusiasts, particularly those who appreciate “The Hustler” and compelling character-driven narratives, “The Color of Money,” with its memorable color of money cast, is a film well worth revisiting and re-evaluating.
