Customer Reviews:

• ONE OF THE TOP TEN WORST LOOKING DVD TRANSFERS EVER!
  Albert Finney is the scandalous "Tom Jones", a squire of young ladies with nothing on their mind but sex. This is the bawdy, gaudy tale of Tom's romantic prowess and how he became the chambermaid's delight. It's told in a rather tongue-in-cheek fashion and celebrated with a lustfully playful score and winning cameo performances throughout. Susannah York crops up as the playful Sophie Western, one of Tom?s many conquests, much to the chagrin of her stoic and stalwart father (Hugh Griffith).

  MGM's DVD is one of the worst looking efforts of digital mastering on the market. Where to begin? Colors are muted, dated, unbalanced and bleed throughout. Contrast levels are so low that night scenes look as though they were shot using only the light coming off of a flashlight with dying batteries. Flesh tones are way too orange. Fidelity in general is a mess. Edge enhancement, pixelization, aliasing and shimmering of fine details are excessive and present throughout the film. Digital and film grain are excessively high. There's really no instance where one can simply sit back and enjoy the film. The audio is a disappointing mono. Considering that the previously issued DVD (exhibiting the same disappointing picture quality) was remastered in "surround sound" the lack of surround on this disc seems odd. There are no extras.
  BOTTOM LINE: Don't waste your money....more info

• WHATS NEW PUSSYCAT !!!
  Tom Jones stars Albert Finny as a would be Casanova who LOVES shall we say
  the delicate things in life. Winner of BEST PICTURE(???) 1963.
  
  My friend Geri owns all the Best Pictures and I always give her pains and sorrows when she mentions this for all I can think of is....
  
  ~~~~ITS NOT UNUSUAL TO BE LOVED BY ANYONE~~~~~~~~~~~~~
  
  ~~~~AND SHE STRIKESSSSS LIKE THUNDERBALL~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
  
  ~~~~YOU LOVE THE WAY SHE WALKS THE WAY SHE MOVES THE WAY SHE TALKS SHES A WINNAH~~~ SHES GOT MOVES SHE GOT FACE SHE GOT STYLE SHE GOT GRACE TAKE TO DINNAH~~~~~~~~SHES A LADY WHOA-WHOA-WHOA SHES A LADY TALKING ABOUT HER BEING A LADY Whoa whoa whoa shes a .... ...more info
• A New Sense of Modernism
  This is an adaptation of a large book, a Henry Fielding novel. In the early 1700's the growing middle class in Europe, especially in the British Empire, became literate. As an entertainment to get through the long hours of new leisure, novels flew from the printing presses. Tom Jones was a hit from the first. It was a bawdy tale with amusing detail. It is lucky that an experienced playwright like John Osborne was assigned the screenplay and double lucky that a fine director, Tony Richardson brought the tale to life.
  
  Indeed, Richardson is a poet with the lush English countryside. Since much of the film depicts Tom Jones' amorous adventures in the grass with Molly Seagram, the peasant wench, on a skiff with the Squire's daughter, Sophie, in the tavern with his mother, er, not his mother, Mrs.Wilkens, and in the suites of a countess, the bawdy adventures spin by as food shoots from the mouths of lovers. There are also duels, a misunderstanding about the linage of the Jones baby, and an unwanted suitor for the lovely Sophie, Susan York.
  
  I saw this film as a teen in 1963 and it telegraphed a new sense of modernism and sexual freedom without pretence that is ironic since Fielding's story was hundreds of years old on the eve of the Beatles and the swinging London of the 60's.
  ...more info
• Waste of time
  It was so awful that I had to watch half of it in fastforward. Although supposedly a period piece, it couldn't get itself out of the 1960s. It felt like a bad skit from saturday night live. Poor acting, unconvincing story line, flat characters, etc. I am truly amazed that this film won an oscar. Unbelievable....more info
• A stunning and for ever young movie!
  This film was a winner from its initial release . Sublime adaptation from Henry Fielding ' s novel , this story talks about the adventures of this man who loves the woman in superlative grade . Albert Finney made a role so credible loaded of charm and savoir vivre . His virtues are not exactly of the first order , but his defiant against the Status Q is told with nuance and very well gusto .
