Thirty years later, I (re)joined a film fan club

Laugh if you have to. Or, if you don't have to laugh, laugh anyways. 

Nearly 30 years ago, my late dad and I decided to join a fan club. It was all my idea because when I become interested in something, I have a habit of diving completely into it.

This fan club called itself, and still calls itself, "The Sons of the Desert." It's actually an international organization "devoted to the work and lives of Stan Laurel and Oliver Hardy." So, yes...it's a Laurel and Hardy fan club. 

I first heard about this group in the early 1990s after my dad received a video collection of Laurel and Hardy films distributed by a company called "Video Treasures." Before each feature film, a series of home movies and photos of Laurel and Hardy, with narration from Stan Laurel's daughter Lois Laurel, would play. They were followed by a quick advert for the Sons of the Desert Laurel and Hardy Appreciation Society. 

It sounded corny but alluring. Who doesn't want to join a crew of like-minded individuals?

Named after their 1933 film "Sons of the Desert," this organization has chapters, or "Tents" as they call them, pitched all around the world. Each Tent is named after a Laurel and Hardy movie. And the spokesperson for each of these Tents is referred to as the "Grand Sheik." During regularly held meetings, films and content pertaining to Laurel and Hardy are watched and appreciated, as is the nature of an appreciation society. It's like a classic comedy movie night, really. 

What's fascinating is that this appreciation society has been around since 1964. It was started by author and scholar, John McCabe, whose first book was an authorized biography of Laurel and Hardy.

So, back in the 1990s. I wrote an inquiry to the address shown on that Sons of the Desert blurb. I received a response back in the mail indicating that there was a Tent called "Call of the Cuckoos" located in nearby San Francisco - I was living in Oakland at the time. No other name could be more suitable for something located in San Francisco. So, my dad and I joined up and attended some of these film screenings this San Francisco Tent held month to month in an auditorium inside a Methodist Church. A projector and screen were always set up. And a folding table with snacks and beverages were always present.

I read somewhere that comedian Bill Murray himself once jokingly referred to these Sons of the Desert fan members as a "bunch of weirdos" when they were presenting him with some kind of honor or award. Again, maybe some of the members really get into Laurel and Hardy. But, so what? 

Some of the attendees were a little eccentric, but so is half the population of San Francisco. Others were friendly and fun to chat up about movies. I was still in my teens and was probably the only young kid in the group. Other members were actually about the same age I am now. Attending these film screenings spurred in me a desire to read about films in general, research movie producers, and, well, everything I do on this blog. For instance, I'm currently enrolled in a film appreciation course online. I think dad and I attended these gatherings regularly for about a year. Of course, being a member of this group wasn't anything I shared with any of my peers. None of them would have cared anyway. 

I think the highpoint of being a member occurred when dad and I attended a screening of some Hal Roach films somewhere in Sacramento. Lois Laurel was also in attendance. She was such a polite lady who was warm and welcoming. I was a bit star struck seeing her. Stan passed away in 1965, long before I was born. So, meeting his daughter was the closest I would get to meeting the legend himself. 

She gave me a signed postcard-sized photograph of herself as a little girl beside her father taken on the set of the 1937 movie "Way Out West." Unfortunately, at some point between then and now, I lost it. 

Sadly, my dear old dad passed away in 2018. Every once in a while, before he passed away, I would bring up "The Sons of the Desert" to him. 

About a year ago, I began researching a not-so-well known female comedy team comprised of Zasu Pitts and Thelma Todd. These two ladies were joined together as a comedic duo by Hal Roach who produced the majority of Laurel and Hardy as well as the "Our Gang" (aka "The Little Rascals") films as well among others. 

Zasu Pitts left the act after making 17 comedy shorts with Todd. She was replaced with Patsy Kelly who, together with Todd, made 21 comedy shorts until Todd died under unusual circumstances in 1935 at age 29. 

A few Christmases ago, my wife gave me a complete DVD collection of their films. I've been working my way through every single one. I also downloaded some periodicals about them and requested my local library to purchase a copy of the book "The Hal Roach Comedy Shorts of Thelma Todd, Zasu Pitts and Patsy Kelly" by James L Neibaur. I'm writing something up about this female comedy team as they deserve continued recognition. Their comedic legacy has faded too much over the decades, unlike
Laurel and Hardy and the Little Rascals. I'll have more to come about Pitts, Todd, and Kelly later. 

