Tom Jones is a film that has not dated well with references to bygone silent films and English country life lost on myself; the photography and editing seems to be from another era as well. I found it difficult to see what the point of the film.
The vague story after the book by Henry Fielding follows Tom and his adventures across England making a life for himself after being run out of house by his uncle landlord. Theis film reminded me a little of Barry Lyndon, with it's rogue character crossing English countrysides encountering shifty characters and overcoming dilemmas along the way. Add to that the sumptuous natural photography and it should be a winner.
The direction is very clunky and unfocused - many close-up shots and the much celebrated countryside scenes were hazily shot and dizzying in nature - the director could not keep the camera still few even a few moments. The plot devices and turning points seemed fabricated and just unbelievable especially when former characters were introduced at key moments in the story just to solve the problem. The speaking -to-the-audience technique and cut transitions that are meant to hide further action to the audience was just pretentious. There are many extraneous scenes that do not enhance the plot and therefore the pacing suffers, especially for a film 2hrs in length
The acting fitted the style of an olde English 18C tale or if it was supposed to be in the fashion of those BBC miniseries and that era. However it could have been so much better. Most of the characters could only do one expression whether it was angry, sullen, bashful or clueless. And Tom Jones himself just spent the film running around like a spoiled immature brat.
I will admit the one feature of the film I (mildly) enjoyed was the music - adapted from the style of early silent films; a mixture of music around Tom Jones time and 17C English composers. It was pacey and moved the action on the screen along.
I can't believe that this won so many major awards that year for being a tired, preposterous, farce of a comedy. It didn't work in the slightest way for me. The script should have been much more clever and wittier but in the end was very mediocre. The film's climax was overblown and the dilemmas experienced by all characters in the film were just overlooked to achieve a happy ending to the film given the final scene of he picture. For a film lauded as best picture by many critics of the time, I fail to see any elements of film-making that make it truly great - in fact they were poor and vague. In the end it came off as nothing more than a tired trivial comedy.
The vague story after the book by Henry Fielding follows Tom and his adventures across England making a life for himself after being run out of house by his uncle landlord. Theis film reminded me a little of Barry Lyndon, with it's rogue character crossing English countrysides encountering shifty characters and overcoming dilemmas along the way. Add to that the sumptuous natural photography and it should be a winner.
The direction is very clunky and unfocused - many close-up shots and the much celebrated countryside scenes were hazily shot and dizzying in nature - the director could not keep the camera still few even a few moments. The plot devices and turning points seemed fabricated and just unbelievable especially when former characters were introduced at key moments in the story just to solve the problem. The speaking -to-the-audience technique and cut transitions that are meant to hide further action to the audience was just pretentious. There are many extraneous scenes that do not enhance the plot and therefore the pacing suffers, especially for a film 2hrs in length
The acting fitted the style of an olde English 18C tale or if it was supposed to be in the fashion of those BBC miniseries and that era. However it could have been so much better. Most of the characters could only do one expression whether it was angry, sullen, bashful or clueless. And Tom Jones himself just spent the film running around like a spoiled immature brat.
I will admit the one feature of the film I (mildly) enjoyed was the music - adapted from the style of early silent films; a mixture of music around Tom Jones time and 17C English composers. It was pacey and moved the action on the screen along.
I can't believe that this won so many major awards that year for being a tired, preposterous, farce of a comedy. It didn't work in the slightest way for me. The script should have been much more clever and wittier but in the end was very mediocre. The film's climax was overblown and the dilemmas experienced by all characters in the film were just overlooked to achieve a happy ending to the film given the final scene of he picture. For a film lauded as best picture by many critics of the time, I fail to see any elements of film-making that make it truly great - in fact they were poor and vague. In the end it came off as nothing more than a tired trivial comedy.