A Man for all Seasons - Clip 2 of 3
Vložit
- čas přidán 24. 03. 2008
- One of the best historical movies ever made (1966). Directed by Fred Zinnemann and based on a play by Robert Bolt, it tells the story of the last years of Sir Thomas More, the best Englishman of his time --perhaps of all times--, brilliant intellectual and politician, author of "Utopia", a martyr for free conscience and a Catholic Saint. He is played by Paul Scofield. The action takes place in 1529-35.
In this scene, Sir Thomas is visited by the infamous King Henry VIII. "Not the Holbein Henry," explains Bolt, "but a much younger man, clean-shaven, bright-eyed, graceful and athletic. The Golden Hope of the New Learning throughout Europe. Only the levity with which he handles his absolute power foreshadows his future corruption." Robert Shaw plays the King. - Krátké a kreslené filmy
I love this portrayal of Henry VIII
Charismatic, wise to how power works but so human when his wants are not met.
To be fair, Henry was desperate, as all monarchs anywhere were if they didn’t have a male heir. We live knowing that Elizabeth I was an excellent Queen, but female heirs were counted as nothing, bc they brought foreign princes to the realm, a very different thing than a princess. Henry was also certain he had displeased God for getting the dispensation to marry Katherine….I’ve never yet seen a film which depicts the superstition which was common in this time, in the times around it. And, since kings believed that God had placed them on their thrones, they were certain of their rightness, and Henry wasn’t the first king to find himself at odds with the Pope. And the Pope’s denial had very little to do with religion; it was purely political in that he was afraid of offending Katherine’s very powerful relatives, the Holy Roman Emperor and the King of Spain. If he had not been afraid of losing _his_ power, there’s little to suppose that he would have done what Henry wanted. So, while the play and film both show Henry as a man with a one track mind, that doesn’t make it accurate….he was an extremely complex man.
and no stench of rotting leg flesh!
Charismatic? Bellowing every other minute?
@@LordTalax bellowing exquisitely 😂
Love how you can see how carefully Thomas is trying to navigate Henry’s extreme mood swings while still giving him advice that doesn’t contradict More’s beliefs. Every word is chosen with such care. Not to mention how Henry is being very friendly but each sentence hints at the threatening nature of the man.
The King is simply unpredictable. In nearly the same breath saying he will leave him out of it and calling to sup, then noting the time saying he must leave. If Sir Thomas was not terrified before that conversation, he was after.
I've played Thomas More in the stage play the movie is based on, and one of the hardest things about it was trying not to just mimic this performance, which is just about flawless, flawless by Scofield and by Shaw. First rate in every way.
I actually asked this of a community theater actor who played More. How did he avoid Scofield's influence? (Which, in my opinion, he had done.) His answer? Step 1 was to avoid watching the movie at all for months after he'd been cast!
Amazing scene, how fast the King changes moods and tries different tactics, alternately flattering More then bullying him.
The power of lust!!!! ever lusting power, that is , a two
way street: anna Boleyn and others waiting in line to lose their heads to lechery and power!!!!!
Henry was the BIGGEST ARSEHOLE ...
He needed a son; the church was no help at all.
Sin is insanity.
@@davido3026the fruit of Lust is bloodshed.
King Henry: "I have been informed that I shall need a bigger boat."
"I have been informed that not only are yeh a cheat, yer a gutless cheat as well."
From start to finish, one of the very best films ever made. Everything about it is just superb.
It is,,,, and the cinematography is exceptional,, Fred Zinnemann was a bit hit-and-miss as a director,,, but he nailed it here,,, what a wonderful script and cast,,, must have watched this a hundred times. As a kid I played a couple of different roles in schools plays,, first as Chapuiys, the Spanish ambassador, then The Common Man,,,, and later I got to play Norfolk,,, which was wonderful,, (It was the original Bolt script,,,,, which is somewhat different than the film) but wish I'd got to play the King or Sir Thomas.
It is amazing - an astonishing piece of work.
This is Henry in his middle phase: the same old bully-boy, but not full of youthful joy, but increasing rage and petulance, and authoritarian behavior growing by the hour. His last phase was as the frightening tyrant. Great performance by Shaw.
