Amazon.com

Winner of four Academy Awards including best picture, director, screenplay, and music, this 1963 adaptation of Henry Fielding's classic novel is a rousing, bawdy comedy about a young man's ribald adventures in 18th-century England. Albert Finney is splendidly hilarious in the title role of a charming womanizer who was discovered as an abandoned infant in the bed of Squire Allworthy, a wealthy landowner who named the child Tom Jones and raised him as his own. As a young man, Tom yearns for the comely daughter (Susannah York) of a neighboring squire, but his amorous adventures (including an extended food orgy that becomes the film's funniest scene) lead him to London and to a duel with a jealous husband. He's sentenced to hang, but fate intervenes. A hit around the world, the film was expertly written by noted playwright John Osborne, and Richardson uses a variety of old-style movie techniques to heighten the lusty, good-natured fun. Don't miss this one! --Jeff Shannon ... Read more

Reviews (25)

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.

Pay No Attention to the One Star Voters
Just want to add my 2 cents worth. There is a reason this film won best picture. It WAS the best picture that year and one of the best for any year. The writing and direction is consistently inventive, clever, witty and intelligent. The massive old novel has been rendered down to its essence and filmed with wit and verve and played by a dream cast. The narration punctuates the humor and the depiction of 18th century England, both country life and London, is excellent. Tony Richardson and his cast had fun with the material, using every manner of technique (fast motion), asides to the audience, and so on to make a rollicking good modern comedy, that was much imitated (Woody Allen did the eating scene at least twice in his films). Comedy is definitely in the eye of the beholder, as witnessed by the negative reviews. All I can say is, they missed the point entirely. See Tom Jones and enjoy how much can be packed into a movie in under 2 hours.

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.

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.

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. ... Read more

Reviews (8)

Great movie...pity about the DVD
This movie made by former Bond director Peter (On Her Majesty's Secret Service) Hunt and starring then 007 Roger Moore has all the hallmarks of a great fun action thriller. Yet, the action doesn't seem to truly pick up until the latter part of the movie when things start to go terribly wrong in a South African gold mine.
The plot - for what it's worth - revolves around plans to increase the value of gold stocks by flooding a gold mine in Africa, and the machinations employed to keep the manager of the mine (played by Moore) suitably distracted and away from the location to allow the villains plot to succeed.
A great cast supports Moore in this piece including Susannah York and Sir John Gielgud and it moves at a fair pace. The troubling aspect about this movie (and the reason I give it only four stars) is the poor treatment that has been afforded the picture on the DVD - it really does deserve to be redone and remastered.

Authentic
While living in South Africa in 1972 I had the idiot notion I might like to work in a gold mine, so I spent a day about 2 miles down. This, and my studies of geology, qualify me to speak a bit to the authenticity of this movie.
What the audience of this movie cannot FEEL about life 2 miles down is the heat and humidity that is natural and the coldness that is artificially created by the 20-ft fans pulling air down through the tunnels and around one's drenched body. But everything that can be conveyed visually is true to the facts of that time (above ground and below, and political as well as natural), and for these reasons this is an absorbing story well told.

Roger Moore gives one of his best Performances
After Peter Hunt directed ON HER MAJESTY'S SECRET SERVICE he left the Bond series. This was Hunt's best directorial effort since then. Roger Moore gives a standout performance as an engineer working for a gold mine in South Africa. The beautiful Susannah York provides the love interest. The sort of likeable Bradford Dillman is the villain of the piece. At a time when composer Elmer Berstein seemed to be struggling between genres he came up with one of his most innovative and beautiful scores including a rousing vocal main title. This is a good film supported by an intelligent script. Well acted.

Gold - Remastered From The Original 8mm Master
Yes, I must agree with other reviews, the quality is very poor with words cut out. Strange when they claim it's restored from a "master copy". Perhaps the movie will be re-issued in anamorphic widescreen by a dvd mastering company that has something better than a 10 year old vhs deck!

1974 was not a banner year for production value
i just read all the complaints about the video/dvd versions of "Gold". the production value of this film is extremely low. the master, i'm sure, is not the best to get a print from. unfortunately, the original had sound & editing problems to begin with. let's face it, does "Chinatown" have high production value? - no because the technology was substandard compared to today's expectations - there's only so much you can do with a master, filmed primarily in South Africa, the primary set being a mine shaft and to boot - it takes place in the 70's.

the content of this film was only passable anyway - wilbur smith doth not an "odyessy" make...perhaps "diamonds" would be the title to work with today - this film was just a product of its time - politically ambitious - like "traffic" was in 2000/2001. ... Read more

