Tom Jones (1963)

Featured Audience Ratings

• Bob S

  
  a messy disappointment - maybe cuz the washed out mgm dvd transfer blows

• Jim H

  
  A voracious bastard pursues his love - among others - in a satirical exploration of British class structure and sexual politics. Henry Fielding is sometimes credited with inventing the modern novel, and his works read like an experiment in a new form; in <i>Joseph… More
  A voracious bastard pursues his love - among others - in a satirical exploration of British class structure and sexual politics. Henry Fielding is sometimes credited with inventing the modern novel, and his works read like an experiment in a new form; in <i>Joseph Andrews</i> the narrator actually tells the reader to skip the boring parts. And in <i>Tom Jones</i> it is clear that this is a faithful adaptation if only because the spirit of experimentation pervades. It is a romp, full of baudy humor and high-energy ballyhoo. The characters even break the fourth wall a few times. But when I read Fielding, I often feel like I'm looking at a child's creation out of Play-Doh and other people expect me to see Rodin. I felt the same way about this film. Yes, I like the satire - the blood spewing from the horses, whipped too a frenzy by fanatical hunters, and the so-called "ladies of quality" acting more whorish than a Kardashian - but director Tony Richardson crosses the line between mad-cap romp with a purpose and mad-cap romp for romp's sake. The ending is too convenient, the behavior too extreme to be taken seriously, <i>Tom Jones</i> is a film made out of Play-Doh. Overall, even though its heart is the right place, I think the film strays too far into unreality to have any real effect.

• Matheus C

  
  As insolent as its protagonist, this British production managed to snap up the year's Best Picture Oscar. While its deserving status is debatable and its timeless status has long worn off, the frantic pace and director Tony Richardson's handling of the material wins you… More
  As insolent as its protagonist, this British production managed to snap up the year's Best Picture Oscar. While its deserving status is debatable and its timeless status has long worn off, the frantic pace and director Tony Richardson's handling of the material wins you over, showing that the Brits can have fun at their own expense and also eat their slice of the cake.

• Ivan D

  
  Consistent comedy with a very charming leading performance in the guise of Albert Finney, a role I think would have brought the film down if a less endearing lead would have been used. It was a comic tale wrapped with the usual heroic steps: Departure, transformation, and return, but… More
  Consistent comedy with a very charming leading performance in the guise of Albert Finney, a role I think would have brought the film down if a less endearing lead would have been used. It was a comic tale wrapped with the usual heroic steps: Departure, transformation, and return, but of course not doing so without any mischief. I thought that the film was very light-hearted in its theme that the scene of Englishmen in their horses and a horde of dogs chasing a lone deer came out as nothing but hilarious craziness, instead of it being a brief satire to the 18th century England's excesses. "Tom Jones" was a good romantic comedy, with plenty of "fourth wall" breaking which, I think, can be considered new to the style of filmmaking at the time. But above all its lavish sets, impressive costume designs and some good performances, the extremity of its characters' eccentricities has made it look like only a notch higher than an episode of "Blackadder" in terms of scale, not a "beating-them-all" type Best Picture winner.

• Lord N

  
  this is another one of those Best Picture winners that just because it won, it is supposed to be a good movie. For the life of me I cannot see why it won. it was vaguely entertaining and mildly interesting but those are it's only redeeming qualities. I didn't like how silly… More
  this is another one of those Best Picture winners that just because it won, it is supposed to be a good movie. For the life of me I cannot see why it won. it was vaguely entertaining and mildly interesting but those are it's only redeeming qualities. I didn't like how silly and predictable the movie was. I knew nothing going into the movie but after the first 15 minutes I knew he would seduce some random girl every 10 minutes and I was completely right. This was probably the least deserving of the 1963 Best Picture nominees and for some reason it won. this was not that great of a film for me. I hear people talk about that Finney's performance was good. I disagree. His character, to me, was rather one dimensional and rather stupid. there was no real plot developments that were done well. It just didn't keep me very interested very much. by the end of the movie I didn't care if he was executed or even whose son he was. it was just a bad movie. Final Verdict: it's poor performances and dumb plot make completely overshadow any decent points this film might have. it was not worthy of Best Picture. Replacement Winner: Lilies of the Field.

• Emily B

  
  Disappointing compared to Tony Richardson's earlier films. The best part of the film has got to be: THE HIGHWAYMAN:"Stand and deliver!" MISS WESTERN:"What?" THE HIGHWAYMAN:"Stand and deliver!" MISS WESTERN:"Deliver?Deliver what?I am… More
  Disappointing compared to Tony Richardson's earlier films. The best part of the film has got to be: THE HIGHWAYMAN:"Stand and deliver!" MISS WESTERN:"What?" THE HIGHWAYMAN:"Stand and deliver!" MISS WESTERN:"Deliver?Deliver what?I am no traveling midwife!"

Read all 6 featured audience ratings