Underrated actor, he proved a superior performer when pitted against Sean Connery in the train fight scene in FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE
Bolt's presentation of the young Henry was all the more striking in 1961, when people knew the monarch only from Holbein's portrait and Laughton's portrayal.
Indeed, it reminds me of another modern-day politician.
Goodness, but Robert Shaw was magnificent here. Since I only remembered Jaws when I was younger, it took me longer to learn and appreciate what a fine and versatile actor he was.
Check him out in "royal hunt of the sun".
Hard to find but I have it!
He was in the original 'Taking of Pellum 123' and 'Battle of Bulge'
@@55Quirll the Sting
@@johnlehmann9860 Very true, I forgot that one
@@johnlehmann9860 The Battle of Britain also. "Spring Chicken to Shite Hawk in one easy lesson" scene is excellent; the character of the grizzled squadron leader based upon fighter ace Aldolph "Sailor" Malan.
Two of my favourite actors. They actually had so little screen time together in this film, but essentially a story of Henry VIII’s will against Thomas Moore’s conscience
The part where Henry snaps off the lilac branch is foreshadowing to Thomas's execution. Watch the execution scene closely. You can a lilac tree directly behind More just before he kneels next to the axeman.
Small comment. Being from Australia, I always thought the fact that the bells were chiming "8 o'clock" a crazy idea. They're not there for breakfast, it's a dinner feast. But how can it be with this much light?
Then I visited London in summer this year and it is indeed this light at 8pm. Even light at 3am. No one tells you this!
Pray for us St. Thomas More 🙏
Thanks for sharing this. I didn't know the days were so short in Australia.
@@sundriedplatypus They're not short, it's just that in most of Australia the days' length doesn't change very much. Down south where I live, in Tasmania, you do get long summer days, but still not as long as in Britain and Northern Europe.
Surely monastic discipline may do wonders for a man's selfcontrol. But that man could, despite his deep piety, be a perfectly sociable and adaptable individual, a true "man for all seasons", as far as his conscience would allow. He got murdered because the tyrant wasn't content with being his sovereign, he wanted to be his conscience as well.
Kind of like today
After all that preparation and planning to have dinner prepared for King Henry and his retinue; He decided wants catch tide to Richmond. Loved seeing all nobles in their fine threads sloshing through mud after him😆😅😂
Noone could ever question Schofield's acting chops,,, but Robert Shaw's performance here is astonishing,,, it's amazing that less than 10 years later he was Quint in 'Jaws' the man aged 30 years over that time. When I was a kid I played Chapuys once,, and Norfolk once,,, though I've always lamented I never got to play Henry. I've only seen this movie 50 times,, I think I'll watch it again tonight.
You're not seriously suggesting that Shaw's performance is better than Scofield's, are you?
P.S. Please note the correct spelling...
@@ppuh6tfrz646❤ Equally talented.
Absolute masterclass in acting from everyone involved, storywise being Thomas More dealing with his majesty the king is like being locked in a room with an enraged gorilla
I can't think of a scene in a film with better acting than this one. Truly tremendous!
7:52 More is thinking 'That bloke's a nutter!'
Robert Shaw is an awesome Henry VIII
Watch how King Henry keeps his voice low when he's being reasonable, and shouts when he's browbeating More. Orson Welles as Charles Foster Kane was the same way.
Except for: "I will have no opposition."
Pure class. Acting at the very cutting edge of the craft.
What a masterpiece, this film, is ! The story is forever : the man of conscience, or the man, of convenience. never, ever, has this been more true than our nation, today. NEVER.
He changes moods quickly
Tertiary Syphilis is one contender if I recall correctly
Capricious, brilliant, fiery, adolescent, so much in such a man as Henry the VIII. He represents the flower of manhood wasted by his passions and conceits. In many ways a far seeing and goodly king, but his reign was tarnished by the absence of basic male virtues like temperance, patience, and wisdom. Not a small amount of Queen Elizabeth's reign was inspired by her father.
Reminds me of Harod the Great. I remember reading that when Harod the Great was at death's door he commanded all the men of the city to be executed with him but the order was not carried out. Probably a spurious story but it is very like Harod the Great to want the men to follow him to his death.
@@jamesmandahl444: Not spurious at all. Widely reported at the time, and perfectly characteristic of Herod's record of behavior. He'd already had a dozen members of his household slain, and various persons he'd counted as friends, for getting in his way or simply being politically inconvenient. The saying about Herod was: "Safer to be a dog in his kennels, than to be a kinsman at his table."
And of course there is the matter of the slaying of the young children in the town of Bethlehem: No one knows the exact number: Perhaps no more than a few dozen, given the town and the era, but almost certainly double digits. The deed was characteristic, and perfectly aligned with Herod's motives. He was, after all, an Edomite, not a descendant of David, and had zero ancestral claim to the throne of Judah. His effort to make a temple-site grander than Solomon's was his effort to legitimize himself as king in Judea. Under the circumstances, what would such a man have done, upon hearing of the birth of a possible claimant of Davidic lineage?
It wasn't just the 20th century, that produced brutal murderous tyrants! Humanity seems to sprout them from time to time.
He was a psychopath
If Henry’s boat goes down in that river he’s not putting on a life jacket ever again.
Funny, funny
Oath breakers today don’t have to worry about losing their jobs; just their self respect, the respect of their families, and the public.
And it seems they don't lose much sleep over that prospect.
Haven't seen this since it was on the curriculum in high school in 1967.
Always a favourite of mine. Wonderful acting and showing the scheming and plotting still carrying on to this day! Music is also just right
“We will need a bigger boat!” “It’s good to be the king!”
The Actors who can never be equalled much less surpassed.
hahahAa..nice!. I analyzed this scene in a graduate class last night, everyone thought it was remarkable, watching this pyscho King and how calm More is just sitting thee watching him rant and rave. I thought it was More's background when he spent 4 years in a monastery praying and fasting.
'Psycho Dad' becomes 'Psycho King'!
I think Robert Shaw watched Ramzan Kadyrov's interviews to prepare for his role as Henry VIII.
Great film,Great acting.
Fantastic scene! Just a superb actor Robert Shaw! He has been gone too long!
Only three years before, he and Sean Connery did that epic fight scene in _From Russia with Love_
Big shark swallow him whole.
@@westlock amazingly versatile actor
Shaw at his very, very finest.
He was served better by his daughter than he could have ever guessed.
Fantastic acting.
Not sure if this was pointed out but there is foreshadowing in this scene. After Henry "guarantees" to leave More "out of it" it looks like Henry will join More for dinner and all will end well. Then Henry abruptly says he can't join More and that he has to get back to court, as he would be stuck in Chelsea with More as the tides were turning. It goes to show that Henry never reslly was going to leave More alone, as Henry cared more about court and how he was perceived.
@RJY4356 I agree. An amazing performance by Robert Shaw.
Good scene for showing how a character uses different tactics to achieve his goal.
Schofield won the best actor oscar for his performance as Moore
We can see plainly his paranoia. Anyone who fails him must be secretly plotting against him. And from that the rest of the movie follows.
the opening 45 seconds are masterful
Robert Shaw was a handsome and colorful Henry the VIII. Great acting all around.
Catherine was the true queen
At 7:52, there's a look on Thomas More's face when he finally realizes he's dealing with a crazy person. Priceless. Of course, this new realization did not save him from the gallows.
What an evening!
Couldn't agree MORE :-)
Robert Shaw is the boss.
Yes, he’s believable as the still young golden king who charmed everyone - until that terrible head injury plus his leg wound saw him succumb to bitterness and cruelty
The David Brent energy at 05:42
One of the (many) brilliant things about this scene is how erratic Henry is - but it's not entirely that his syphilis is doing his brain in. He has those moments of screaming where he is very deliberately speaking to all the courtiers that he knows are listening. He's starting to lose it, but he's still a really cunning ruler. It's set up a bit when he tells Alice "They'll play to you" about the musicians, and he's "playing to" the crowd gathered around the window.
Although asserted at the end of the film, it is doubtful that the historical Henry had syphilis.
@@stevekaczynski3793 true 👍 his real decline in character and physical health dates from a head injury, as well as several broken bones, in a very bad jousting accident in the early 1530s. He could no longer exercise and he became grossly overweight (his legs also had agonising sores which refused to heal). Without that accident there would likely have been no capricious behaviour which led to the executions of More, Anne Boleyn and Cromwell to name but a few. The Renaissance, highly intelligent, charismatic prince became a tyrannical despot in the last third of his reign only.
