The Shoes of the Fisherman (I) (1968) User Reviews

A Sinful Treat

[johngiovannicorda · 7/10 · 2 May 2018]

Morris West's novel carries an element of prophecy but the film is far too heavy in every department to, ultimately, be taken seriously and yet you do. I did. Anthony Quinn is a credible Kiril, the priest who survived years in a Siberian prison to become Pope. There is enough humanity in Quinn to make that leap in our hearts and minds - that is a massive plus in favor of this huge super production - Laurence Olivier tries a new accent as the Russian premiere and okay but when the Chinese Chairman is played by Burt Kwouk - you know Kato in the Pink Panther movies - I had to readjust myself and start from scratch. Oskar Werner belongs to another movie altogether but he's wonderful as the priest questioning his faith. Vittorio de Sica and Leo McKern play two Cardinal/Politicians with saintly ambivalence but it is the soap opera outside the Vatican that drags the movie out of everywhere. David Janssen, famous then because TV's "The Fugitive" looks really uncomfortable. Alex North provides a respectful and resounding score. The long sequences about Vatican procedure are priceless and I will recommend it because here I am, weeks after I've seen it, thinking about it which means I've enjoyed it more than I should have. What a ridiculous thing to say, right? Right.

Putting It All On the Line

[bkoganbing · 7/10 · 20 June 2006]

The film adaption of Morris West's best selling novel Shoes of the Fisherman gives the viewer a rare insight into the workings of the Catholic Church. Even the most dogged of unbelievers have always conceded that in this form of the Christian faith there has always been a grand pageantry at work.

It also a great example of life imitating art. Anthony Quinn is the former Archbishop of Lvov who was sent away for many years by the Communists to time in the Gulag. As a gesture of goodwill the Soviet Premier played Laurence Olivier gives him his release. Quinn and Olivier also have a history of their own, Olivier was the KGB official who interrogated Quinn back in the day and we know what their interrogation methods were like.

Upon reaching the Vatican, the Pope played by John Gielgud makes him a Cardinal. A few months later Gielgud dies and in the conclave to elect a new Pope, it's decided that Cardinal Quinn has some insight into an unbelieving part of the word that no one else possesses. So Quinn steps into The Shoes of the Fisherman.

So we have the first non-Italian Pope in 400 years as we shortly did in real life. Quinn inherits a world in crisis with China suffering from famine and threatening war against its neighbors to obtain food.

I can't reveal what Quinn actually did in the film, but it seems as though he took his cue from Pope Benedict XV who also tried to use his good office to end World War I and also organized relief efforts. In any event, he put it all on the line and I do mean all.

Tony Quinn and Laurence Olivier had a history of their own. They co-starred on Broadway in Becket with Olivier as Becket and Quinn as Henry II. Though there sure wasn't anything wrong with the film adaption that Richard Burton and Peter O'Toole did, it might have been nice to see the original cast perform this.

In fact my favorite in this film is Olivier. With the Soviet Union now broken up we can look back now and see the problems confronting each Soviet premier as they tried to hold their polyglot state of several republics together. Olivier's Kamenev is in the tradition of Leonid Brezhnev who was in charge at the time of the Soviet Union. It's with complete seriousness that the actor playing the Chinese premier calls him half a capitalist already. Of course when Mao died, the Chinese have become more than half capitalist themselves.

Others in the cast of note are Oskar Werner as a non-conforming Jesuit who espouses some heretical doctrine who Quinn finds intriguing and Leo McKern and Vittorio DeSica as a pair of politically astute Cardinals.

Good location shooting nicely blended with newsreel footage of crowd scenes give the film a real authenticity. I think Catholic viewers will like Shoes of the Fisherman especially.

