Such a frustrating disappointment

Strong and Moving!

The performances transcend the film's tropes, grounding it in characters that feel more complete than this subgenre often produces.

When a movie has you begging for it to end not even half way through it's pure crap. We've all seen this movie and this characters millions of times, nothing new in it. Don't waste your time.

This movie is most certainly not a masterpiece deserving of a perfect rating, but when I see a solid movie with ratings lower than some total trash I have no option but to overrate in order to contribute at least a little bit to what I think is a proper rating for a movie...That being said, this movie is actually a solid 7 in my book because it delivers a good plot without too many holes and without over-stretching my suspension of disbelief. It also delivers solid acting and well developed characters, including the support cast which is a rarity in modern Hollywood movies. In short, my feeling was that all the characters were played well, were believable and easy to connect with.Special kudos go to Jane March who is not only very beautiful and graceful in this role but pulls of a multiple personality role quite well in my opinion and is overall a pleasure to watch and this has nothing to do with the nude scenes which are just an added bonus for some of the audience...Finally, I suspect this movie is so poorly rated in part because of the aforementioned nudity as I noticed a trend in this regard with all the puritans racing to give a rating of 1/10 to any movie containing nudity.

I don't really see how this ever got a Razzie award, because it's way too middle of the road for that. It's a standard thriller with standard suspects and a standard yet pretty creative outcome. It's really unexceptional in every possible way, except maybe for the surprisingly tacky sex scenes and gratuitous nudity, which gives it kind of an exploitation feel. Not enough to call it bad. At some points the writing is also a bit forced. The makers noticed they hadn't had anything happening in ages so they threw in a car chase for some reason. Would the killer really take that kind of risk? Even though this movie has quite a lot of flaws, it actually does manage to be entertaining. The mystery stays exciting throughout and the ending does not disappoint. It's bizarre and unbelievable, but it does not disappoint. Overall I'd say this movie isn't nearly as bad as what some people seemed to believe.

I really don't know how anybody expects me to write more than twenty-five words about such a trashy thriller as "Color of Night". Let's face it, the real attractions - if you can call them that - are the steamy sex scenes between hunky Bruce Willis and nymphomaniac waif Jane March. There is certainly plenty of their flesh on show, so if this is your thing I guess you could wade your way through the rest of the garbage (if you are really that desperate) or make good use of the fast forward button. My advice though would be to use the eject button instead.Director Richard Rush ought to find another vocation, though I admit he had nothing to work with in Billy Ray's story. Director of Photography Dietrich Lohmann has nothing but naked bodies to film, editor Jack Hofstra should have been fired while the music from Dominic Frontiere may be the worst ever composed for a movie of this type.At least the cast, including Lance Henrikson, Lesley Ann Warren, Brad Dourif, Ruben Blades and Kevin J. O'Connor seem to realise they're in a shocker.Sunday, September 22, 1996 - Video

Folks don't like this movie. I didn't either, but there is at least one interesting thing about it, its provenance.Its an old fashioned locked house mystery, patterned after the Agatha Christie model. You have some sort of artificial constraint that sets the rules: there is a murderer and you know it is one among a small group. As the story goes, you discover that each person has some hidden side that may lead to the explanation that they are the murderer. The detective, in this case a psychologist, is hampered in that he has a condition similar to the broken souls he is counseling. It makes it difficult for him to "see" on our behalf. In true Agatha tradition, the real murderer is revealed to be someone, and to rely on some causes, that are so unexpected we smile when they are revealed. The red in the red herring here is sex. The diversions that pull us away all have to do with sexual fantasy. This is, needless to say, not a device that Agatha would have used, but it is most welcome here because it isn't just sex that is used to distract us: its that special kind that comes from cinematically- generated romantic target stories.In fact, if you know films, you may know one of the most successful and lovely of the projects that simply and directly takes you one of these romantic, bodily encounters that actually ends but remains sweet. Its "The Lover," and stars as the target of attention a young Jane March. Its a different twist than here, where she takes on several characters in one body, but the overall shape is the same, emotionally as well as the skinform.There's incompetence in how it is delivered to us, but the way it is structured is very, very sweet, and continues the narrative tradition of the detective story into more modern terms. It probably is important in that respect and though it doesn't directly reward us, I'll bet that its a big step in the evolution of the form that has given us stuff we really do like.Ted's Evaluation -- 3 of 3: Worth watching.