Brilliant!
Robert Shaw gets too little attention for his portrayal of Henry VIII.
I think he won the academy award for his portrayal of Henry 8th. Robert Shaw was truly a Man For All Seasons. Brilliant actor,
successful writer, father of 10 children all of whom seemed to hold him in high esteem …..and he died at the age of 51 years…..
half way through life and we all are the poorer for it.
This is why I have no use for hereditary titles ...
I'm sure no one was giving you any.
This film was made just after the golden age of Hollywood had ended, but some excellent pictures were still being produced because of the expertise of those who were present during the golden age. Today's movies are a definite departure from all of that, and who knows when another renaissance will happen. This film is one of those which represents Shakespearean acting in its quintessence.
I almost felt sorry for Henry though. The man saw court intrigues, and he certainly heard of the Wars of the Roses from his father. To not have a direct heir would produce horrors unthinkable to the country reminiscent of the Wars of the Roses.
Henry can hardly be blamed for his psychotic character in his desperation.
Agreed. Who, in their right mind, would ever want to be a king? With all that pressure laid on their shoulders?
Exactly - and he had seen his own older brother Arthur die. He knew that the world he lived in was an extremely dangerous one. He didn’t realize that his daughters would far outshine poor sickly Edward.
Roses war was from too many heirs, not lack of one...
@@tomdumb6937 Too many _weak_ heirs in the WoR, distant relatives who wanted the throne through obscure ancestry. Having a son produced from a legitimate marriage would be virtually impossible to challenge, and anyone who attempted to take the throne would be seen as a usurper. A direct male heir wasn’t necessary, but it was far more preferable than any other alternative
And yet... Elizabeth had no child. James (V and I) had his troubles, but he didn't face a Roses-like war. Still, that was generations later. Henry can hardly be faulted for not knowing this.
Perfect depiction of Henry and most other monarchs. Spoiled rotten brats.
And like our current Prince Harry!
@@gemmag.2988 Exactly!
A King and A Saint
heh, I appreciate the comments though, I was not aware of the inaccuracies. I'm sure they existed, but keep in mind the style of cintemetography in this era.
Costumes and armor were stylized representations, and clothes were worn in an almost Hellenic fashion to denote which character was which and what his personality and character might be.
Many ministers lost their heads for opposition to King Henry 8th will. And even when he got his wishes each of his estranged Wives eventually got the axe too.
There must have been a few previous takes. That mud was already covered with footprints.
wonder how many fell in it
Others were already in the house. Plus servants.
pouvez--vous ün jour nous passer le film entier en français ? S'il vous plait. Merci..
If only Catherine had given him a son-how different would history have been, how much better the world would have been
Or if only Henry wasn't an irrational dickhead lmfao don't blame Catherine
Catherine had given him two sons. Unfortunately all of her children (save for Mary) were stillborn or died shortly after.
The King wanted to go after the Church not so much because of his wish to divorce, but far more due to his precarious financial situation -- he wanted to break with the Church so that he could loot it and replenish his coffers. Thomas More died for a moral principle that wasn't even at the heart of the matter. So it goes.
His moral principle was the church, not the marriage.
Oh please, more nonsense.
I think you’re right
: Shaw was a force of nature.
'i hardly know myself'....'see awhat you make a pop do!!!!'
boatloads of prancing fairies fawning and fumbling over themselves in the proximity to power. It's a disgusting display of wealth and the creeping vines that seek to influence.
Henry the viii, his love for flesh and meat knighted steak, to the rank of "Sir loin"!!!!!!
That was James 1
Actually people did wear those kinds of clothes in those days.
Ridiculous looking of course but back then nobility was only concerned with looking as extravagant as possible.
Awesome movie about the human minds capability and intellect.
People expected their sovereigns to dress splendidly. It was a reflection of the whole kingdom. Their lives were so drab that they appreciated viewing colorful displays. Parades were particularly popular, far more so than they are now.