Beautiful Film

[spanishflea50 · 8/10 · 21 November 2006]

I think this film is absolutely wonderful and a very noble piece of film. The film shows the details of the Catholic conclave with an accuracy rarely seen in novels let alone films. The ceremonial elements are very well observed and very nicely shot, the transfer on the DVD is also very good. Apart from that the story is also very intelligent and touching. I like the fact that the faith of Father Tallymond and Pope Kiryl are discussed in such detail and I finished the film feeling very moved. However I would give the film 8 out of 10 because of two caveats. Firstly the story of the American TV reporter's love triangle which is already a bit underdeveloped in the book is rendered completely pointless here as he has virtually no impact on the rest of the story. This might be excusable if it were well done but it is very stilted and in my opinion is the only bit that seriously dates the film. Also the film is a little long and could probably be pruned of this storyline without much difficulty. My only other caveat is that if you aren't interested in religion, theology or philosophy there isn't really a lot going on in the film. this is not a criticism for me but just a warning.

I love the film!

[joe-852 · 2 June 2005]

Rome and Papal Rome, the ceremonies associated with both, chant including the Gregorian type are lavishly displayed in this beautiful film. However, all of that would just be decorative were it not for the interesting personages: Father David Telemond's poetically flawed theology pitted against Lakota's "simple" faith that saved him from despair in Siberia. The extraordinary character (played with great beauty and humanity by Leo McKern) of Cardinal Leone whose encyclopedic catechism finally gives way to utter humanity and forgiveness in his final encounter with Quinn now Pope. The scattered negative comments form mostly laudatory reviews, I think, stem from people who can't "get into" the less than obvious moments of dialog which require some patience but also a modicum of background into Rome and its history. Sometimes I fear that Americans (and I'm one) can't sit still for anything that isn't an action picture. For me, and I've seen the film countless times, its beauty both in the evocation of Rome and the extraordinary exchanges between the characters makes it a unique cinematic experience.

Interesting but overlong picture about a new Pope and his fights to spread justice

[ma-cortes · 7/10 · 24 December 2014]

Set in a futuristic vision of the late 1980's, Ukrainian Archbishop Kiril Lakota (Anthony Quinn , though Rex Harrison was originally considered to play the role) is set free after spending several years as a political prisoner in Siberia where carries out forced works . Although it is never mentioned or indicated at any point in the film, the story is actually set 20 years in the future . The Ukrainian man is brought to Rome by Fr. David Telemond (Oscar Werner) , a troubled young priest who is under scrutiny for his beliefs and befriends him and he contends adversities until rising to cardinal and lately Pope . Once at the Vatican, he is immediately given an audience with the Pope (John Gielgud , he subsequently played Pope Pius XII, in The Scarlet and the Black (1983) and Elizabeth (1998), where he played Pope Pius V) , who elevates him to Cardinal Priest . The priest turned Pope singlehandedly attempts to stop bigotry , strife , famine , world conflict , his own personal conflicts and many other difficulties . As the world is on the brink of war due to a Chinese-Soviet feud made worse by a famine caused by trade restrictions brought against China by the U.S. When the Pontiff suddenly dies , Lakota's genuine character and unique life experience move the College of Cardinals to elect him as the new Pope But as a good pacifier , he has to find a solution to Chinese starvation , plus the crisis between China (Burt Kwouk as Chinese leader) and Russia (Laurence Olivier, as one of the Russian Premiers) . Meanwhile , a correspondent (David Janssen) attempts to patch his petty marital troubles at a loving triangle between wife (Barbara Jefford) and young lover (Rosemary Dexter) .

This is a moving but overlong film and in some moments results to be dull ; based on Morris L. West's best seller that contains drama , interesting world policy , emotion and historical events . Good film with thought-provoking issues and dealing with an Ukrainian's rise from a simple imprisoned priest to the college of Cardinals until becoming Pope . The film is pretty well but being wasted by a loving triangular drama between a reporter , spouse and girlfriend . Very good acting by Anthony Quinn as Pope Kiril I who must now deal with a lot of problems as his own self-doubt , the struggle of his friend priest and tries to fend off atomic war ; this type of treatment was a big turning point for Quinn . Reference is made to Kiril being the first non-Italian pope to be elected since Adrian VI 400 years earlier . In real life, this happened 10 years after this film was released with the election of Pope John Paul II .

