A Man for all Seasons - Clip 2 of 3 

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!

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.

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 😂

​@@gregruland1934 this was before the rotting leg

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.

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.

"I have been informed that not only are yeh a cheat, yer a gutless cheat as well."

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.

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.

Kind of like today

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.

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.

Well spotted

Except for: "I will have no opposition."

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

And it seems they don't lose much sleep over that prospect.

Tertiary Syphilis is one contender if I recall correctly

Funny, funny

'Psycho Dad' becomes 'Psycho King'!

I'm sure no one was giving you any.

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

​@@westlockhis best scene is when Rosa Klebb whacks him in the gut wearing a knuckleduster, and he doesn't flinch. "He seems fit enough"

And like our current Prince Harry!

@@gemmag.2988 Exactly!

Until she wasn't

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

Henry wasn't crazy. He was a man with unlimited power compensating for low self esteem

@@DanBeech-ht7sw Perhaps Henry wasn't crazy, but in the movie, Robert Shaw - who plays Henry, did a convincing impression of a crazy person.

@@MichaelBishop-uw6wx I'd call it a brilliant portrayal of an entitled and bullying man with unlimited power

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.

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.

I love these diagnoses across space and time.

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.

wonder how many fell in it

Others were already in the house. Plus servants.

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.

God did not want Catherine to have a boy

That was James 1

Eh? Two wives and two ministers. Facts

His moral principle was the church, not the marriage.

Oh please, more nonsense.

I think you’re right

No, it was the other way round. Having broken with the papacy he couldn't afford to have an incredibly wealthy political opposition. So he nationalized the monasteries which were more opposed to him than the regular church of England. Leaving aside the issue that catholics think that people somehow OUGHT to be catholics, the various monasteries and abbeys owned about a third of England which is ridiculous. They were sitting on a mountain of wealth and that's just not healthy. While redistributing that to the state isn't brilliant, at least it was all spent by the state within 30 years, thus oiling the English economy. That's the real reason why the elizabethan reign was thought of as a golden age, even though she was permanently broke.

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.

It's still the same now. I was brought up to have contempt for Monarchy and privilege.

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

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.

They miss the moors.

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.

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.

What about Sid James? Magnificent in the role

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.

Precisely so. The matter was complicated by papal interference, dispensations and whatnot.

​@uriahl2331 but obviously if there had been children from the first marriage then the church would have forbidden the marriage. Unless, on payment of a wad of cash, they issued one of their "dispensations "

👩‍💻😅🤣😂

Dork

​@@virgil9303It was actually a clever comment. Trump is erratic.

Mary I was also a great monarch!

Henry was clean shaven until he went bald, then he shaved his scalp and grew a beard. That started a fad among his courtiers who had very short hair and beards you could hide a badger in.

None of that's in the bible, except fasting, and that's not mentioned as an aid to viable sperm.

Trump masks?

@@TheRrye23 Let me guess....You're a mask person right? 😷=🐑

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