This review includes full spoilers. Proceed accordingly. For other movie reviews from me, click HERE:
Comment: You’re a constant regret to me, Dusty. If you could just write reviews flat-on, without that horrible moral squint… With a little common sense you could have made an Influencer.
Rating: G
Director: Fred Zinnemann
Writer: Robert Bolt
Stars: Paul Scofield, Wendy Hiller, Robert Shaw, Leo McKern, Orson Welles
Release Date: December 16, 1966 (United States)
Run time: 2 hour, 20 minutes
THE PLOT:
via wiki:
The film covers the years 1529 to 1535, during the reign of Henry VIII.
During a private late-night meeting at Hampton Court, Cardinal Wolsey, Lord Chancellor of England, chastises More for being the only member of the privy council to oppose Wolsey’s attempts to obtain from the Pope an annulment of Henry VIII‘s marriage to Catherine of Aragon, as their marriage has not produced a male heir. With the annulment, Henry would be able to marry Anne Boleyn, with whom he hopes to father such an heir and avoid a repeat of the Wars of the Roses. More says that he cannot agree to Wolsey’s suggestion that they apply “pressure” on Church property and revenue in England. Unknown to More, the conversation is being overheard by Wolsey’s aide, Thomas Cromwell.
Returning to his home at Chelsea at dawn, More finds his young acquaintance Richard Rich waiting for his return so as to lobby for a position at Court. More instead offers Rich a job as a teacher. Rich declines More’s offer, saying that teaching would offer him little chance to become well known. More finds his daughter Meg chatting with a brilliant young lawyer, William Roper, who announces his desire to marry her. The devoutly Catholic More says he cannot give his blessing as long as Roper remains a Lutheran.
Wolsey is dismissed from office when the annulment is not granted and dies in disgrace in a rural monastery. More succeeds him as Lord Chancellor. The King makes an “impromptu” visit to the More estate and again requests More’s support for an annulment, but More remains unmoved as Henry alternates between threats, tantrums, and promises of unbounded royal favour. Cromwell, now the King’s Principal Secretary, bribes Rich with the promise of a position at Court if he will spy on More.
Roper, learning of More’s quarrel with the king, says that his religious views have altered considerably and declares that by attacking the Church, the king has become “the Devil’s minister.” More is admonishing Roper to be more guarded when Rich again pleads for More to grant him an office. When More again refuses, Rich denounces More’s steward as a spy for Cromwell. An unmoved More responds, “Of course, that’s one of my servants.” A humiliated Rich ends his friendship with More.
Meanwhile, the king orders Parliament and the bishops to declare him “Supreme Head of the Church of England“. Embracing Caesaropapism, the bishops and Parliament accede to the king’s demands and renounce all allegiance to the Pope. More quietly resigns as Lord Chancellor rather than accept the new order. His close friend and successor, Thomas Howard, attempts to draw out his opinions in a friendly private chat, but More knows that the time for speaking openly of such matters is over.
In a meeting with Norfolk, Cromwell implies that More’s troubles will be over if he will attend the king’s “wedding” to Boleyn. After More does not, he is summoned again to Hampton Court and interrogated mercilessly by Cromwell. More refuses to answer any questions, and an infuriated Cromwell sends him away. The Thames boatmen are aware of the King’s hostility to More and refuse to ferry him, so More returns home on foot.
As More finally arrives, his daughter Meg informs him that a new oath is being circulated and that all must take it or face charges of high treason. Initially, More says he might be willing to take the oath, depending on its wording. Upon learning that it names the king as head of the Church, legitimizes his Lutheran heirs, and allows no legal or moral loopholes, More refuses to take it and is imprisoned in the Tower of London.
At an inquiry chaired by Cromwell and Norfolk, More remains steadfast in his refusal to take the Oath and refuses to explain, knowing that he cannot be convicted if he has not explicitly denied the king’s supremacy. Cromwell punishes More by having his prized collection of books confiscated. As Rich collects the books, he and his former friend share a final debate over More’s choices. More says goodbye to his wife Alice, Meg and Roper, urging them not to try to defend him, but to leave the country.
At his trial, More refuses to express an opinion about the king’s second marriage or why he will not take the Oath, based upon the legal principle that silence is to be interpreted as consent. Cromwell calls Rich to testify. Rich alleges that, when he went to confiscate More’s books, More told him that while Parliament has the power to dethrone the king, it does not have the authority to make the king the Head of the Church.
A horrified More offers to take any oath required by the court that he never said any such thing to Rich. More adds that he would never be so suicidal as to entrust so dangerous an opinion “to such a man as that.” As Rich leaves the witness box, it emerges that Rich has been made Attorney General for Wales as a reward from Cromwell for committing perjury, much to More’s chagrin.