But watching their films, and reading about them, brought the Sons of the Desert to mind. 

I admit I was kind of embarrassed to talk about having been part of a Laurel and Hardy fan club in my teenage days. It seemed kind of stupid. Uncool. But now, again, so what? It's right up my alley.

No matter how corny or quirky it seems, the Sons of the Desert don't strike me as just a mere fan club. They actually work hard to keep this part of film history alive and well decade after decade. Laurel and Hardy are a foundational pair in comedy. Their work and dedication deserve not just appreciation, but a whole international society dedicating to appreciating. It would be ashamed if Laurel and Hardy faded too far into obscurity. The same goes for a lot of classic films. As I heard someplace before, there's no such thing as an old joke if you haven't heard it before.

This group introduces new generations to Laurel and Hardy films, classic cinema in general, and to the film industry from that era as it pertains to this comedy duo and the Hal Roach Studios. And the members certainly enjoy themselves while doing it.

Evidently, they're still as active as ever, especially in Europe. So, I looked up any nearby Tents to where I live now in Kansas. There's one in Basehor, Kan., - a town I never heard of - called the "Hog Wild Tent." Unfortunately, it's an hour and 40-minute drive from me. Well, that's too far. 

Regardless, I can still join as a "delegate at large." And I did. For a membership fee of $35, I can still be a part of things and receive the group's publications and such in the mail. After 30 years, they lure me back into this Laurel and Hardy Appreciation Society "The Sons of the Desert." As Stan Laurel once said, "You can lead a horse to water, but a pencil must be lead." 

Clue (1985)

"They all did it. But if you wanna know who killed Mr. Boddy, I did. In the hall. With the revolver."

Director

Jonathan Lynn

Cast

Tim Curry - Wadsworth
Lesley Ann Warren - Miss. Scarlet

Martin Mull - Col. Mustard

Madeline Kahn - Mrs. White

Christopher Lloyd - Prof. Plum

Michael McKean - Mr. Green

Eileen Brennan - Mrs. Peacock

Lee Ving - Mr. Boddy

Colleen Camp - Yvette 

My wife and I recently watched the 1985 comedy "Clue," based on the classic board game, on the same day my fourth child was born just a few days ago. As my wife recuperated at the hospital, we both decided to watch "Clue" on our tablet while browsing through movies on various streaming apps. Though it was a day to celebrate, hospital stays are incredibly boring, too. 

"Clue" has been a favorite board game of mine since my youth. Certainly, more so than "Monopoly." I hate losing money in real life. Why would I want to lose my game money, too?  

"Clue," however, holds a special nostalgic place for me. I have a strategy, probably like everyone else, whenever I play. It often works, unless an opponent has a better strategy.   
The movie based on the boardgame has a truly respectable cast and has become a bit of a cult classic.

Sometime in my pre-teenage years while browsing the shelves of my local video rental store in the hills of Oakland, "California Video," I discovered this flick much to my surprise. Well, of course I had to check it out. 

By the way, when I first saw the trailer for the 2019 comedy murder mystery "Knives Out," my initial impression in the first few moments of the trailer was that it was a remake of "Clue." 

The movie "Clue" was a favorite of mine in my younger days. But I haven't seen it since my early teenage years until my wife and I watched it at the hospital.

Speaking of the board game, I still hope to own a copy of "Clue Master Detective" which offers more rooms, weapons, and characters for crime solving game play. Last Christmas, I found it at a calendar store at the mall. Though I didn't buy it then, I know someday it'll be mine.

Anyways, the movie starts as six individuals are invited to an eerie looking mansion for a special supper. 

As each guest arrives, they're greeted at the door by Wadsworth the Butler (Tim Curry) and given a pseudonym - Miss. Scarlet (Lesley Ann Warren), Mrs. White (Madeline Kahn), Mrs. Peacock (Eileen Brennan), Prof. Plum (Christopher Lloyd), Col. Mustard (Martin Mull) and Mr. Green (Michael McKean). 

However, an extra guest named Mr. Boddy (Lee Ving) is scheduled to arrive. Wadsworth informs the guests that Mr. Boddy has been blackmailing each of them for some time. 

Mrs. White is suspected for murdering her physicist husband. 

Mrs. Peacock is being blackmailed for supposedly accepting bribes on behalf of her husband, a U.S. Senator. 

Prof. Plum lost his medical license after fooling around with a female patient. 

Mrs. Scarlett operates an underground brothel. 

Col. Mustard has been engaging in some war profiteering. 

And Mr. Green claims to be a closeted homosexual which could cost him his job at the State Department if he's found out. 

When Mr. Boddy shows up while dinner is being served, Wadsworth informs the party that the police have been notified and will arrive in 45 minutes.

Boddy, however, threatens to expose each one of them if the police arrest him. He gives each guest a weapon (a lead pipe, a wrench, a revolver, a rope, a knife, and a candlestick) and hopes any one of them will use their weapon to kill Wadsworth. 

If Wadsworth is murdered, Boddy says their secrets will be safe. He then turns out the lights. A shot is fired. A scream is screamed. And when the lights come back on, it's Mr. Boddy who's lying dead on the floor. 

Now the elegant yet mysterious evening becomes a classic who-dunnit as all the guests run around the mansion investigating Boddy's murder. 

The premise of the murder mystery, and its connection to the board game is fun to watch. The notable cast who all work off each other well enough is the best part of the film.

"Clue" sparks a few hearty laughs for me, but overall, it fizzles out in its efforts to get the audience to laugh as characters do a lot of running back and forth, and back and forth. Overall, its weak humor consists mostly with shouting, falling, and again running around. There's very little solid comedy in the dialogue. 

The easy jokes make the movie feel like a mere novelty rather than something worth coming back to again for laughs. It doesn't impress. There's only one joke in the movie that makes me think "now that was funny!" 

There's so much potential for a creative experience with the source material the movie has behind it, but this movie's legacy is that of a cult classic. With some tweaked writing and better jokes, "Clue" could have been a more respected comedy classic rather than just another deflated goofball comedy.  

The cast, too, could have been given a lot more comedic dialogue and material. This is a top-notch cast. Still, what they have to work with is lacking. In some scenes, the cast looks as though they're uninterested in whatever is going on. 

Three different endings were filmed for this movie. Upon its release, theaters were given any one of these three alternate endings. When "Clue" was released on home video, all three endings were included. 

Honestly, the three endings seem superfluous, though I understand the producers were trying to make the movie just like the board game. It would have been interesting to discuss the movie with others who watched it in different theaters and saw different endings back in 1985. 

Director Jonathan Lynn went on to direct other goofy comedies like "The Distinguished Gentleman," "Sgt. Bilko" and "The Whole Nine Yards." His next movie after "Clue" was the somewhat obscure comedy "Nuns on the Run" with Monty Python alum Eric Idle and "Harry Potter" star Robbie Coltrane. Perhaps Lynn's most notable film is the 1992 comedy "My Cousin Vinny." 

"Clue" has potential but ends up an unsubstantial screwball comedy with a runtime that's barely over an hour. A future remake could give this story what's lacking in this film.

Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3 (2023) - My Thoughts Real Quick

(Minor Spoilers ahead)

After the Marvel movie "Avengers: Endgame" (2019) - the 22nd movie in the Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU) - I lost a lot of interest in the MCU. Too much of a good thing simply loses its savor after a while. I'll still watch Marvel movies when they cross my path if I'm interested enough, but I don't make a lot of effort to see whatever the latest movie in the franchise happens to be. 

Before "Avengers: Endgame" I was just as excited as anyone else when new Marvel movies were coming out. And once "Avengers: Endgame" hit screens, it felt like a grand finale of sorts. The novelty of these stories simply wore off. That's not to say recent Marvel movies are boring or dull. Many of them, though, seem too similar to previous ones. Others continue to feel like nothing more than build-ups to future movies. 

I love the "Ant-Man" films. I hated the "Dr. Strange" films along with the pretentious and dull 2019 movie "Capt. Marvel." The "Thor" movies are hit or miss - more hits than misses. But the ones I really love above all else are the "Guardians of the Galaxy" movies, starting with the first of the three from 2014. Wow! Has it been that long? 

"Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2" (2017) is even better than the first. It's among the most entertaining of the MCU movies out there. The humor and style in both films are great. The atmosphere is bright and brilliant. The pacing is spot-on. Overall, the characters are memorable and easy to get invested in. They're among the best comic book-based films. 

"The Guardians of the Galaxy Holiday Special," which aired on the streaming service Disney+ in November 2022, is a fun and entertaining film to cleanse the palate until a new theatrical release would come about. 

So, I was a little more Marvel-excited than usual (post "Endgame") when "Guardians of the Galaxy: Vol 3" hit theaters on May 5, 2023.

While this third installment is enjoyable, overall entertaining and satisfyingly full of action, it feels just a bit (and I do mean just a bit) more mundane than the previous two. 

I wasn't as excited as before while sitting through it, though maybe that's because I've sat through two other movies plus a "holiday special." Still, I wouldn't hesitate in saying this is definitely one of the better Marvel movies in a while after "Endgame." 

To the movie's credit, the storyline shifts focus onto the character Rocket's (voiced by Bradley Cooper) origin story. 

Rocket, the anthropomorphic racoon, is a likeable character in the films. This story of his in part three really helps solidify his role in the overall storyline. 

Rocket affirms who exactly he is, and not what he perceives himself to be. It's a message I can get behind. 

There's a lot more emotion within volume three than in the previous two films. It's heavier in that regard, giving the movie a darker tone. That dark tone pushes the humorous parts out of its way to make room for itself.

I appreciate Rocket's backstory though it's not what I was expecting. I don't want to say the movie is a letdown. I wasn't let down. I sat through the movie expecting that familiar humor I've seen in the previous movies. But it wasn't quite the same the third time around. 

The entire experience is more nuanced compared the other flicks. The vibe overall feels different. It's a little weaker. The movie's strongest aspect is the story.

There are a few surprises thrown in that made the audience I was a part of gasp - literally.

Volume three has flare but not to the extent as the previous movies. It's not lacking but it's facing that direction. 

There's a running joke which begins when Kraglin (Sean Gunn) calls Cosmo a bad dog. Throughout the rest of the movie, Cosmo protests and begs him to take it back. It's a corny gag. 

The juke box soundtrack has songs that I enjoy more than the previous soundtrack for volume two. It includes songs like "No Sleep Till Brooklyn" by the Beastie Boys, "I'm Always Chasing Rainbows" by Alice Cooper, and "Badlands" by Bruce Springsteen. It's a decent mix. 

Honestly, if Marvel actually ends the series with volume three as they claim they will, it wouldn't be a bad decision. 

"My Thoughts Real Quick"

I tend to put in more effort on my site 1000daysofhorror.com while this blog gets much less traffic. In an attempt to remedy that, and write more posts especially on new releases, I plan to jot down my thoughts rather than write up lengthy reviews.

Oh, there will still be lengthy reviews on older films. But for newer releases, they'll be quick. 

Diary of a Wimpy Kid: Rodrick Rules (2011)

"What did I say about being civil to one another? That's all I asked of you!"

Director

David Bowers

Cast

Zachary Gordon - Greg Heffley

Devon Bostick - Rodrick Heffley

Rachel Harris - Susan Heffley

Steve Zahn - Frank Heffley

Robert Capron - Rowly Jefferson

Peyton List - Holly Hills

I admit this is more of a rant than a review. No matter. It needs to be ranted.

I'm making one major leap after reviewing "A Man for All Seasons" about the last years of St. Thomas More in my last post. Now, I'm on to the 2011 movie "Diary of a Wimpy Kid: Rodrick Rules." That's like eating a $50 steak dinner at an exquisite fine dining establishment one day, to settling for a prepackaged peanut butter and jelly sandwich from the freezer section at Wal-Mart the next day. 

"Diary of a Wimpy Kid: Rodrick Rules" is the second movie in a tetralogy all based on junior fiction books by Jeff Kinney. 

I watched this movie the other day with my kids and felt compelled to say something about it. In a word, it's garbage and I'm sorry I let my children see it. What's worse is that they want to watch it again.

I've listened to Kinney's "Diary of a Wimpy Kid" audiobooks with my own kids. I admit I've gotten a few laughs out of them. I didn't necessarily mind them. 

Like the books, the movies center around young Greg Heffley and his experiences with his family, particularly his older brother, Rodrick. The stories also depict his experiences with school, his friend Rowley, his crushes, his pursuit in trying to be noticed, and his life in general as a kid.

When it comes to the movies, I admit I enjoyed watching the 2010 movie "Diary of a Wimpy Kid." I saw it a few years after its DVD release out of curiosity. While it has a lot of weak spots thanks to poor writing, and the main character makes a lot of poor nonsensical decisions even for a kid, it still has some entertainment value. It's far from perfect yet more grounded in reality then it lets on. 

In fact, the first Diary flick reminds me a bit of the 1983 movie "A Christmas Story" about young Ralphie Parker and his quest for a Red Ryder BB gun for Christmas. I think the similarities as I see them are due to Heffley's constant fantasies similar to Parker's as both characters are in pursuit of something for themselves. Each story, too, is told from the kid's point of view. 

This second movie, however, is absolute garbage. 

In this story, Greg (Zachary Gordon) and Rodrick (Devon Bostick) don't get along just like in the first movie. 

Their mom Susan (Rachel Harris) is desperate to have her two oldest boys just learn how to be nice to each other. Now that she writes a regular column in the newspaper about good parenting, she thinks having two kids who constantly fight doesn't look good for someone who gives regular parenting advice. 

As Greg is going on to the seventh grade, he's also starting to notice girls. In particular, he has his eyes on the new girl at school, Holly Hills (Peyton List). So, as usual he puts in too much effort to present himself as anything other than his true self. 

Rodrick, meanwhile, has his heart set on entering his band "Loded Diper" into a local talent show. He thinks it'll lead to the band's big break.

All the while, the Heffley's are planning a fun weekend trip to Rockin' Rapids waterpark. But after Greg and Rodrick get in a fight right in the middle of a church service of all places, Susan and their dad Frank (Steve Zahn) decide to take their three-year old son Manny (Connor and Owen Fielding) instead and leave Greg and Rodrick home as punishment. 

Zachary Gordon and Devon Bostick.

The parents inform the two, particularly Rodrick, that under no circumstances are they allowed to have anybody over while they're away. 

Of course, Rodrick completely ignores them and throws a party. He tries to get Greg out of the way by locking him in the basement. 

Greg calls his buddy Rowley Jefferson (Robert Capron) to help get him out. Nothing gets passed Rodrick, evidently. He puts Rowley in the basement with Greg. So, now he's in on the gig. 

But when mom calls to check on how things are going, both Greg and Rodrick answer the phone. Rodrick lies and claims everything is fine. Greg slyly hints to his brother on the other end, while mom is listening, that he either let him out of the basement or he'll spill the beans about the party. You know...blackmail. 

So, Greg and Rowley join in on the fun while taking candid pictures of the party. The next morning, the two brothers are awoken by the phone ringing. The house is trashed...as is the front lawn. 

Susan lets them know that they'll be home early because Manny got sick. In fact, they'll be home in an hour. 

As Greg and Rodrick frantically try to clean the house and yard within an hour, they're forced to replace the bathroom door which someone graffitied "Rodrick Rules" on with a door stored in the basement. The spare door has no lock. The bathroom door does. 

Within minutes of finishing up, Susan, Frank and Manny walk in. 

It looks as though the two boys are in the clear. And they convince their folks that they've gotten along all weekend alone together.

Rodrick has one piece of advice to Greg should mom and dad become suspicious. 

"Deny! Deny! Deny," he says. 

When Susan discovers there's no lock on the bathroom door, she goes to Rodrick who acts like the door never had a lock. 

Seeing that her own son is full of crap, she goes to Greg who breaks under the pressure. 

Greg spills the beans, but he pleads with her to let it slide as he and his brother are actually getting along for a change. 

Of course, she reluctantly agrees thinking it's better that they're acting like real brothers rather than punish Rodrick telling one lie after another her lie, getting his little brother to lie as well, and blatantly disobeying her and his father right to their faces. Susan doesn't say a word about it to her husband. 

