Nobody's Fool

Nobody's Fool (1994) stars Paul Newman as a man approaching retirement age in a small town in upstate New York. He is pressing a Workman's comp case against the only construction company in town, is represented by a one-legged lawyer, is living in a bedroom belonging to his grade school schoolteacher (Jessica Tandy). He flirts outrageously with Melanie Griffith, the wife of the construction company owner (Bruce Willis), who cheats on Melanie constantly with a hot number named Anjelica Torn. Newman and all his friends play poker together in the local tavern, no matter what conflict they were having during the day.

NUDITY REPORT

Griffith flashes her breasts for Newman, and Torn is topless sitting next to Willis in a poker game for several minutes.

DVD info from Amazon

widescreen anamorphic

Newman is reunited with the son he left years before when he split from his ex-wife. Over the course of the film, Newman has to begin to deal with the son, a grandson and his hatred for his own abusive alcoholic father.

Newman was wonderful in the role, playing a real person, and not a movie character.

The Critics Vote

General USA consensus: three and a half stars. Ebert 3.5/4, Berardinelli 3.5/4.

Newman was nominated for Best Actor, and the film also received a writing nomination.

Rotten Tomatoes summary. 84% positive.

The People Vote ...

IMDB summary. IMDb voters score it 7.2/10

It grossed about $40 million, and has been a solid rental winner.

The meaning of the IMDb score: 7.5 usually indicates a level of excellence equivalent to about three and a half stars from the critics. 6.0 usually indicates lukewarm watchability, comparable to approximately two and a half stars from the critics. The fives are generally not worthwhile unless they are really your kind of material, equivalent to about a two star rating from the critics, or a C- from our system. Films rated below five are generally awful even if you like that kind of film - this score is roughly equivalent to one and a half stars from the critics or a D on our scale. (Possibly even less, depending on just how far below five the rating is.

My own guideline: A means the movie is so good it will appeal to you even if you hate the genre. B means the movie is not good enough to win you over if you hate the genre, but is good enough to do so if you have an open mind about this type of film. C means it will only appeal to genre addicts, and has no crossover appeal. (C+ means it has no crossover appeal, but will be considered excellent by genre fans, while C- indicates that it we found it to be a poor movie although genre addicts find it watchable). D means you'll hate it even if you like the genre. E means that you'll hate it even if you love the genre. F means that the film is not only unappealing across-the-board, but technically inept as well. Any film rated C- or better is recommended for fans of that type of film. Any film rated B- or better is recommended for just about anyone. We don't score films below C- that often, because we like movies and we think that most of them have at least a solid niche audience. Now that you know that, you should have serious reservations about any movie below C-.

Based on this description, Tuna says, "this is a C+". Scoop says, "I can't think of any reason to hold it down to a C+. It feels real, and is also entertaining, combining the best of studio films with the best of indy films. It has a great cast of major stars and character actors, and features one of the screen's all-time greatest stars in perhaps his most realistic performance. It was a hit with critics, was nominated for Oscars, has some sexy nudity, is filled with genuine emotions, and drew in a large enough audience to make a profit. What else is there? I think it must be at least a B-.