Color of Money book
- Thread starter asmith74
- Start date
IMHO the book is a far better story than the movie, and is what the screenplay should have been based off of. Love the movie...... but love the book more. I compare it to Stanley Kubricks version of The Shining...... great movie..... but not as good as the book.
Chuck
Chuck
how bout somebody sending one around to az'ers to read and then pass along I will take delivery of one if anyone has one to spare. Leonard
Yay, I;ll get to read fade's copy
Just a note to let folks know that I took fade up on his offer.
I was also not aware that the book differed from the movie.
I plan to read it real quick when it arrives, so it should be
up for grabs to borrow again soon. Thanks again fade.
Just a note to let folks know that I took fade up on his offer.
I was also not aware that the book differed from the movie.
I plan to read it real quick when it arrives, so it should be
up for grabs to borrow again soon. Thanks again fade.
I must be one of the very few people that was lucky enough to actually read the book before I saw the movie. I ran into it in a supermarket, of all places, somewhere in '85 or very early '86. At any rate, the book is indeed far superior to the movie, but it is not as marketable to the general audience. In that sense, and that sense only, I am grateful to the producers of the movie for being willing to deviate significantly from the book in constructing them movie script. In 1965, TCOM novel may have been suitable for a movie without revision, but in the mid '80's the movie version was the ticket. Interestingly, however, Walter Tevis' underlying motif of the father-son relationship/struggle was actually more poignantly displayed in TCOM movie than in any of his written works. Go figure!
whitey2 said:
If anybody want to read the book and avoid waiting and mail costs, check out our local library. Tevis is very respected author, most libraries will have at least a few of his books. If your library does not have it, they can most likely get it for you through a library exchange program.
No Fats
Minnesota Fats does not appear in the movie, as he did in the book, because they couldnt, or wouldnt, get Jackie Gleason to play his part again. The rumor was Newman didnt want him. Jackie was very lackadaisical in his work ethic. Showed up when he felt like it, and left the same way. Newman, on the other hand, and I know this because I was on the set, showed up early and stayed until they were done shooting. A real pro. Sometimes they didnt stop until 11pm or midnight. I was on the set for 3 days, and I wouldnt do it again and fade those long hours for $500 a day. Twelve to fifteen hours a day are the norm.
the Beard
Minnesota Fats does not appear in the movie, as he did in the book, because they couldnt, or wouldnt, get Jackie Gleason to play his part again. The rumor was Newman didnt want him. Jackie was very lackadaisical in his work ethic. Showed up when he felt like it, and left the same way. Newman, on the other hand, and I know this because I was on the set, showed up early and stayed until they were done shooting. A real pro. Sometimes they didnt stop until 11pm or midnight. I was on the set for 3 days, and I wouldnt do it again and fade those long hours for $500 a day. Twelve to fifteen hours a day are the norm.
the Beard
freddy the beard said:
That is still over 30.00 an hour and your making a MOVIE with SCORSESE! Really you wouldn't!? I know plenty of people who would do it for free (like me)! It is sad that such a unique experience, to be on the set of one of the best directors of all time, was wasted on someone who did not appreciate it.
As far as the book goes, it is not just a little different but completely different from the movie. I read it last year and just loved it. I think Tevis is a great writer and really captured the inner struggle of a aging legend.
To me, the absence of the Fats character in the movie, was far less surprising than the complete absence of the Tom Cruise character in the book. From what I read, the original script was much closer to the book, but Newman really wanted a character like the George C Scott of the Hustler and requested a rewrite.
I have mentioned this before but if you enjoy his two pool books, he also wrote a brilliant book about a female chess prodigy, called The Queen's Gambit, it is excellent!
Last edited:
dang it and I thought I was first to beg a copy.
cuechick said:
Yeah, The Hustler was much closer to the book. However, I recently reread the Hustler, it had been a long time since I read it. I found a couple of big differences between it and the film. Maybe I am misinterpreting the ending, but I don't think so. Some character traits of Eddie are put on the Bert Gordon character in the film. But then the Color Of Money book seems to follow the film. I dunno.
JPB said:
Sorry but I think your confused, have you read The Color of Money or this thread for that matter? The only thing that is the same in the book and the film is the title.
I think both are great, esp. the book but if you read the book and expect the movie you will be very very surprised!
cuechick said:
Rereading what I wrote, my post should have been more clear, but I think the tone of your post is a little harsh. But my post wasn't totally clear so I guess I brought it out. To clarify, I have read both the Hustler and the Color of Money and seen both films. I recently reread the Hustler as I said. The ending of the Hustler book was somewhat different than the film of the Hustler in my reading of it. I didn't post details since maybe people have not gotten there. I thought the film of the Hustler was the prequel to the book Color of Money just a bit more than the book. That is because of something Sarah said to Eddie in the book that in the movie she said to Bert and the way the book ended. Also the differences in the trip to Kentucky in the book Hustler as opposed to the film. That is what I was saying. Perhaps I should reread the end of the Hustler. If you like I would point out specifically what I am talking about, but again, I sort of don't want to given the spoiler nature of it for those who have not read it. But I should have been a bit more clear in my post.
Where does the line start for the TCOM book?
I havent read it //plus it might be cool to send to Germany for a visit ..
maybe the sender should send a gift with the book to the previous person... something regional in flavor........
Who wants a bratwurst?
I havent read it //plus it might be cool to send to Germany for a visit ..
maybe the sender should send a gift with the book to the previous person... something regional in flavor........
Who wants a bratwurst?
JPB said:
Hi JPB,
I did not mean to sound harsh, your response was confusing but I apologize, I did not mean to hurt any feelings. I do think I understand the point you were trying to make.
I have read both books and seen both movies and I know exactly what you mean by the change in endings. Without giving away too much, I think the movie went for a more dramatic "Hollywood" ending, which made sense from a box office standpoint. It made the movie more appealing to a general audience.
What people should know, it the writer, Walter Tevis, was also a poolplayer, and he wrote the books very much from a players perspective. With a real understanding of not just the game but the competitiveness and the passion and need to play. This is why I enjoyed the books so much...
To answer Smoke...
If by line you mean story line, it starts something like 20 years later, when Eddie is approached to do televised exhibition matches against Fats for money. He has not touched a cue in years and he finds himself
now older with bad eyes and struggling to get back to what he once was.
It is a pretty complicated journey as he meets a woman he is very attracted too and is torn between her "legitimate" world of art and money and his.
Fats is really a minor character in this story...I wonder if there is some of Tevis's own life in this. It was written in the early 80's about 20 years after the Hustler.
Last edited: