I think this is a new genre that they're all sort of working their way through it and haven't got all the kinks worked out yet but it's a genre that works for me.

A Brilliant Conflict

The film never slows down or bores, plunging from one harrowing sequence to the next.

The movie's neither hopeful in contrived ways, nor hopeless in different contrived ways. Somehow it manages to be wonderful

This is yet another example of a movie weighed down with gongs and critical acclaim at the time - the so-called renaissance of British films aka the kitchen sink school - that seen today is both embarrassing and cringe-making. Albert Finney, always, like Hitchcock, vastly overrated, adds another wrongly overpraised character to his Arthur Seaton (Saturday Night And Sunday Morning)and leads a cast of British luvvies who have been encouraged to let their hair down and slum it in the interest of adding 'picaresque' to their CVs. John Osborne who had not yet joined the Establishment, has fun sending it up and allows himself at least one stinging satire in the hunting scene in which an innocent deer is torn to pieces by the hounds. Osborne allows Michael McLiammoir to narrate in the equivalent of Chapter Headings and the whole thing is totally forgettable.

Based on Henry Fielding's classic, Tony Richardson's 'Tom Jones' has received quite a lot of acclaim and is still highly praised after almost half a century. It's quite nicely shot with the exception of the cinematography which was flat. The English location is pleasing to look at and the performances are very good. Albert Finney fits Tom Jones like a puzzle. The costumes are great and the director manages to capture the essence of the time period.However, I found the movie to be incredibly boring. I really tried to enjoy it. The beginning is very rushed and perhaps after about half an hour it moves at a snail's pace. The humour in the dialogues works to an extent, not enough to save this from boring me.There's also a disturbing hunting scene. I don't mind when a movie shows disturbing elements (as long as its relevant to the story) and hunting was a big game during that time period but it just seemed pointless to really kill a deer over it.Anyway, 'Tom Jones' just didn't work for me. Other than Finney's terrific performance and some nice dialogues, it didn't offer much.

Tom Jones is a rollicking tale of an 18th century rake roaming the English countryside where trouble is sure to follow. Tony Richardson's interpretation of the Fielding novel captures the ribald flavor of the book while Walter Lassaly's flawless photography stunningly captures picturesque landscapes, candle lit interiors and the frenzy of the hunt littered with hounds and horses. Richardson chooses wisely from the picaresque work and Jones gallops along at an energetic pace as Richardson fills his painterly compositions with scenes of subtle and slapstick seduction and narrow escape.As Tom, boyishly handsome Albert Finney is a combination of irresistible charm and clumsy stealth. In spite of his lustful predicaments and date with the hangman Finney somehow maintains a priapic innocence throughout. The supporting cast is uniformly excellent with special mention going to Hugh Griffith's gruff Squire Western Edith Evans, Joyce Redmond and the venerable Jack MacGowan as Patridge.Honored in its day but mostly ignored for its importance today Tom Jones has aged far better than most. Its irreverent style, lush look and energetic rhythm is as fresh and impressive now as it was when first released. An excellently crafted work.

How do they do it? The casting was perfection. Albert Finney and Suzanna York were great. But, then, Hugh Griffith, Joan Greenwood, the guy who played Mr. Blifil, the wenches, the men who were out to get Tom Jones could not have been played any better by anyone else. Each scene, while keeping the plot going at a rapid pace, was complete and a delight to watch all by itself. What I really loved about the deer hunt besides the beauty of the English countryside and the aerial shots was the whooping and yelling of the riders, dogs barking and hooves pounding. It seemed much wilder and less elegant than the fancy fox hunts we've seen in more contemporary films. I was almost out of breath by the end.A movie like this I can watch over and over for the performances and the beauty of the direction even though I know the plot by heart. It's like listening to a favorite song by a great artist. I wish I could have been on the set to watch the fun in person. How do the people who make these wonderful types of movies walk away from them at the completion without feeling sad that they are over?