Jeux érotiques de nuit

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.

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.

Director Roger Vadim has worked with many beautiful women (Bardot, Fonda and Deneuve) in his career and for this offering he gets a hold of Cindy Pickett (who likes to wander around in a see through nightgown) and Joanna Cassidy in support. "Night Games" is transfixing, but muddled erotica as Pickett plays wealthy Beverly Hills housewife Valerie St. John, whose marriage seems to be falling apart with her inability to make love with her publisher husband due to a traumatic memory of childhood rape. So to achieve sexual fulfilment she escapes to her fantasies, especially when her husband just gets up and goes leaving her alone in their mansion. Every night she is visited by a phantom (from her illustrations - in some striking costumes), who helps her overcome her fears and with him explores her sexuality in the hope of freeing herself of the past. But Valerie's attachment to this fantasy begins to have a toll when reality becomes forgotten putting her in a dangerous predicament. Cindy Pickett's performance is right on the money, capturing the very neurotic state of her repressed character's mind. Vadim plays around with Pickett's frigid character's imagination --- dreams or reality in what becomes a dangerous cocktail of sexual healing ("The dark can play funny tricks on ya. That's all"). The busty redhead Cassidy (who looks great) is the good friend and has some memorable sequences; like the poolside scene and the old-fashion styling in a sexual daydream sequence. Also stealing some instances is Paul Jenkins as a scruffy alcoholic Welsh writer and Gene Davis as a young admirer. The slow-going story does come across fragmented and lean, but Vadim's elegant direction gives it emotional depth in its vividly inspired imagery along with Jon Barry's infatuating musical score that has a sensually smooth swing and the leering camera that glides about the vast estate is profoundly projected.

"Does everything have to mean sex for you?"

As has been said in other reviews, Roger Vadim has worked with, dated, married and promoted the careers of some of the most iconic female talent of the twentieth century, Fonda, Denueve, Bardot, etc. So you can understand why some actresses would throw themselves at him to get on in life. Cindy Pickens, bless her, is not on the same planet as those other actresses. Joanna Cassidy should have been cast as the lead imo.

This turgid, boring, dated, slow, poorly written, boringly plotted and with a dreary sort porn feel to it. Roger Vadim can't direct a suspense thriller like this to save his life.

Don't bother.

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.