  Tom Richardson made one of the top english movies in all the british cinema . An authentical ode to the joy . And Susan York is splendid too in this performance . Diane Cilento is simply amazing with her support role . Excelent transfer to DVD .
  Please smile and let your senses talk by themselves . ...more info
• It's a delightfully good time...
  It has charm and humor to spare, that is for sure, and it is rich with wonderful performances and witty dialog but calling it the best movie of the year seems like a stretch. I so adore it, which goes without saying, and I enjoy every minute, but it is just a good movie that provides a good time, and it never feels like more than that.
  
  Does that make any sense?
  
  The film follows Tom, the adopted son of a British squire. He's a lady-charmer of sorts, planting his seed wherever he may lie and loving every minute of it. When Tom falls for the beautiful Sophie, the daughter of a neighboring squire, things begin to heat up for Tom. Jealousies within the family cause Tom to eventual flee only to get himself in more and more trouble. He's a kindhearted and well intentioned young man who just doesn't know when to stop.
  
  `Tom Jones' is a very funny movie that sports a stellar cast of comedic performances, as well as some touching and sincere ones. Albert Finney received his first of many Oscar nominations for this film, and he was definitely deserving (it was such a good year in this category). He is charming and witty, enough so to make even Tom's most reprehensible of actions forgeable. High Griffiths and Edith Evans ham it up in their roles, providing an abundance of comic relief, and Susannah York is stunning and beautifully tempered as Sophie.
  
  There isn't a sore spot to be found within the acting at all.
  
  The script is also delightfully written, engaging and funny throughout, sporting some very memorable moments and some intriguing character development. I loved the voice over narration, which provided the film with a literary feel that complemented its comedic tone. It is very well constructed and wonderfully put directed.
  
  The fact remains that while I cannot find a single flaw I just cannot name it the best of the year. I think when you consider the films that were provided to us in 1963 `Tom Jones' kind of falls towards the middle of the list. Films like `Hud' or `This Sporting Life' were much stronger works and much more poignant and influential. `8 ?' is another example of a film that is much smarter and much more technically proficient than `Tom Jones'. This film is splendid and entertaining but its well does not run as deep as some of the years other offerings. Top ten maybe (I'd give it an A-), but not top five and definitely not number one.
  
  Oh well, it is till a wonderful film and one that I will continue to watch and enjoy for years to come....more info
• Dated Film
  I had much better memories of this film than reality as the recent viewing proved. I thought fondly of this film after having seen it in the theatre when it was first released. I recently purchased it as a gift for a friend and we watched it for a current review. I was quite bored for the most part and realized that I confused much of it in my mind with Far From The Madding Crowd, which is a better film....more info
• Couldn't finish it - What was Academy thinking?
  I picked up this DVD because it won the Best Picture Oscar in 1963. I found it to be trite, boring, and terribly stuck in the 60's. It's hard to imagine how this film won the Best Picture Award over much better films like The Birds, Dr. No, Mad Mad Mad Mad World, Cleopatra, etc.
  
  Tom Jones was so bad that I quit watching it half way through. I couldn't see wasting another hour on of my life....more info
• "Out and About in the 1700s"
  This movie is such a great example of use of humor in a fictional biography. ("Little Big Man" would be another) Tom, played by Albert Finney starts his life under dire circumstances and goes from one predicament to another. We fear for his life many times. Most of the Action occurs in the 1700s and we get to see the traumas of people living with parasites, being arrested for minor offenses and punished without benefit of fair trial or representation. Raw sewage and garbage fill the streets. It was a time when getting through each day was a hair-raising adventure for most people of a certain socio-economic strata. Tom loves the ladies and is hoplessly addicted to their attentions, which causes him even more problems with irate husbands, boyfriends and angry family members. Somehow he survives it all and usually lands on his feet. There is a wonderful and memorable scene of a feast in which the feast-goers shovel the food in without care of manners or decorum. They wipe their greasy mouths with their own hair dangling down or with the hair of their wigs. They eat with their mouths open and the food flopping out and flapping against their faces. Turkey legs are gnawed on with the veins and tendons springing outward in a sickening manner. Loud burps fill the air. Eating utensils are used as a last resort, fingers preferred. This movie won many academy awards and deserved them all and then some....more info
• Worst "Best" Picture Oscar Winner Ever!