Frank remains in the dark and continues to be just as baffled as she was about the bathroom door. 

Now, Greg and Rodrick start spending time together. He tries to give Greg advice in impressing Holly. He even lets Greg hang out in his bedroom. 

When Frank discovers the party pictures while he and Susan are hosting her editors for dinner, he's justifiably angry that not only did Rodrick and Greg disobey and lied, but his own wife also kept it from him as well. 

Greg and Rodrick are now both grounded. Rodrick gets it worse than Greg. Not only is he grounded longer than his brother, but he's also not allowed to perform in the talent show.
And what does this poor excuse for a brother do? He blames this all on Greg.
"You're my brother. But you'll never be my friend," he says. Harsh!

When the talent show takes place, which the Heffley's are attending, Loded Diper still performs but without Rodrick. 

He's been kicked out of his own band and replaced by another guitarist. 

Rowley is also performing a magic routine in the show, which he's been practicing throughout the movie. He wanted Greg to be his assistant. The selfish, self-centered garbage kid, Greg, couldn't be bothered putting himself out for a friend though he constantly asks Rowley to do stupid things for him all the time.

Seeing that Rodrick is crestfallen, Greg tells his mom that if she lets Rodrick play in the show, he'll agree to be Rowley's magic assistant. She agrees. And everyone ends up happy in the end. A minor subplot in the movie is Greg attempting to become internet famous by using Rowley to do something embarrassing so he can record it and upload it on YouTube. 

In a mid-credit scene, Greg uploads an embarrassing video of his mom dancing badly at Rodrick's concert onto YouTube which goes viral. Again, Greg is a horrible kid. 

The Heffley's lie, and lie, and lie to each other throughout the movie, and come out happy and clean at the end. These aren't small white lies. These are big friggin' lies with bells and lights hanging off them. 

There are some small consequences. Namely, the consequence is Greg being blamed for everything in a Charlie Brown kind of scenario. 

The parents issue punishments but don't keep them. Again, in the end, everyone is happy even though each one of them lied, except Frank. He's just made to look like a clueless dad with no idea what's going on. 

The only decent character in the whole movie is Rowley, who tells Greg he can't lie to Mr. and Mrs. Heffley. Of course, Greg shuts him down. 

Rowley is the only character with a moral compass and conviction.  In the third movie, "Diary of a Wimpy Kid: Dog Days" Greg spends a weekend with the Jeffersons who are portrayed as overly loving, overprotective and well-intentioned. Greg can't relate to them in any way, and of course treats them like inconveniences despite the generosity and hospitality they show him. As far as Greg is concerned, they're a bunch of wet blankets. 

Through the film series, Rowley's dad considers Greg to be a bad influence, so the man has good insight. And yet, they manage to be the only likeable characters in the flick.

The Heffley's are all just stupid. Greg is stupid because he couldn't learn a lesson if his life depended on it. He's also stupid because he treats his own family like trash and doesn't seem to realize it. 

Rodrick is stupid because he's just clueless. Susan is stupid because she can't say no to her stupid kids, and succumbs to her kids' empty promises. And Frank is stupid because he can't seem to take any kind of charge over the family. 

They're presented as a typical American family. While I'd like to think they're not the typical American family, the scary truth is they might just be a depiction of typical American family. The idea that consequences for bad decisions are only what we decide them to be (a stupid idea far from reality) is way too common these days. That seems to be the "moral" of this story. This movie is completely empty. It's empty of humor. It's empty of anything worth retaining. It's empty of personality.

So, I apologize to my kids for allowing them to watch "Diary of a Wimpy Kid: Rodrick Rules." 

A Man for All Seasons (1966) - Springtime for Classics

"I die his Majesty's good servant, but God's first."

Director
Fred Zinnemann

Cast
Paul Scofield - Sir Thomas More
Wendy Hiller - Alice More
Leo McKern - Thomas Cromwell
Orson Welles - Cardinal Wolsey
Robert Shaw - King Henry VIII
Susannah York - Margaret More
Nigel Davenport - the Duke of Norfolk
John Hurt - Richard Rich
Corin Redgrave - William Roper

"A Man for All Seasons," based on Robert Bolt's play of the same name, depicts the final years of St. Thomas More - the Lord High Chancelor of England under King Henry VIII from 1529 to 1535.

