This film is a rollicking tribute to the picaresque novela genre in which a scoundrel makes his way up the socio-economi
-
Archived from the IMDb Discussion Forums — Tom Jones
Bklyn4ever — 19 years ago(July 10, 2006 08:38 PM)
This film is a rollicking tribute to the picaresque novela genre in which a scoundrel makes his way up the socio-economic ladder with nothing but his wits (sharpened by hunger) and a lust for life. The score is in a category by itself, as is much of the acting. And the hunting scene is no amateurish effort, but a delightful recreation of a day in the countryside centuries ago. I don't see how people can fault a movie of such originality and spunk, one that really transports you into the past as it breathes life into a literary classic, but then again, I am not a fan of "worst" lists to begin with . . . what a waste of time to write about works of art that you don't like or wish to deflate because you feel they are overrated.
-
Colkitto — 19 years ago(July 21, 2006 03:18 PM)
Possibly part of the reason why this constantly appears on "Worst Best Picture" lists is the inability of some people to distinguish between a film which may not have deserved to win Best Picture but is still a good movie (
Tom Jones
,
Braveheart
,
Shakespeare in Love
) and one which is actually crap (
Ordinary People
,
Forrest Gump
).
"An inglorious peace is better than a dishonourable war" ~ John Adams
-
Bklyn4ever — 19 years ago(July 27, 2006 07:49 AM)
Thanks; I agree there is a difference. I still find Tom Jones to be an excellent film and a choice of which the Academy can be proud.
And I don't think it won over Fellini's 8-1/2. As an Italian-language film, that would have been competing in the Best Foreign Language category.