Amazon.com

"Sister George" of the title is Britain's best-loved soap opera character, played by actress June Buckeridge (Beryl Reid). Buckeridge has become so identified with her character--a sweet old Miss Marple-ish nurse who putters around her quaint little village on a motor scooter--even her friends call her George. But outside the studio she's a hard-drinking, hot-tempered, foul-mouthed lesbian living with an immature young thing she's nicknamed "Childie" (Susannah York, who makes her memorable entrance in a sheer baby-doll nightie). At her worst Sister George is an abusive monster (in a moment of rage she forces Childie to eat the butt of her cigar), but beneath the bluster is an insecure television actress. When the studio decides to kill her character off and an executive makes a play for Childie, the soap star desperately clings to her young lover. Director Robert Aldrich, best known for his tough action films and gothic thrillers, brings his fierce vision of human nature to Frank Marcus's play. In its best moments the film simmers in angry suspicion and helpless frustration, brought to life by Reid's vivacious performance, but other scenes are overlong and stage-bound and would have benefited greatly from judicious trimming and tightening. The caricatured portrayals of lesbian life have aged rather poorly--an inevitable sign of the times--but this acidic show biz drama still carries a hefty emotional punch. --Sean Axmaker ... Read more

Reviews (4)

Whatever Happened to Sister George?
The blurb on the packaging reminds the viewer that THE KILLING OF SISTER GEORGE comes to us "from the makers of WHATEVER HAPPENED TO BABY JANE." If you had not known that Robert Aldrich directed and that Lukas Heller was responsible for the script, you still might have guessed as much. Both films are lurid, over the top and are nowadays considered to be camp classics. Neither is a cinematic masterpieces, to be sure, but both have their moments.

SISTER GEORGE came by its notoriety legitimately. A number of gay and lesbian themed movies were coming out in the late 60s. Unlike, say, THE FOX or THERESE AND ISABELLE, though, KSG was unabashedly garish. No literary pretensions here. Whether it was simply trading in stereotypes is a subject of some debate. It is clear that ultimately, "George" is meant to be a sympathetic character; her plight--losing her job and her lover on the same day--is one we're supposed to identify with. Some will, of course, but the failure of the movie is that many more will not. Aldrich and co. mean to portray George in all her complexity, but we never really find out what makes her tick.

And that is much of the trouble with "camp classics": characters like George are supposed to be sympathetic and ridiculous at the same time. To say nothing of being bitchy, bitchy, bitchy. It's a lot to ask of any script writer, or any actress.

Beryl Reid's acclaimed performance is indeed the best thing about the movie. She does suggest some of the character's inner conflicts and self-doubt. But she is all too often in full-harangue mode. It's ultimately wearying. As for Susannah York, she never mangages to project the vulnerability that her child-woman character is supposed to possess. The doll collection notwithstanding, she actually comes off as savvy and sassy in a Julie Christie sort of way. She looks uncomfortable in those ridiculous teddies. Actually, she looks pretty uncomfortable throughout the whole movie.

Watching the movie some 34 years after its release is an odd experience. It's hard to see why it was so shocking at the time (one of the first commercial films to earn an "X" rating). But that's only part of it. What's even stranger is how little fun this camp classic turns out to be. I wonder if others will catch themselves thinking, "Well, this is certainly the guilty pleasure, isn't it? I wonder if it's almost over?"

A camp Classic.
Beryl Reed is gives an amazing performance as the lecherous Sister George. Many people have condemned this film as being anti lesbian, but I feel it is a study in abusive behavior and the insecurities that feed it. It's also very campy and a hoot. Susannah York as Childie and Coral Browne ( Vera Charles in Auntie Mame) also give very brave and wonderful performances considering this movie was made in the sixties. The story is of a lechorous lesbian who plays a nun on a British Soap Opera.On screen she is kindly and a total humanitarian; offstage is something else altogeher. George is an alcholic lesbian who abuses her younger lover and comes on to real nuns in their taxi cabs. When the BBC threatens to write her out of the soap opera due to her scandalous off-screen behavior, a paranoid lesbian becomes even more abusive. See it for the wonderful performances and sixties sensibilities of gays.

Moving lesbian character study in a very 60's framework.
It is a very good example of this type of cinema from the late sixties when directors loved to take all kinds of chances with their subject matter, not like today's pre-packaged films. That three such outstanding actresses as Beryl Reid, Coral Browne and Susannah York were willing to go along with Aldrich for the ride I find just amazing. Beryl Reid in particular shines, although all three put in stupendous performances. I have heard people criticize the film for being dated, but I don't find that a real criticism at all. The enlightened film-goer has to be receptive to other times, other mind-sets, other ways of feeling. If any film invites the viewer to cross those barriers, this one does. Yes, it is overly long, and could probably have been cut down to half its present length. That is the films great flaw, but like most good films which seem overly long upon first viewing, it's impact stays with you. If you can make it past the two-hour mark, I don't think you will find that this film is lacking anything in quality, sensitivity, or the cumulative power to move. Just excellent.