I have to say this movie falls into my most absolute top favorite of movies ever made along with other titles like "Amadeus," "The Kid," "The Sting," and "Casablanca." 

The act of watching or listening to a story about a person standing by their convictions and morals amidst pressure for powerful individuals and in the face of injustice, is always relevant. Nothing can be more timeless. 

The story covers a lengthy span of history. The movie opens with Cardinal Wolsey (Orson Welles), Lord Chancellor of England, as he rebukes Thomas More (Paul Scofield) for being the sole member of the King's advisory council to oppose his attempts to put pressure on Pope Clement VII in obtaining an annulment for King Henry VIII's (Robert Shaw) marriage to Catherine of Aragon. 

For those who slept through history class back in high school, the king wanted an annulment because Catherine had not been able to produce a male heir for Henry VIII. So, he wanted to toss her aside and marry another woman, Anne Boleyn (Vanessa Redgrave), with the hopes she would produce a male heir. 

As Henry is a Catholic married in the Catholic Church. The Church takes vows made before God very seriously. Failing to produce a baby boy is certainly no grounds for declaring no marriage ever took place. That's not how Henry wants it, though. 

The King is hell bent on getting his annulment. The Church is more concerned about protecting the sanctity of the marriage. 

As Wolsey tries to get More to support the King's wish, little do they know that Wolsey's aide, Thomas Cromwell (Leo McKern), is eavesdropping on their conversation. 

Back at More's home in Chelsea, a young acquaintance named Richard Rich (John Hurt) has been trying to convince More to grant him a position in the King's Court. More doesn't think Rich is qualified for a position. Rather he offers him a job as a teacher. Rich declines the offer as he wants a position that will make him known in elite circles. This leaves him frustrated with More.

Also, More's daughter Margaret (Susannah York) is in love with a young lawyer named William Roper (Corin Redgrave). Though More is fond of young Roper, he refuses to allow his daughter to marry him because he's a Lutheran. If he wants to marry Margaret and have More's blessing, Roper must reject his heretical beliefs and return to the Catholic faith. 

After Cardinal Wolsey dies in the walls of a monastery, banished from the King's Court for failing to budge the Pope on the annulment issue, More is given the office of Lord High Chancellor. 

Having accepted the office, the King himself pays his dear friend More and his family an impromptu visit at More's home. He wants to ensure he has More's support in his annulment pursuit. King Henry thinks it should come easy as the two are friends. 

Orson Welles and Paul Scofield as Cardinal Wolsey and
Thomas More in "A Man for All Seasons."

More respectfully stands firm in his moral principles despite the King threats, promises of special favors, and screams. 

When the King departs, Cromwell finds Richard Rich and grants him his coveted position in the King's Court. His use of Rich is something sinister, but Rich doesn't see that. He's impressionable and way too covetous of influence and prestige.

Cromwell ultimately finds use in Rich as a witness to bring down More and get him out of the way of the King's annulment pursuit.

Seeing that the Church won't give him want he wants, King Henry demands parliament and the bishops to break ties with the Church and declare him "Supreme Head of the Church of England." Of course, they agree to these demands. 

More knows he cannot agree to any of these actions. So, he silently resigns as Lord High Chancellor. More is then pressured from all sides to just verbally accept that the King was never married to Catherine. At least, it would make his life easier.

His close friend and Third Duke of Norfolk, Thomas Howard (Nigel Davenport) tries to get More to reveal his true opinions on the situation during a private chat. More, however, knows that speaking openly with anyone, no matter how close they are to him, is a bad idea. 

Cromwell meets with More and says he can get off the hook if he just attends the King's wedding to Anne Boleyn. More, however, doesn't attend. So, he's brought back to Hampton Court for questioning about some trumped-up charges about accepting a bribe while employed as Chancellor.

More is smart and says very little. An angry and frustrated Cromwell tells More that the King views him as a traitor but lets him leave the interrogation regardless.   