  When you think that "Lawrence of Arabia" preceded this and "My Fair Lady" followed this it boggles the mind that something as terribly bad as this film could ever be mentioned in the same breath as those two brilliant all-time classics of film. I thought that "Gigi" was the worst film ever to win the Best Picture award until I saw this. Much of this film reminded me of the typical Benny Hill comedy and we all know just how "well" those jokes have aged over the years.
  
  Not only is the film itself extremely mediocre but so is the dvd; the picture quality is extremely poor as this hasn't been restored at all and the sound quality is just as poor in mono. I only hope that the book itself is a lot better than this waste of plastic.
  
  Highly NOT recommended except as a cure for severe insomnia!...more info
• Nicely Naughty Vintage Fun!
  For many years, Tom Jones was my absolute favourite film. My views have mellowed and my tastes changed somewhat, but I still enjoy seeing it every now and then. It's like an old friend. Although, I will admit, it is one of those films that viewers either love or hate.

  Even though the story is set in the England of the early 1700's, the film is solidly a reflection of the 1960's. It was extremely popular when it came out - winning the Academy Award as best film. Audiences were overwhelmed by its bawdy humour, sinning and sinful characters, and endless camera trickery - all briskly paced and accompanied by a rollicking musical score. Director Tony Richardson threw everything into the mix - speeded up film, freeze frames, screen wipes, character asides to the audience, a lip-smacking narrator, even a silent movie opening sequence. The characters looked like real people instead of actors - the costumes and settings actually looked lived in. John Osborne's script contained dialogue with a proper period flavour (too much so occasionally) and the whole thing was photographed with a subdued, grainy quality not unlike an old painting. In fact, Tom Jones is almost two films in one - the first part rustic, earthy and halcyon on the sprawling estates of Squires Western and Allworthy, then an abrupt change of style to the intimidating Hogarthian squalour of London where danger seemed to lurk behind every corner. Newgate Gaol and a public hanging are uncompromisingly realistic for what is, after all, basically a comedy.

  Most memorable of all are the performances. Albert Finney as Tom and pert Susannah York as his one true love are suitably attractive and talented. But the real flavour of this feast is provided by one of the most incredible supporting casts ever assembled for such a film. Hugh Griffith shamelessly steals every scene he's in but the haughty Edith Evans is more than a match for him. Diane Cilento, Joyce Redman, and the incomparable Joan Greenwood give plenty of variety to Tom's sex life, while David Warner, Julian Glover, and Peter Bull lead the villains.

  I have never read the Henry Fielding novel on which the film is based and have no intention of ever doing so. The film of Tom Jones is more than capable of standing on its own. Its style, like its setting, may seem like a relic from the distant past. But, in many ways, Tom Jones represents the high point of British film making in the Sixties - an achievement the Brits have rarely equalled since. More than that, Tom Jones is an immensely enjoyable film - it is fun! And that is something we can never have too much of....more info

• Of its Time
  Heavily influenced by Godard's 1959 mould-breaker "Breathless" (jump-cuts, hand-held camera, addresses to the viewer) this film is full of brilliant episodes, especially the stag-hunt. Contrary to the opinions of some reviewers, imho it does an outstanding job of presenting the uninhibited flavour of 18th century England; especially by bringing out the contrast between town and country, which incorporated one of the greatest and most far-reaching social changes which took place in that century. The luxury and squalor of London compared with the almost idyllic feeling that many had for the vanishing bucolic life is commented on by almost every notable writer of the age. However, the film doesn't seem to be well-paced, overall. The first part is too slow, and the second is too disjointed, and there is a sense of dissatisfaction in the end at the lack of balance and rhythm. It is not quite as good as I remembered from having seen it when it first came out, 1963. The leading performances are nevertheless superb, although Squire Western's boorishness is, let's face it, just a bit over-played. The dialogue is nonetheless excellent: not artificial in the slightest. The narrator's accent is not assumed, as somebody supposed: it was delivered by a very well-known Irish actor in his natural speaking voice. The use of a narrator in this instance makes for an intelligent transfer of Fielding's long, picaresque novel to the screen. The film expects a literate audience: which is not supplied by the negative reviews posted here....more info
• Disjointed and episodic but, it comes together
  I had to watch this movie carefully. At times it seems disjointed as the adventures of the illegitimate adopted son of a Squire Allworthy, a country squire in 18th century England, goes from one episode to another. There certainly is a plot but because of the rapid movement from one adventure to another, this plot can be difficult to follow without paying full attention to the film. Additionally, we are quickly introduced to a lot of characters so, it is difficult, at times to keep track of who's who and what their roles are, in Tom's adventures. However, if you pay attention, or, alteranatively, if you scroll back in your DVD to review scenes that were unclear, the movie does, indeed, come togther.
