Thanks for the memories!

Brilliant and touching

At first rather annoying in its heavy emphasis on reenactments, this movie ultimately proves fascinating, simply because the complicated, highly dramatic tale it tells still almost defies belief.

Through painfully honest and emotional moments, the movie becomes irresistibly relatable

Look, this film had promise, but one feels, the movie doesn't have the full effect as anticipated. Not being able to get past a rape, when she was thirteen, and never been, now hot thirties aged Pickett, who turns in a wonderful sexy performance, has worn down her suffering husband, (Primus) when wanting to make love. Whenever a man appears or she's touched by a masculine touch, she reacts, though one of two of Pickett's reactions seemed, overacted, or may'be that's just how her character is. With her husband gone away, and later, firing a young Chicano stud servant and maid, getting it on, in one of her rooms, she's left on her lonesome, where fantasy entwines with reality. She deals with some very real and dangerous situations, in the form of some unwanted and accepting intruders. This is taking up a few unsettling notches, with a bold, narcissistic writer, who shows up a couple of times, who becomes the charming hero of the peace. And it's no surprise at all, that he's the charming knight in disguise. The film suffers cause it doesn't go deep enough into the core of Pickett's problems. To me, there was a lot of some wasted scenes, the fantasy ones, too brief, not explained well, where they seemed more concerned with eroticism. It's hit or miss, more so, miss, where the end result is muddled, but the film's style is typical Vadam. Primus is very good, and Gene Davis, stereotyped, as a creepy stud rapist, where Joanna Cassidy has never looked sexier. Splendid Pickett does make the film one to watch. Not without interest, definitely. The last scene with Pickett cured, over where the end credits is absurd, is judged with the briefness, prefore.

I saw this movie ages ago, in "the golden age" of the VHS. Expecting something erotic and arousing, all I got was a lot of images of a woman running around in different states of nudity and semi-nudity. To sum it up, I was so booooored! BUT...the soundtrack by John Barry was excellent with a really nice waltz as the linking theme. Checking the soundtrack today, the titles of the different track listings are quite silly, but imaginative. We get "The phantom of the orgasm" for instance and "The dominatrix's waltz" :D. But if you manage to find the soundtrack, buy it! It's a hidden gem! And it's also the only reason I give this movie four stars. The score is worth 10, the movie itself 2.

Just a few words on Anton Versluys'commentary on this film ("Underrated erotic extravaganza", 26 December 2000). I strongly disagree with his closing remarks, I quote: "This is not a serious film, just some kind of joke but good enough to call it a good film. Perhaps Roger Vadim will not be remembered as a great director, but this one is one of his fine works." First of all, Mr. Versluys flatly misses the point. Does he really expect to see a "serious" good, inspiring, stimulating, healthy EROTIC film during his lifetime? "Night Games" by the late Roger Vadim is a work of art, showing the skills and delicacy of this french artist; it is a film to be enjoyed and relished upon, unlike so many other so-called American "erotic" films, for example Demi Moore's "Striptease", which is truly nauseating. Yes, Roger Vadim will indeed be remembered as a fine Director having good taste, and Mr. Versluys will not be remembered as a great movie critic.

NIGHT GAMES is directed by Roger Vadim. Sports a cast of capable actors and the music score is by maestro John Barry. You'd think this would guarantee a certain level of quality, right? Well, forget about it. NIGHT GAMES is terrible through and through. I've wanted to see this film for a very long time, ever since I saw the poster of the movie when I was a teen when the movie was released and boy, did this movie not even come close to the little expectations I had about it. The big problem in this misfire is the lead actress, Cindy Pickett. She's just not beautiful. With her very short hairstyle, she's very manly looking. On the poster, Cindy has blond hair and sorta looks like a sexier version of Olivia Newton John. In the movie, her hair is a drab brownish color, and she looks like ONJ on a very bad day. The reason why casting Cindy makes this movie almost intolerable is the fact that she's in every frame and the story is about her being alone in her mansion. 70% of the movie is just Cindy walking around in her mansion, looking scared. This makes for a very tedious "erotic" flick. The only good thing about this movie is Joanna Cassidy and Barry's score.