The footage showing the arrival of the Cardinals and the crowds gathering in St. Peter's Square is taken from news reels and other archive films that documented the events between the death of Pope John XXIII and the election of Pope Paul VI in 1963 . Colorful and evocative cinematography by Erwin Hillier , filmed in Panavison . Rousing score by Alex North , though he reused the opening fanfare he wrote for 2001 (1968) but which had been rejected by Stanley Kubrick, as one of the main themes in his soundtrack . This epic point of view of a rise of an obstinate locked priest from a Siberian prison until Cardinal and Pope was well directed directed by Michael Anderson though emerge some flaws , being alternately compelling and uneven .

Tu est Petrus.

[brogmiller · 7/10 · 23 January 2021]

One would have expected this film to be a magnet for the faithful but alas not enough of them paid the price of admission to enable it to emerge with a profit.

The 1960's was a decade of seismic social and political change. It also marked a change in people's viewing habits and with increasingly younger, less literate audiences, spiralling costs and the disintegration of the studio system the film industry had to adapt or die. Whatever its merits this 'blockbuster' with its intelligent script, 160-minute length and 'intermission', seems strangely anachronistic.

Good acting is timeless of course and there are performances here that are absolutely riveting.

It is the individual scenes between seasoned professionals that are so impressive, notably Anthony Quinn as Pope Kiril, Oskar Werner as Father Telemond , Laurence Olivier as Premier Kamenev and Leo McKern and Vittorio de Sica as Cardinals Leone and Rinaldi. I am not the only reviewer to regret the strange absence of inveterate scene-stealer de Sica from the second half of the film. Olivier is a great presence and looks suitably menacing behind his spectacles but his Russian accent here is no more convincing than it was in 'Demi-Paradise' twenty five years earlier. Leo Mckern's acting can be a little 'fruity' at times but he is wonderfully restrained here and really impresses in his reconciliation scene with Quinn, who gives arguably the finest of his post-Zorba performances. There are insufficient superlatives to apply to Oskar Werner who is simply stunning.

Great support from Frank Finlay, Paul Rogers and John Gielgud who prove that there are no small parts, only small actors.

David Janssen has a totally thankless role as a link man and the two women in his life simply confirm that the female of the species has a different agenda.

Needless to say the production values are excellent and the fabulous art direction reflects the fact that permission to film in the Vatican was denied.

The score by Alex North includes music from his score to '2001' which had been rejected by Stanley Kubrick.

By far the most interesting issue raised is that of the Vatican's political stance. The main objection to Pope Kiril's meeting with Premier Kamenev and Chairman Peng is that they represent Communist regimes. This calls to mind the Vatican's support for Fascism earlier in the century.

Also striking are scenes where Father Telemond, whose character is supposedly based on Darwinian Pierre de Chardin, is questioned regarding his alleged heresy. Definite shades of the Inquisition here.

Although the ending seems simplistic it does raise the inevitable question as to why there is such a massive disparity between the wealth of the Catholic Church and poverty of the majority of those it purports to represent.

Great performances and little else

[JuguAbraham · 7/10 · 25 July 2002]

I first saw this film in 1971 and was in awe of the selection process of the Pontiff that the film presented in lengthy yet pleasing detail. Even today it would be difficult to access the locations within the Vatican the film showed. The real hero of the film is Morris L West, the author of the book, who could foresee the selection of a Pope from a Communist country, just as H G Wells predicted the landing on the moon.

The mainstay of the film beyond the story are the performers (in order of merit): Oscar Werner, Anthony Quinn, Leo McKern, John Gielgud, Laurence Olivier, Vittorio De Sica, and David Janssen.

This was probably the finest performance of Oscar Werner. It is indeed unfortunate that he did not live to endear us long after this movie was made.