  
  Tom, played by Albert Finney, is great as a womanizer who who falls in love with Sophie (played by Susannah York), the daughter of a drunken, neighboring squire. Thinking that Tom is the illegitimate adopted son with no blood ties to his adopted father, he heartily disapproves of Tom as a potential son in law. Rather, he prefers that Sophie marry the priggish, snotty nephew of Squire Allworthy because, after all, the nephew would be the heir to his fortune. Despite his love for Sophie, almost without trying, Tom seems to find himself in bed with various women in his bawdy adventures. These ribald adventures are as much a part of the movie as the plot is.
  
  The cinematography is great. The sets, both of the country manors and mid 18th century London, are spectacular. The satire while cutting, is basically good natured as proper, pompous British gentry are skewered. This is a clever comedy which takes a little work, by the viewer to appreciate. Although it won the Oscar for best picture in 1963, because the disointed episodic nature of the movie makes it a little hard to follow, I give it four stars rather than five. The year 1963 was also the year that Sidney Poitier won the Oscar for best actor in Lilies of the Field. Having seen both of these movies, I would rate Lilies of the Field more deservng of best picture. But then again, perhaps I just didn't do the mental work necessary to fully appreciate Tom Jones....more info
• Simplely Delightful
  Call it one part Monty Python's Flying Circus, one part Chaucer's Canterbury Tales, with a dash of Benny Hill and you begin to see the rollicking good fun in store here. Played with stunning comic sensitivity and wit Albert Finney is adorable as the bawdy bastard Tom Jones. An unlikely canidate for its day Tom Jones managed to walk away with four Oscars, including Best Picture and deservedly so. For it's style and technique have been widely imitated by the likes of Woody Allen, Richard Lester and I dare say Stanley Kuberick's dark comedy Barry Lyndon owes a debt to the narrative style of this classic English comedy....more info
• LOVE this movie!!!!
  I saw this in the theatre when it was first released, and the passage of time has done nothing to dim my love and fascination of this superb translation of the novel by Fielding. Of course, Albert Finney made a very dashing Tom Jones, and wqas so perfectly suited to the role; Susannah York great as his true love, Sophie, and the other roles, Hugh Griffith as Sophie's father, and hilarious in his part as a drunken, boisterous, lusty squire, and Dame Edith Evans as his rather disapproving, but very funny sister, reprimanding him with a trilling "Brrrrrrrrrrrrrrrother...." while he is wrestling some country maidens in the haystacks, straw in his hair and a pack of bulldogs surrounding him. The dinner scene with him eating a roast chicken with great gusto, so much so that he harangues Sophie with pieces of it in his nose, is delightful, as is his unscripted departure from Squire Allworthy's residence, on his horse, and turning so tightly that the horse rears and collapses with Hugh Griffith on top of him...so funny Richardson wisely decided to keep it in the film.
