Joseph Andrews Reviews

  • Sep 05, 2019

    One of the most bizaare movies I ever watched-I watched it on magic mushrooms in 1984 and it was like a massive scene from the annals of the hellfire club-were they chased by Satanists? To this day I can be unsure. I am even reading the book to see if what I saw was real but I can find no semblance to what I saw that night. That is all.

    One of the most bizaare movies I ever watched-I watched it on magic mushrooms in 1984 and it was like a massive scene from the annals of the hellfire club-were they chased by Satanists? To this day I can be unsure. I am even reading the book to see if what I saw was real but I can find no semblance to what I saw that night. That is all.

  • Sep 25, 2010

    Man, this movie. How weird. I've never seen a movie with such ugly people before. Seriously, some of the women in this film make Kathy Bates look like Natalie Portman. Even the actually pretty Ann-Margret is unattractive underneath that hideous 18th century makeup (really, what the fuck were people thinking back then?). And the men are mostly really ugly too. However, I guess that's kind of the point. The characters in the novel are described as being ugly, and given the much lower state of hygiene and diet back then, it's not surprising that people ugly by the time's standards would be absolutely repulsive today. I guess it's ok to read about ugly people, but having to actually look at them throughout a movie is a different story. The movie does follow the book's rambling, shapeless plot pretty closely. The cinematography is decent, but the movie is awkwardly edited - scenes just change abruptly, and any scenes involving physical action are very confusing. Peter Firth is kind of a boring non-entity as Joseph, but then that's the way he is in the book too. Michael Hordern is at least likable enough as Parson Adams. Ann-Margret, who somehow got a Golden Globe nomination for this movie, is decent I guess - her part is made bigger than it is in the book. It's definitely ironic that this movie was directed by a man named Richardson, givent the novel's inspiration and history. I would really only recommend this if you've read the book and are curious to see a movie adaptation.

    Man, this movie. How weird. I've never seen a movie with such ugly people before. Seriously, some of the women in this film make Kathy Bates look like Natalie Portman. Even the actually pretty Ann-Margret is unattractive underneath that hideous 18th century makeup (really, what the fuck were people thinking back then?). And the men are mostly really ugly too. However, I guess that's kind of the point. The characters in the novel are described as being ugly, and given the much lower state of hygiene and diet back then, it's not surprising that people ugly by the time's standards would be absolutely repulsive today. I guess it's ok to read about ugly people, but having to actually look at them throughout a movie is a different story. The movie does follow the book's rambling, shapeless plot pretty closely. The cinematography is decent, but the movie is awkwardly edited - scenes just change abruptly, and any scenes involving physical action are very confusing. Peter Firth is kind of a boring non-entity as Joseph, but then that's the way he is in the book too. Michael Hordern is at least likable enough as Parson Adams. Ann-Margret, who somehow got a Golden Globe nomination for this movie, is decent I guess - her part is made bigger than it is in the book. It's definitely ironic that this movie was directed by a man named Richardson, givent the novel's inspiration and history. I would really only recommend this if you've read the book and are curious to see a movie adaptation.

  • Mar 31, 2010

    This was such an interesting movie. I thought it was well done.

    This was such an interesting movie. I thought it was well done.

  • Jul 09, 2008

    Another one of Richardson's underrated works. Surprisingly, save a few liberties, very close to the plot of Fielding's original novel.

    Another one of Richardson's underrated works. Surprisingly, save a few liberties, very close to the plot of Fielding's original novel.

  • Aug 22, 2007

    Some amazing scenes and amazing corsets. 'Lady Fanni from the Parish of Boobrey'! Some proper tounge in cheek moments save it.

    Some amazing scenes and amazing corsets. 'Lady Fanni from the Parish of Boobrey'! Some proper tounge in cheek moments save it.

  • May 06, 2006

    The old man was the shiz-net and there were some good parts, it's o.k. for watching for an English class but the rest kind of sucked and the book not being all that good doesn't help anything at all.

    The old man was the shiz-net and there were some good parts, it's o.k. for watching for an English class but the rest kind of sucked and the book not being all that good doesn't help anything at all.