Later, Margaret tells her father that a new oath is going around England and all must take it. Refusal to do so will be considered high treason. 

More doesn't initially refuse until he sees how the oath is worded. The oath declares the King as the Supreme Head of the Church. Well, to hell with that! 

More ends up imprisoned in the Tower of London. He will not take the oath, and much to the displeasure of his captures, does not explain why. 

He then encourages his wife Alice (Wendy Hiller), daughter and son-in-law not to defend him. But rather, he asks them to flee England. 

More is brought to trial with all kinds of false testimony thrown at him, even by Richard Rich who claims in court that More told him Parliament doesn't have the power to make the King head of the Church. 

While the outcome of the trial leads to his unjust death, More's success is found in his legacy of courage in the truest meaning of the word, and ultimately in his sainthood. 

There's something ongoing about the true story of More. Hence, the title. This period of his life is an example to be imitated for all seasons.

It's just as relevant in today's sociopolitical climate. Certain ideologies are treated like a religion. These blatantly false and repugnant ideas about individuals have a tight squeeze on our culture. Anyone who dares argue against them will be excommunicated, or cancelled as the kids call it. 

As for More, he could have verbally accepted in for the sake of being left alone regardless of what his conscience dictated. But as apologist G.K. Chesterton observes, tolerance is the attitude of those who do not believe in anything. 

Of course, today, More would likely be shouted at and branded a "hater." Angry mobs would mercilessly throw a label on him that ends in "ist" or "phobe."
Little is as alluring as power and influence. More chose a clean conscience. The rest of us, depicted through the other characters, especially Rich and Cromwell, easily fall under that weight and can easily give up our moral values for the "respect" of others, to meet their preferences, and win their favor and empty praise. When power is offered, weak people can rationalize anything, especially when a seat at the table is at stake. 

Robert Shaw as Henry VIII along with Paul Scofield.

In one scene, the Duke of Norfolk asks More, "Oh confound all this. I'm not a scholar, I don't know whether the marriage was lawful or not but dammit, Thomas, look at these names! Why can't you do as I did and come with us, for fellowship!"
More replies, "And when we die, and you are sent to heaven for doing your conscience, and I am sent to hell for not doing mine, will you come with me, for fellowship?"
"A Man for All Seasons" is a truly respectable film. And though the political situations and murky injustice against More initially seems complex and complicated, the story is told rather simply. It's an easy film to follow. 
More's story is a testimony to what courage really is - a word thrown around much too loosely to the point of nonsense these days. 
"If we lived in a state where virtue was profitable, common sense would make us saintly. But since we see that avarice, anger, pride, and stupidity commonly profit far beyond charity, modesty, justice, and thought, perhaps we must stand fast a little - even at the risk of being heroes," More later tells his daughter. Why does that ring so true in today's society at home and abroad. 
There is one conversation that stands out in film. I often hear it quoted in political discussions or see it printed in articles. 

After Rich unsuccessfully attempts to coax More into voicing his opinion, Alice, Margaret and her husband William voice their concerns about him, suspicious Rich is a spy.

"Father, that man's bad," Margaret says.

"There's no law against that," he replies. 

"There is! God's law!" Roper insists.

"Then God can arrest him," More says. 

His family grows impatient as Rich continues walking away. 

"While you talk, he's gone!" Alice says. 

"And go he should, if he were the Devil himself, until he broke the law."

"So, now you give the Devil the benefit of law," Roper asks.

"Yes! What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil?"
"Yes, I'd cut down every law in England to do that!" Roper replies.
"Oh? And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned 'round on you, where would you hide, Roper, the laws all being flat? This country is planted thick with laws from coast to coast. Man's laws, not God's! And if you cut them down, and you're just the man to do it, do you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then? Yes, I'd give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety's sake!"

Rule of law matters, even for those whom one disagrees with. 

It's worth mentioning that director Fred Zinnemann has some rather notable film titles under his belt - "High Noon" (1952), "From Here to Eternity" (1953), "Oklahoma!" (1955) and "A Nun's Story" (1959). "A Man for All Seasons" is a gem on his crown donned for his mark in cinema. It's a political story so it's likely going to ignite some political discussion among audiences for all times.