A Classic
This movie is a lot of fun if you do not take it too seriously. It is set in the late 60's London and features the late great Beryl Reid as a soap star under threat at work and home. Great scenes of the Gateways club in London and the owners - Gina and Smitty as well as some of the regulars, who are used as extras. It is not for the faint at heart; there is a very funny scene involving an intoxicated Beryl Reid (George) and a couple of nuns in a taxi cab! If you are looking for a movie depicting a healthy lesbian relationship/love story then this is not for you! ... Read more

Reviews (8)

Great movie...pity about the DVD
This movie made by former Bond director Peter (On Her Majesty's Secret Service) Hunt and starring then 007 Roger Moore has all the hallmarks of a great fun action thriller. Yet, the action doesn't seem to truly pick up until the latter part of the movie when things start to go terribly wrong in a South African gold mine.
The plot - for what it's worth - revolves around plans to increase the value of gold stocks by flooding a gold mine in Africa, and the machinations employed to keep the manager of the mine (played by Moore) suitably distracted and away from the location to allow the villains plot to succeed.
A great cast supports Moore in this piece including Susannah York and Sir John Gielgud and it moves at a fair pace. The troubling aspect about this movie (and the reason I give it only four stars) is the poor treatment that has been afforded the picture on the DVD - it really does deserve to be redone and remastered.

Authentic
While living in South Africa in 1972 I had the idiot notion I might like to work in a gold mine, so I spent a day about 2 miles down. This, and my studies of geology, qualify me to speak a bit to the authenticity of this movie.
What the audience of this movie cannot FEEL about life 2 miles down is the heat and humidity that is natural and the coldness that is artificially created by the 20-ft fans pulling air down through the tunnels and around one's drenched body. But everything that can be conveyed visually is true to the facts of that time (above ground and below, and political as well as natural), and for these reasons this is an absorbing story well told.

Roger Moore gives one of his best Performances
After Peter Hunt directed ON HER MAJESTY'S SECRET SERVICE he left the Bond series. This was Hunt's best directorial effort since then. Roger Moore gives a standout performance as an engineer working for a gold mine in South Africa. The beautiful Susannah York provides the love interest. The sort of likeable Bradford Dillman is the villain of the piece. At a time when composer Elmer Berstein seemed to be struggling between genres he came up with one of his most innovative and beautiful scores including a rousing vocal main title. This is a good film supported by an intelligent script. Well acted.

Gold - Remastered From The Original 8mm Master
Yes, I must agree with other reviews, the quality is very poor with words cut out. Strange when they claim it's restored from a "master copy". Perhaps the movie will be re-issued in anamorphic widescreen by a dvd mastering company that has something better than a 10 year old vhs deck!

1974 was not a banner year for production value
i just read all the complaints about the video/dvd versions of "Gold". the production value of this film is extremely low. the master, i'm sure, is not the best to get a print from. unfortunately, the original had sound & editing problems to begin with. let's face it, does "Chinatown" have high production value? - no because the technology was substandard compared to today's expectations - there's only so much you can do with a master, filmed primarily in South Africa, the primary set being a mine shaft and to boot - it takes place in the 70's.

the content of this film was only passable anyway - wilbur smith doth not an "odyessy" make...perhaps "diamonds" would be the title to work with today - this film was just a product of its time - politically ambitious - like "traffic" was in 2000/2001. ... Read more

Reviews (1)

some honest dialogue
... It exceeded expectations with some nice dialogue between John Hannah's character and the lead male (can't remember his name); nice performances by both. Many things they said, I've actually said to friends, all about wanting to be in a relationship and afraid to be. If any women want to know how ..men can be (if you didn't know already) check the film out. Shows that perhaps we're not that bad and, like you, we're trying; and, yes, we obsess too. Only part of the film I wasn't wild about is the ending, a little too nicely tied up. All in all, a passing grade. ... Read more

Amazon.com

The big selling point of this film is spelled out immediately in the credits: "And introducing Michelle Pfeiffer as Sue Wellington."It also gives one pause to consider that Pfeiffer's career may have never evolved had she not had a passing resemblance to a young Susannah York.York, who aided, abetted, and produced this clunker, plays Sue Lewis, wife of Harry Lewis. Harry (Elliott Gould) is a businessman living in the past.The past he's reliving is the New York of 1944, where he and his buddies conspired to get him set up with the best-looking girl in the boroughs, Sue Wellington. It's only a slight moment of prophecy, but the first time Pfeiffer appears on screen she has a halo around her head. The rest is a loping Bowery Boys comedy that tries to turn serious at the end but just ends up the epitome of bathos.The best reason to get this is to fall in love again with the girl who would be Catwoman.--Keith Simanton ... Read more

Reviews (2)

Dont get fooled by the title and the name
this is one of the 3 worst movies I have ever seen.

Bad storry, bad quality of the DVD,

Just dont get it. Beleve me. Thats why it is under 10 bucks but under 2 bucks would still be a wast of money and time.

Great if you want too...
take a nap. This movie put me to sleep. even the conversations were boring. robotic and choreagraphed. Weak story and ending. Do something productive instead of watching this movie. ... Read more