The multiple layers of clothing were due to the lack of central heating. Gothic cathedrals, with their extremely high ceilings and large windows, must have been very cold to sit in for most of the year.
@@westlock Yep. Parades were the only form of distracting entertainment they had, that or knightly tournaments.
Ridiculous? Have you seen cyclists today?
Henry looks like he’s wearing gold lame.
Talk about a Best Supporting Actor Oscar that was never given...Walter Matthau over Robert Shaw?
How is it 8 o'clock when the shadows are short (the sun is high like it's around noon)
@tub99899
I don't even begin to claim to know the full case-history of the matter, but with reference to the film as you do... More explains quite well that his core beliefs forbade him from taking the oath. Once you step outside yourself so completely, you're lost. What good are you then to anyone... let alone your family. Besides the son-in-law, Will Roper was a young lawyer.... he should have been counted on to be resourceful. One would think so, anyway.
Robert Shaw does a great job as Henry, but he (Henry) was 6'2". As for More, Erasmus describes his size as "far from being tall".
This important detail seems to have been lost in the casting phase of the film, although with a little camera trickery, Shaw could have been made to stand higher than Scofield.
I think this is important because the King was trying to intimidate More into approving of his divorce and a much taller King would have made his presence more convincing.
He was the King.
He didn't have to be 'tall' to intimidate people.
I agree. Shaw was the best choice for Henry, but his height should have been emphasized.
The acting was great regardless of height.
@@abhcoat yes it was
I wish he had :-)
It was made in the '60's, you can't blame them for that.
So... Henry VIII hunted killer sharks after being King?
It is so hard to watch this after watching Wolf Hall. That’s not 100% accurate either, but More wouldn’t have gotten in so much trouble if he hadn’t published everything he thought. The Pope made things worse by letting the case hang fire for years.
Why the whopping cut at 1:04 (Henry greeting the family)? Perhaps a permission requirement to keep under ten minutes?
...8 looks like Prince Harry....oh...those gingers.....
Katie Britt's emotional Rollercoaster rebuttal to the 2024 State of the Union speech.
I love this movie but the ugly lion high five at the beginning of this video makes me giggle.
*but.....HE DIDNT STAY QUIET. Moore went on to write numerous books condemning the marriage of the King. It wasn't Moore's silence that caused him to loose his head. It was his own books written by his own hand condemning the marriage of the King !*
In my humble opinion Shaw was the best Henry VIII
@ajacqx Interesting point. Perhaps I should be just criticizing the film instead of insulting poor olde Sir Thomas
@3:41-3:43 King Henry viii 👑: I'm in an excellent frame of mind
...
...
😳
Thx for the clip from a great movie 🎥🍿
It's hard to watch a good man being crushed by a godless tyrant.
A bit rude for Henry to jump in the mud, sand then the courtiers do the same, and traipse through on Mistress More’ clean floors.
They miss the moors.
Clean-shaven?
Inconsiderate in his desires, violent and headstrong to whatever he took a will.
Another 20 seconds dammit. His wife starts nagging and moaning and he shouts.."woman mind your house"! Brilliant line which I've used on my wife occasionally.
She was very right in nagging him as the outcome would prove. I LOVE Wendy Hiller. What a face.
You sound like a chauvinist, citizen. Pipe down.
Find a better movie if you can, and let us know what it is...
I'm not a bible guy but,... "Judah got a wife for his firstborn, and her name was Tamar.
But Judah's firstborn, was wicked in the LORD's sight; so the LORD put him to death.
Then Judah said to Onan, "Lie with your brother's wife and fulfill your duty to her as a brother-in-law to produce offspring for your brother."
Judah was, according to the Book of Genesis, the fourth of the six sons of Jacob and Leah, and the founder of the Tribe of Judah - of the Israelites.
By extension, he is indirectly the eponym of the Kingdom of Judah, the land of Judea, and the word Jew.
Correct. Not only was it not forbidden, the role of the “kinsman redeemer” was treated rather seriously. Those who wouldn’t take their brother’s widow to wife had their shoe loosened by the widow as a form of public reproach.
