SADLY, THEY DON'T MAKE THEM LIKE THIS ANYMORE
I don't mind recent Oscar winners with their complicated characters and bizarre situations (see Crash, The Departed, etc.) but it's nice to see a movie like A MAN FOR ALL SEASONS and remmember a time when the academy rewarded movies about deep, congruent, inteligent men. A truly great one for sure.
The movie does feel a little dated regarding hair styles (very 60s!) and customs (you can easily tell they have never been worn until right before the movie was shot) but the performances and screenplay are simply fantastic. I read somewhere that Steven Spielberg hired Robert Shaw for JAWS after seeing this movie and it's easy to notice a similarity in his work on both films.
Truly terrific !

excellent performances
A man for all seasons is an amazing tale of a turbulent period in english history: The king, Henry VIII, is in love with a girl and want to finish his marriage to the queen. For that He wants the Pope's consent and when He refuses, the king takes english church out of the Pope's jurisdiction and proclaims himself head of the church. So far so good. But He needs the support of the bishops, the people and the members of government. One of the most prominent members being Sir Thomas More. More is a humanist, lawyer, writer, filantropist and all around one of the most enlighted minds of the Renaissance, not to mention treasurer of the kingdom and personal friend to the king, but perhaps, more than anything: a profoundly devoted catholic.

For the king, the approval of More is fundamental for the respectable man that he is, but Sir Thomas do not agree with the king. Choosing to stay away, More remains silent in the matter, but powerful enemies want him down and push the king and his government to demmand his public approval. Knowing the law, He remains silent, believing this will save him but his mutism continues to irritate the king and his entourage, until they finally take More to trial and to his death.

A fantastic performance by Paul Scofield as the disgraced but firm More, is the key to the whole movie. His estoic speech in front of the parliament is one for the ages. The matter of a man in firm defense of his principles and convictions is as valid today as it was 300 years ago and should be an example to people of all ages. A Man fo All Seasons is truly a movie everyone should see at least once in his life.

Even more thoughtprovoking in 21st Century!
King or God? Who is more important?
Law of the land? Or religious sermon? Which is more correct?
Lawmakers or clergy - who should override whom?

Come and watch this movie to find how these thoughts were resonated in 16th Century England as it still do today at a different wavelength.

Sir Thomas More had bee glorified in last century as Saint, though he was a lawyer and a statesman. This movie at least partially explains why. He remained firm to his stance that King Henry VIII can not be placed beyond Papal authority. As the heretic King did not like More's idea - which was not sanitizing his divorce and marriage to Anne Boleyn - the end came to Sir More too soon.

The strength of the movie is the steady and restrained and often with intelligent wit, with which Scofield carried the role. Though he utters the same for a number of times (not mentioning intentionally why), he has been able to build the man of utmost reputation and integrity, for which Sir More has been known. The research work by Bolt is commendable too.

The movie preaches a lot. If you are not a real serious movie goer, or do not want to tax your brain with real complex religious-political issues, skip it. Though that does not discredit Zinneman's work.

I would like to end this with an interesting question though. In 21st century, whom would people follow? Clergy or Head of the State. What if clergy is wrong?

What happens to Sir Mores of 21st Century then?

A Movie for All Seasons
You'd be hard pressed to find a film so profound as "A Man for All Seasons"; it borders on Shakespearean in its tone. Yes, it shows only one side of Sir Thomas More, and we fleetingly glimpse More's intense revulsion toward Protestantism and its followers (he sent some of them to the stake for heresy). But the side that the movie portrays is accurate, as Sir Thomas deeply loved his family and believed in educating both his son and his daughters (he had six girls: Three were his own, two were adopted, and one became his ward and later married his son). Sir Thomas also displayed a flashing wit that could run the gamut from light-hearted to biting. Paul Scofield's Oscar-winning portrayal of Sir Thomas has yet to be topped; not even Charlton Heston could do it. Orson Welles is perfect as Henry VIII's right-hand man Cardinal Thomas Wolsey, while Leo McKern's cunning Thomas Cromwell and John Hurt's sleazebag-in-training Richard Rich send chills down your spine. Robert Shaw's Henry VIII is a roaring lion who brooks no opposition from anyone. Wendy Hiller is delightfully gruff as Dame Alice More, Susannah York is radiant as Sir Thomas's daughter Margaret More, and Colin Redgrave is great as Margaret's outspoken suitor Will Roper. The settings and the costumes are the cherries on the cake, though the Tudor gown that Margaret wears when she first meets King Henry did not come into fashion until a decade later.

A Movie for All Seasons
There can be little argument about the merit of this film winning the 1966 Best Picture award. The acting is superb, the authenticity is extraordinary, and the dialogue is absolutely captivating. Paul Scofield gives perhaps the best acting performance in the history of cinema. They simply don't make movies like this any more. Unfortunately, most of the younger generation will likely find this movie to be boring because it lacks action and has no sex, profanity or graphic violence -- a sad reflection of the times and of our society in general.