Quinn on the other hand had played somewhat similar roles; his "Barrabas" was very close to this one and probably a richer performance; so was his "25th Hour" where he has to suffer when he is mistaken for a Jew in a Nazi labour camp. Quinn finest moment, and probably the film's strongest scene, was the incognito Pope praying as a Jewish rabbi would at the bedside of a sick man. The lines following the scene with Barbara Jefford (the Doctor wife of a TV reporter) spoken by Quinn "You never mentioned the word love" is probably one of the few strong lines in a lackadaisical script that are truly uplifting.

Leo McKern is a good actor and I would rate this performance as his second best--second only to his Ryan in Lean's "Ryan's Daughter". The scene where he admits his guilt of being jealous is very well developed.

De Sica is good always great as an actor and as a director. After great scenes in the beginning of the film, De Sica's character vanishes which is a major flaw in the film. John Gielgud has played a Pope often ("Becket" for one) that he just slips into the role like a glove.

Laurence Olivier is great to watch but ridiculous to hear him deliver his lines. Even though he is able to play the role of the Russian leader well, his Russian English based on a heavy "th" sound only provides amusement. This would have succeeded had he persisted in bringing more Russian sounds in his speech. In comparison, Frank Finlay is more Russian than Olivier in this film. Actress Rosemary Dexter has proved her acting capability in Swedish films providing good foil to reputed actresses like Bibi Andersen; yet she has got insignificant roles in films like this one.

The screenplay and direction are weak but the subplots involving David Janssen and Oscar Werner add life to the listless screenplay. Though the movie has its strong moments, the intervention of international politics involving superpowers make the film and West's story unbelievable.

1960's movie foresees changes in the Catholic Church

[barryrd · 8/10 · 19 February 2015]

This film, based on the book by Morris L. West, was made in 1968 and seemed far ahead of its time but it is remarkably accurate in predicting the trends we would come to witness with subsequent popes. No longer are popes crowned with a tiara. We have seen a pope from the Communist bloc and three non-Italian men have served as pope. Francis, the current pope, mirrors many of the traits of Pope Kiril with his emphasis on social justice and the stories of his secret forays into Rome. Anthony Quinn offers up a pope who is humble but also wise. Despite the shock of his election, he knows who is the boss. One scene outside the Vatican is very moving as he visits a dying man, who happens to be Jewish. We also see a pope who is comfortable amid the hurly-burly of city life.

The film draws the viewer into the movie with scenes we have often witnessed from St. Peter's Square of huge crowds at the time of a pope's death and the subsequent election of his successor. David Jansen is the erudite broadcaster talking to American audiences about the workings of the Vatican and the progress of events. There are the processions through the square, close-ups of statues around the square, puffs of black and white smoke telling onlookers the status of the balloting, and the tolling of bells. The movie goes behind the scenes and takes the viewer back to the square with the throngs waiting in anticipation until the drama is over. In this film, it reaches a finale with the coronation and in particular, the words of the new pope.

I found the pomp and pageantry and the sacred traditions surrounding the death of a pope and the election of a successor to be well described and displayed. The inquisitorial nature of the pontifical commission grilling the Oscar Werner character is what we are given to believe about the Vatican's treatment of theologians. Werner was outstanding in his role as an avant grade theologian breathing new life into church dogma against the rather staid and anti-intellectual Vatican insiders. Vittorio de Sica was excellent as the urbane Secretary of State. Leo McKern, as the conservative Cardinal Leone, was shown to be a man with some foresight and compassion. John Gielgud had a brief but impressive role as the aging pope welcoming Kiril Lakota to the Vatican. A large-scale movie with an excellent cast, I would gladly see the it again.

"What do you think of Christ?"

[sherwin-1 · 7/10 · 2 March 2002]

This movie makes the Catholic Church look good; I wish that it was true. After twenty years in a Russian prison camp, Kiril Lakota is released and taken to the Vatican. He was asked, "What have you learned after twenty years of confinement?" "I have learned that without some kind of loving, a man withers like a grape on a dying vine."

