--- title: "Tom Jones: the reviews" canonical: "https://film.one/film/tom-jones/reviews" title_page: "https://film.one/film/tom-jones" critics_score: 78 critics_reviews: 7 licence: "© Fi1m Ltd. Written by AI under a human editor; checked against sources before publication. Quote with attribution and a link to the canonical URL." --- # Tom Jones (1963): what the critics said Critics' score 78 from 7 reviews: 7 positive, 0 mixed, 0 negative. All seven reviews are positive, and most of the praise goes the same way: Albert Finney’s Tom, the high spirits of Richardson’s direction, and the film’s willingness to be bawdy. Critics return to the ensemble, the Somerset settings and the colour photography, and to particular set pieces, the eating scene between Finney and Joyce Redman above all. The reviews from 1963 are the warmest, treating the film as a daring leap rather than a costume drama. The reservations cluster around technique. Variety finds the camera tricks and editing occasionally disconcerting, and Empire, writing decades later, thinks the nouvelle vague borrowings now date the film. The later reviews are generally cooler, calling it watchable and entertaining rather than remarkable, though Eye for Film is an exception, still taken with its chaotic energy. The spread is narrow: nobody dislikes it, and the argument is only about how much of the boisterousness still lands. ## The New Yorker — Brendan Gill Fi1m's normalised score 90/100 (inferred from the text). 5 October 1963. Richardson's Tom Jones is hailed as a near-perfect comedy that triumphantly leaps into an imaginary 18th-century springtime with bold risks and high spirits. The critic praises the authentic Somerset settings, the marvelous ensemble cast led by Albert Finney, and the superb color photography and music. [Read the review](https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/1963/10/12/country-pleasures) ## The New York Times — Bosley Crowther Fi1m's normalised score 90/100 (inferred from the text). 8 October 1963. The critic finds Richardson and Osborne's adaptation a major creative achievement that captures the ribald wit of the novel through inventive cinematic structure and rhythm. He singles out the lusty performances, especially Albert Finney as Tom and the memorable eating scene between Finney and Joyce Redman. [Read the review](https://www.nytimes.com/1963/10/08/archives/screen-tom-jones-a-lusty-comedyalbert-finney-is-seen-in-the-title.html) ## Empire — David Parkinson Fi1m's normalised score 70/100 (inferred from the text). 1 January 2000. Richardson's bawdy adaptation of Fielding's novel mixes Free Cinema roots with nouvelle vague techniques and period detail, resulting in a lively picaresque that captures the permissive spirit of its era. The ensemble cast excels in cameos, though the film now feels somewhat dated. [Read the review](https://www.empireonline.com/movies/reviews/tom-jones-review/) ## Los Angeles Times Fi1m's normalised score 70/100 (inferred from the text). 20 October 1963. The review calls the film a bawdy, bellicose, and photographically arresting dark horse of 1963 that is both a fine period piece and a paradox of animal appetites. It singles out Albert Finney's irresistible portrayal of Tom as a rogue-saint figure while noting the film's mix of British humor traditions and filmic tricks. [Read the review](https://www.latimes.com/archives/story/2022-09-01/from-the-archives-a-merrie-romp-with-one-of-the-jones-boys) ## Variety — Rich Gold Fi1m's normalised score 70/100 (inferred from the text). 31 July 1963. The film is seen as a lusty, boisterous period piece with sex, color, prime performers, and plenty of action that should do strong business. Richardson directs with verve though occasional camera tricks and editing are noted as disconcerting. [Read the review](https://variety.com/1963/film/reviews/tom-jones-2-1200420461/) ## Eye for Film — Angus Wolfe Murray Fi1m's normalised score 85/100 (inferred from the text). 31 August 2018. The critic praises the film's raucous, original energy and chaotic fun as a sex comedy that stands alone, highlighting its tumultuous enjoyment and standout scenes like those with Edith Evans. [Read the review](https://www.eyeforfilm.co.uk/review/tom-jones-1963-film-review-by-angus-wolfe-murray) ## Collider — Liam Gaughan Fi1m's normalised score 70/100 (inferred from the text). 30 April 2023. The critic views the 1963 Best Picture winner as one of the stranger recipients of the award but finds it watchable and entertaining. Finney’s lead performance and the film’s set design are singled out for praise. [Read the review](https://collider.com/tom-jones-oscar-best-picture-winner/) --- © Fi1m Ltd. Written by AI under a human editor; checked against sources before publication. Quote with attribution and a link to the canonical URL. Our review: https://film.one/film/tom-jones.md