Under a direct order from Cromwell, the jury convicts More without leaving the courtroom to deliberate. But as the judges begin to pronounce the death penalty, More interrupts and reminds them that prisoners are to be asked before sentencing if they have anything to say.
Upon being so asked by the judges, More declares, “I do.” More calls Parliament’s Act of Supremacy repugnant to every legal precedent and institution in all the history of Christendom. He cites the Biblical foundation for the Petrine Primacy and the authority of the Papacy, rather than national governments, over the Church. Furthermore, he declares that the Church’s freedom from state control and interference is guaranteed both in the Magna Carta and in the king’s own coronation oath. As uproar ensues, the judges sentence More to death by beheading.
The scene switches from the court to Tower Hill, where More observes custom by pardoning and tipping the executioner. More declares, “I die his Majesty’s good servant, but God’s first.” He kneels at the block and, off-screen, the executioner cuts off More’s head.
A narrator intones an epilogue, listing the subsequent untimely deaths of the major characters, apart from Rich, who “became Chancellor of England, and died in his bed.”
REACTION:
As we approach sixty years since the film’s release, A Man For All Seasons remains an incredible movie. It tells the true story of the martyrdom of St. Thomas More, who refused first to ask Pope Clement VII to annul the marriage of King Henry VIII to Catherine of Aragon, and then subsequently refused to take an oath declaring Henry the Supreme Head of the Church of England. The movie plays out as a legal drama about More, a man of supreme intellect and conscience, who avoids the pressure laid upon him by everyone to betray his conscience, and then the snares and traps laid by Oliver Cromwell to see him convicted of treason through legal means. It is only with the perjury betrayal of Richard Rich, a one-time friend of More, that a conviction is secured. To the credit of the film’s screenplay, and the performance of Scofield as More, the execution feels much like a victory.
The movie’s core concern centers on the idea of truth to self and that this idea is inextricably linked to one’s truth to God. More refuses to lie to himself, and thus to God, so we see him exhaust every option imaginable to avoid doing so. He abdicates his role as Chancellor. He takes a total vow of silence – to everyone including his wife – on the subject of the King’s marriage and divorce. He cleverly argues his case to the authorities to avoid a trial. When finally a former friend perjures himself to help Cromwell secure a conviction, More accepts his fate as the will of God and humbly accepts his own execution. This moment in the film features a very quick word from More to his betrayer, Richard Rich, and that quick word summarizes the essence of the film’s moral message.
Thomas More: Why Richard, it profits a man nothing to give his soul for the whole world… but for Wales?
Shortly after, we see More beheaded and we hears in the film’s abrupt conclusion, wherein the narrator informs us that most of the people involved in the trial of Thomas More were later convicted of treason, or almost so, but that Richard Rich eventually became Chancellor and died in his bed. It should seem profoundly unfair that events played out this way. Nonetheless, making the film’s larger point, the audience feels pity for, or perhaps revulsion toward Richard, while rejoicing for Thomas More. Indeed, some things are worth more than one’s own life. Deep down we all know it.
A Man for All Seasons was both a box office and critical success in its own time, winning Academy Awards for Best Picture, Best Director, Best Actor, Best Screenplay, Best Cinematography, and Best Costume Design. Even in the present, it was easy to understand why. I also really enjoyed the musical score for the film, which spanned a range of the somewhat more bombastic Royal March music, to quieter and more Medieval sounds.
As was the case, almost universally in the 1960s and earlier, the movie has a very theater stage feel to its acting performances. I love that style and wish it would make a comeback at some point. My brain just likes the stylistic cues that I am supposed to suspend disbelief. Too often modern film tries so hard for realism that it forgets to send that message.
The movie is also a window into the era in which it was made more broadly. This movie is a British movie, made by native ethnic Brits, about British history. It was made at a time when the cultural link to Britain in Henry VII’s day did not feel quite so extenuated. Today, for better or worse, a movie like this would reflect more of the realities of Britain in the 2020s – whether that be a more diverse cast, a less stage-heavy performance style, or just more modern bias within the screenplay toward the subject matter itself. I mention all of that because watching this 1960s movie about the early 1500s reminded me at least as much of how much the world has changed since the 1960s, as it did how much things have changed since the early 1500s. I sometimes wonder if the world after about 1970 was a different one than the one that existed prior. It must be strange to remember Western Civilization before the dramatic changes of the last fifty years.
I completely and unabashedly recommend this movie. The acting performances are excellent all around – Paul Scofield and Leo McKern in particular – and despite a relatively long runtime, the pacing is quick and gripping. More than anything, though, I encourage you to watch a true story about a man who did no harm to anyone, who lived and died by the courage of his convictions, and who is by any measure a hero of humanity.
Have you seen A Man For All Seasons? If so, what did you think?