Soon after his arriving, the pope died. None of the 'favorites' were chosen for his successor. On the seventh vote Kiril was elected to be the new pope. He brought a different perspective to the Vatican than his colleagues were used to seeing. He didn't let his position go to his head, but rather wanted to get out of his confines and feel the pulse of the community. "We're all in prison one way or another." "What do you think of Christ?"

This movie did however make one point to me. Even though the Catholic Church is a system far from perfect, there are people in it who God is leading, who 'walk in the shoes of the Fisherman,' and who live unselfishly to help their fellow men in need. 'How does a man ever know if his actions are for himself or for God?" "You don't know. You have a duty to act, but you have no right to expect approval, or even a successful outcome."

Neither novel nor movie prescient, based on real men

[ovcharenko · 9/10 · 8 December 2015]

Recent viewers and reviewers tend to marvel at the "prescience" of the movie and the novel it is based on, mistakenly associating the election of the Slavic pope with that of John Paul II some years in the future. In fact, novelist Morris West based the character of Kirill Lakota on two Ukrainian (Byzantine Rite) Catholic bishops, who were actually persecuted by the Soviet regime and imprisoned in Siberia. Patriarch Josef Cardinal Slipyj was released in 1963 thanks to the efforts of the presiding Pope (and JFK), and lived in Rome until his death in 1984. The movie screenplay and Quinn as actor do convey well a great deal of Slipyj's character, who was a tall, imposing presence with a fierce intellect and inspiring faith.

Fictional Pope from SocialistCountry resembles real life Polish Pope

[movie-viking · 7/10 · 8 February 2011]

A pretty good movie...You have to understand...All popes were Italian--until Karol Wojtyla was elected in the late 70s as Pope. The former Wojtyla...survived both the Nazis and the Communists.

Thus, this movie's fictional Pope has much in common with the real life first non-Italian Pope - Karol Wojtyla - also from a then-communist country--Poland.

At the Vatican, the cardinals (in their desperation to reach a vote---and to elect a Pope who would be a good leader) elect the new Cardinal from then-communist Russia - former Ukranian Prisoner ##102592R - Kiril Pavov Lakota...who had served 20 years in a Siberian labor camp (later called "gulags").

There are various subplots---described by others here. But the big plot is the threat of nuclear war between the Soviets and the Chinese (who are suffering a huge famine & who might use nuclear weapons).

As some Americans are now taught that the "Cold War" was no big deal, this movie's dangerous international situations will no doubt seem fake. But read up (far & wide) the Cold War (and the thread of nuclear war) was real. (I knew a man who said...his plane carried a nuclear warhead!)

While some of this movie is a bit too late 1960s---and a touch creaky, maybe this movie will inspire some to research (in multiple places) the AMAZING essentially nonviolent way that Communism fell apart in the Soviet Union & its European satellites.

And --in the 1980s---a US President, a British Prime Minister, a Polish working man, ...and a Polish born Pope were the main ones to "tear down the wall"!!!

A super special chance to tour inside the Roman Catholic Church...

[Nazi_Fighter_David · 8/10 · 7 October 1999]

Kiril Lakota (Anthony Quinn), a Russian priest, is suddenly released from Siberia after twenty years' imprisonment and brought to Rome...

At his arrival to the Vatican, Archbishop Lakota is received like a prince and is immediately created Cardinal Priest by the ailing Pope (John Gielgud).

Lakota develops a friendship with Father David Telemond (Oskar Werner), an unorthodox Jesuit forbidden to teach... Telemond is the author of ten books none published, with works under examination by a special Pontifical Commission... He is suspected of holding opinions dangerous to the faith...

Discussing one of his book, Kiril states to the young philosopher that 'faith' kept him alive... Kiril makes it clear that he finds Telemond's book, a challenge to the Catholic faith... Not one word of the 'soul' was there mentioned...

