A Man for All Seasons (1966)

The Worst Film Ever

everything you have heard about this movie is true.

Absolutely amazing

Great movie. Not sure what people expected but I found it highly entertaining.

A Man For All Seasons4 And A Half Out Of 5A Man For All Seasons is a character driven feature of a man who will not and does not take "yes" for an answer. There are very few features that bleeds excellence in every form of it and touches the long lasting perfect note that not only is brilliant but essential to cinema; this is one of it. It is rich on technical aspects like costume design, production design, background score, sound department and editing. The dialogues in here are memorable, thought-provoking and goose-fleshing, as the intensity outgrows potential for the protagonist and at his vulnerability the argumentative conversations written in here can cut through any form of energy. The writing by Robert Bolt is undeniably strong and gripping, keeping the audience on the edge of the seat and leaves them in awe of it. Fred Zinnemann; the director is in his A game communicating with the audience through his brilliant execution skills as the emotions pours out of the screen like rain and makes it almost impossible to not be effected by it; especially in its last act. The performance objective is scored majestically by the protagonist Paul Scofield and a brilliant supporting cast like Robert Shaw and Wendy Hiller. A Man For All Seasons is a feature for all generations as it is layered with multiple emotions that can be explored through the craft present in each frame of it.

Directed by one of the all-time great film directors Fred Zinnemann & with a really brilliant screenplay written by Robert Bolt, "A Man For All Seasons" is just about as perfect a movie as is possible to make. The movie gives an account of the conflict which took place in the 16th century between King Henry V111 & his Lord Chancellor Sir Thomas More, which eventually led to More's execution. Paul Scofield gives a towering acting performance as Sir Thomas More with Robert Shaw (also extremely good) as Henry V111. After the Pope in Rome refused to annul his marriage to Catherine Of Aragon the King separated himself from the Catholic Church & proclaimed himself head of the newly- created Church Of England. More refused to sign the Oath Of Supremacy acknowledging the King's position & also refused to countenance the divorce which would leave the King free to marry Anne Boleyn. The Duke of Norfolk (Nigel Davenport) tries to persuade him to sign a document sanctioning the divorce but More adamantly refuses. The Duke tells him that it doesn't really matter whether he believes in granting the King a divorce or not & that he should sign it anyway, "for fellowship". More answers him by saying, "And when we stand before God & you are sent to heaven for doing your conscience & I am damned & sent to hell for not doing mine, will you accompany me there for fellowship?". After he resigned as Lord Chancellor More maintained an attitude of silence before & during his trial regarding the kings divorce. His thinking was that by doing so they would be unable to gain a treason conviction against him. More hoped he would then be left alone to live out the remainder of his life in peace & quiet. However, the angry King wanted More's head & there was never any chance of that!. Thomas Cromwell (Leo McKern), the ruthless & unscrupulous chief minister to the King got an ambitious, young (& equally unscrupulous) nobleman Richie Rich (John Hurt) to bear false witness against Sir Thomas More which helped to convict him. Cromwell rewarded Rich for his treachery with a chain of office. When More sees it he finally breaks his silence. "Why Richie, isn't that the chain of office for the Ministry of Wales? It profits a man nothing that he sells his soul to the devil for all the world, but to do it for Wales!". As I said at the start Robert Bolt's screenplay is just brilliant. He took the movie's title from a writer & poet who knew him & lived during Sir Thomas More's lifetime. Robert Whittington described him thus:-"More is a man with an angel's wit & singular learning. I know not his fellow. For where is the man of such gentleness, lowliness & affability. And, as time requireth, a man of marvellous mirth & pastimes, & sometimes of sad gravity. A man for all seasons". Jonathan Swift wrote that More was "a man of the greatest virtue this kingdom ever produced". Just before the axe came down severing his head from his body More is reputed to have said, "I die the king's good servant, but God's first".

Paul Scofield is Sir Thomas More in this historical picture concerning Henry VIII's future marriage to Anne Boleyn. But he's still married to Catherine of Aragon, who can not give him an heir. So of course Henry wants the Pope to annul his marriage to Catherine, so he can marry Anne. Sir Thomas More was a Lord High Chancellor and a counselor to His Majesty, but he does not condone this action. "A Man for All Seasons" is very special movie to me, as it symbolizes not only doing the right thing, but staying true to one's self, and it's a very modest and humble film. Scofield brings these qualities and more to his character. Living simply and true. Using what God has given you to the best of your abilities. Pleasing and serving God over man. Scofield embodies sense and sensibility in portraying this statesman with firm resolve. His quiet non-statement of the King's demands is not taken well and is taken to criticize the King, because those who know him knows what he stands for and that his not saying anything speaks volumes - even though he says he's trying to stay out of it. Scofield deservedly won an Oscar for this role, and the movie also is breathtakingly beautiful with its stark and simple cinematography. Miss this film and you miss not only a film essential - but a history lesson and a lesson in living.

Try to imagine a time when there was only one "Church", where diocesan/papal power was supreme and separation from the Church body was the one of the most terrifying punishments that could be meted out. And in this same time temporal kings absolutely believed that it was their divine right to rule with impunity over the masses.Combine these conditions with a transcendent confrontation between 2 of the most intricate and influential intellectual giants of the era and you've got the basis for a truly epic tale - and it's not fiction.Add a gifted modern playwright and a superb cinematic director and let them work their magic. The result is one of the finest dramatic expositions ever brought before the public.There are plenty of other commenters with details and technical observations far superior to what I could offer so I won't bother adding to them. I will say that if you figure there could be nothing remotely interesting or inspiring in a conflict between a narcissistic, power-mad potentate and a pious religious scholar you're absolutely wrong and missing out on a real opportunity.