  I also appreciated the performances of David Warner, as the disgustingly priggish tutor, Mr. Bliful, and Diane Cilento (once married to Sean Connery...) as Tom's sometime paramour. The entire cast is excellent, including Joan Greenwood as the predatory older woman after Tom at any cost. Watch for the Masquerade Ball and see Hugh Griffith in his elephant mask; what a great scene!
  The peripheral players are superb, as is the setting of London in the eighteenth century, with the deplorable lack of sanitary conditions and the terrible poverty. The music is haunting, the scene at the Inn (yes, the food scene, of course, one of the more outstanding in the movie) but also the frenetic byplay of the characters winding up in each other's beds with different wives and lovers, it is such a classic melange of humor, drama and near tragedy, there simply isn't one moment of bad film or minute of tedium...you will be absorbed all the way through, and enjoy this rambunctious, joyful frolic with Tom and his supporting cast of finely drawn characters. One last comment: The scene of Tom and Sophie, running, taking turns rowing a boat and falling in love on the grounds of her father's estate, is absolutely beautiful; watch for the scene of them picking blossoms and Sophie laughing and the blossoms falling into her mouth; very sensual and exquisitely detailed, as is the entire production....more info
• If there is a God...
  ...why does he allow people to suffer through this movie?

  If you think it's funny to watch people kick dogs and have sex with their own parents, then this is the movie for you. Albert Finney looks about 15 years too old to portray the virile title character in this adaptation of the classic 18th century novel. The "plot," if you can call it that, is a little hard for me to describe since I am expending a tremendous amount of energy trying to block it from my mind. Suffice to say it plods along much like a typical episode of Three's Company, with it's misunderstandings, sexual escapades and slapstick humor. The difference of course being that a typical episode of Three's Company is better written, better directed and far easier to stomach. In particular, the last hour of the movie is a boringly boring bore. Sitting through it is like sitting through the end credits of the Olympics. I find it to be unbelievable that this movie was nominated for any Oscars much less win for best picture given the fact that it is as difficult to watch as footage of starving African babies with flies all over their heads. Wow, that is two hours of my life I can never get back....more info

• A Masterpiece
  Perhaps in 1968 there were fewer idiots in this world than in 2004? It's difficult to explain why this film has so many negative reviews. It is one of the best movies of the late 60s, and I have watched it so many times, nearly every scene has burned itself into my memory.
  It is a perfect adaptation of Fielding's Tom Jones. Every minute of the film has so much joy, humor, excitement and hilarity that it's very difficult to sum up in this review.
  If you have any taste in film at all, and are a patient and intelligent filmgoer, you'll want to buy this classic....more info
• Poor quality DVD, Sound - so so very 60s movie
  This movie won best picture in 1963 over the likes of Cleopatra and Lillies of the Valley. I can say that it may be the oddest best picture of the 40 or so that I have seen. It has one amazing scene of a English Hunt filmed from all sorts of innovative angles for 1963. It is a truly amazing scene and I suspect this film could not have won best picture without it. It has the best editing and cinematography of the film.

  But the directing, which also won an academy award, reminds one of Monty Python and Benny Hill. If that's your cup a tea then you will probably like the movie. But I should note that much of the popularity of this film comes from the fact that it breaks new ground in both topic and film making. Remember, the best pictures before this were, Lawerence of Arabia (epic), West Side Story (musical), The Apartment (possible exception), Ben Hur, Gigi, The Bridge on the River Kwai, etc. With the possible exception of the sex oriented comedy The Apartment, film goers had never seen anything like Tom Jones in 1963. Of course we have since gotten more Wooddy Alen, Benny Hill and Monty Python than we can handle. Tom Jones may have been a thrill in 1963, but it almost seems a period piece out of the technicolor 60s than it does Henry Fieldings novel of the 18th century....more info

• Tom Jones
  A very good print of the original movie. A classic effort for foreign film during the 60's. Outshines many current efforts at period comedy....more info
• an oddly fun movie
  I watched this movie in my Intro to Film class, and I learned that in the time this movie was made, it was revolutionary in its uninhibited style. I liked this movie because it's quirky, thoughtful, and satirical all at the same time, even without any profanity at all....more info