Before the Pontifical Commission, Father Telemond manifests: 'I believe in the future union of the world with the cosmic Christ.' He is interrupted by an announcement that the Pope has passed away... The film shows how the Pope's ring is defaced, his seals broken, his apartments locked and sealed...

Cardinals from all over the world arrive to the Vatican City for the election of the new Pope... The Cardinals are pleased by Lakota's ideas: 'Life is a gift of God,' he declares. 'We should manufacture the authentic Christian revolution... Work for all... Bread for all... Dignity for all men...'

To the surprise of the outside world, he is elevated to the throne of St. Peter by the College of Cardinals led by Cardinal Rinaldi (Vittorio De Sica).

Kamenev, the pragmatic Russian premier (Laurence Olivier) congratulates the elected Pontiff and sends him a gift... The gift had its meaning for the Russian Pope... Kamenev, who was once Kiril's hated interrogator, is anxious to avoid war with China... He turns to Kiril, now spiritual leader of 800 million people, for help...

Kiril, bound to charity with a duty to act, begins to understand the cruel world he knows so little about... He could not even remember that he is Peter!... He is remembered that he just starts to climb his calvary...

Anthony Quinn plays with human characterization the tormented Russian priest plagued by self-doubt... He is dispatched to Rome so that Russia will have a friend in the papal court in case China should rise against her...

Laurence Olivier plays the tormentor Russian Premier who does not count on the fact, of course, that the one-time Siberian prisoner will ultimately become the new Pope...

Oskar Werner is excellent as Father Telemond, the silenced theologian who believes that 'man is born in bondage to his own history.' Father Telemond shows a brilliant mind reaching out to the last frontiers of thought... He lives a deep spirituality with extraordinary depth and beauty, but fails to live in peace in a church he dearly loves...

Leo McKern portrays Cardinal Leone who had preferred to be a country priest rather than a 'walking encyclopedia of dogma.' Cardinal Leone is jealous of Father Telemond, jealous that he has the intimacy, trust and affection of the elected Pontiff...

There are several subplots in the film, one of which includes a romantic triangle with a television reporter (David Janssen), his doctor wife (Barbara Jefford) and the Italian girlfriend (Rosemary Dexter) who won't let him go... Kiril, as Pope, is carried into this when, sneaking out of the walls of the Vatican to mingle anonymously with the crowds, he accidentally encounters Dr. Ruth Faber and helps her solve her marital problems while they are both attending a dying Jew... The scene remembers us the European princess, Audrey Hepburn, in her "incognito" informal tour of Rome, out of Palace duties, in William Wyler's "Roman Holiday."

Based on Morris West's best-selling novel, "The Shoes of the Fisherman" is a super special chance to tour inside the Roman Catholic Church, discover dynamic performances, but plenty of turbulent questions that were needed to be answered...

Anthony Quinn personified the humane saintliness of the Pope to be, with vulnerable humility, boundless inner strength

[ruby_fff · 7/10 · 3 April 2005]

Prompted by the news on Pope John Paul II's passing, I thought of Anthony Quinn's role in "The Shoes of the Fisherman" (1968). I caught it one evening on cable TCM (Turner Classic Movies). Quinn certainly delivered a convincing cardinal Kiril Lakota in director Michael Anderson's 1968 MGM film version of writer Morris West's novel, with a stellar supporting cast including Laurence Olivier, Leo McKern and Oskar Werner. He inhabited the role completely with such grace and facility, making the moments of hesitancy and dialogs with humility so real. For instance, he made the little detour segment so sensitively endearing. Author Dan Brown's "Angels and Demons" may be an intriguing suspenseful read revolving around Catholicism and the 'mysterious' Vatican, but Anthony Quinn's performance made "The Shoes of the Fisherman" an interesting movie to watch about the Vatican's Conclave process; the film score by composer Alex North is also appreciated. (If you've visited the Vatican in Rome, it makes viewing and reading about the papacy the more fascinating.)