Henry wants Thomas More's good opinion because Thomas More is the one king's councilor who is not, at base, a sycophant. What conscience the king possesses can be pricked by Thomas More. Henry wants to believe that he is right. The king can't ultimately accept Thomas More's opinion, though, because his narcissism and desire govern him. He needs a male heir because he (justifiably) wants to secure the succession. However, he also (and more poignantly) wants a son to demonstrate to the world that he is a man, capable of fathering a son. Additionally, he desires Anne Boleyn, who denies him. That which one can't have is highly alluring. Even more so for a king - the man who has everything. If Henry wanted a son, there are any number of women who he could have had besides Anne Boleyn. Almost every king and high lord married for dynastic and material reasons. Henry eschewed this typical practice because he was motivated by personal desire. All of his marriages, save the one with Anne of Cleves (which was a marriage of the standard, diplomatic mode), were to women that Henry wanted to marry for personal reasons.
The first marriage was for political reasons (we don't see this from the clip because it is set at least twenty years after the wedding).
Katherine was originally married to Henry's brother Arthur. He died--but Henry VII wanted to keep Katherine's dowry. He or Ferdinand came up with the idea of her marrying Henry.
@@gidzmobug2323 Katherine married Prince Arthur for dynastic reasons. Katherine remained in England after Arthur died because Henry VII wanted to preserve Katherine's dowry and also the diplomatic alliance with the Catholic Monarchs, who were more powerful, and assured in their rule of Spain, than Henry's newfound regime was powerful in Europe and assured in England. As part of his diplomatic wrangling, Henry VII broke off the potential marriage between his younger son and Katherine, and also floated a marriage between himself and Katherine. When Henry VII died, Prince Henry was unmarried and free to do what he wanted as king. Henry _willingly_ married the five years older Katherine, even though the diplomatic logic at that point was not a going concern. Why did he marry her, although he had a pick of younger, previously unmarried brides? I think he fell in love with her as a young boy. Henry was the one who escorted Katherine into the church to get married to his brother. I think the impression of a young, beautiful bride made a deep impression upon Henry and he created a fantasy of Katherine that he cultivated into his teens and his kingship. I wouldn't overlook the tendency of younger brothers to desire what their older brothers have had, either.
@@renshiwu305 The idea of Katherine marrying Henry VII, as I remember, did not go over very well.
@@gidzmobug2323 The English were prejudiced against foreigners (like most people). But to see the English monarchy allied with the powerful and prestigious Spanish House via a pretty, young, and charming Princess of Wales (like Diana Spencer, who was also those things), was not unpopular.
@@renshiwu305 An alliance with an older monarchy (Spain or France) also added legitimacy to Henry's reign. Henry VII was viewed as an upstart ruler.
Best Screen Henry VIII?
1. Robert Shaw
2. [big gap]
3. The rest
Do check out Charles Laughton if you get the chance.
Keith Michell in the PBS series The Six Wives of Henry VIII was good, too, especially since over the course of his six wives you watch him evolve.
Like Donald Trump with a vocabulary
👩💻😅🤣😂
Dork
@@virgil9303It was actually a clever comment. Trump is erratic.
Science tells us that the male gene is what determines the sex of every child, therefore, Henry, The King, was much more
responsible for the sex of his offspring than any wife he might have had. So, Henry was actually the problem. And, isn’t it ironic that Elizabeth I, a female heir, who followed him to the Throne of England (after her sister, Mary), is one of the greatest monarchs of England
Mary I was also a great monarch!
Had they known about fruitarianism, urine therapy , and intermttent fasting they could have had that male heir. All in the bible.
For anyone watching this in 2020 the third group mentioned (starting at 4:55) can now be clearly identified by the masks they wear.
Trump masks?
@@TheRrye23 Let me guess....You're a mask person right? 😷=🐑
7:58 heretic
Vaguely Pythonesque.
Thomas More was an indefatigable careermaker and golddigger, who sailed with all winds in the course of selfpromotion and imcomparable vanity
Perhaps he was in real life.
But this is based on a play and the screenplay is written by the playwright.
The film reflects the play, not the reality.
He is a Saint and that being so; thoroughly investigated and canonized
@@charlesoconnell3693 they must have obviously approved then of his torturing and burning of Protestants when he was chancellor
@@Kacer99281 Source?
@@njmccormackgmail I suggest you do your own research