I thought: by the infinite wisdom of the Lord, what a way to remind us that death is inevitable to every man, even the Pope. Many of us complain about so much deaths these days in ongoing wars, unforeseen disasters, yet things seem to happen for a reason and death being a part of the process of life. Yes, it's easy to comment when the loss of someone dear is not so close to home - still, 'natural' happenings, cause unbeknown to us (mortals cannot see the reasons why), can very well be blessings in disguise, and the (divine) design for what might be to come. Here's to the succeeding "Fisherman" with all the inner strength needed.

Earnest, but dull

[JoeytheBrit · 5/10 · 3 May 2002]

THE SHOES OF THE FISHERMAN is an earnest but dull movie that tells the story of the election of a former Russian political prisoner (Anthony Quinn) as pope at a time when the world is on the brink of nuclear war. Even at a mammoth 160 minutes, this movie, which is based on Morris West's best-seller of the same name, seems to only skim the surface of the story it tells, as if trying to cram in as many aspects of the novel as it possible can, when some judicious pruning is really what is called for so that the core issues can be explored further. For example, the way it stands at the moment, Quinn's ascendance to the office of pope seems to be the result of one conversation he has with a handful of cardinals, a fault that severely weakens the credibility of the plot. Meanwhile, David Janssen's poorly-defined character, a journalist unfaithful to his wife, is totally superfluous to the main thrust of the plot, and acts as nothing more than a clumsy device to drive along the narrative. I can't help feeling that more fruitful use of the running time could have been made by concentrating more on Quinn's rise to power, and also by exploring further Quinn's potentially fascinating relationship with the Russian premier (Laurence Olivier) – the man who consigned him to Siberia, and then orders his release 20 years later. Also, Oskar Werner's young priest with unorthodox theological views that bring him into dispute with the synod, takes up a disproportionate amount of screen time.

One plus point: Anthony Quinn is perfectly cast as the reluctant pope, injecting just the right amount of humility and self-doubt to the part.

Movie must be understood in the context of 1968

[Mark-Rhoads2 · 13 November 2003]

With respect to those viewers who evaluate this film as entertainment, to fully appreciate and understand the many sub-plots, a viewer would have to understand something about Roman Catholic theology, the currents of 1968, and the popular philosophy of the French Jesuit Pierre Teilhard de Chardin with some people such as the author of the book, Morris L. West. The Oskar Werner character of Father David Telemond is a good surrogate and advocate for Chardin but he is not Chardin. Chardin is mentioned by Werner during the inquiry of the Papal Commission into Father Telemond's writings. The real Chardin believed in what Telemond calls "The Cosmic Christ" "the point to which all of human evolution is advancing." Telemond and Chardin would explain that a good God still allows man to use free will to chose the wrong things, to commit crimes, even mass crimes such as war, because those things are part of the natural breakage that always happens in any production process. But they would also argue that faith would ultimately bring mankind closer to God on a very long but not infinite timetable. Pope Kiril thinks there is beauty and power in Telemond's writings but cannot understand Telemond's views on theology. "There is little of the Catholic faith as I know it in your writing." The Pope tells him that faith alone saved him from insanity in the Gulag of Siberia in the USSR. In his background, fundamental toughness, and simple faith, the fictional Pope Kiril (1968) is an amazing precursor to the real Pope John Paul II (1978). Tellemond protests, "God is there but by a different name." Telemond is finally accused by Cardinal Leone of heresy because he says that if his faith were taken away he would still believe in the world and its goodness--an idealistic but still secular world view. Pope Kiril is willing to sell off the wealth of the Church to help starving Chinese people because he understands that is the only way to prove to Chairman Peng and the world that the church believes in what it preaches. The loneliness of his decision is framed by terror when Cardinal Leone tells him, "This is Calvary, Holiness, and you have just begun to climb." That is the most profound line of a great many profound lines in the movie. One does not have to be an intellectual to appreciate the film which succeeds on its own terms as entertainment. But people who think it is boring just have no concept of what the film is really about. For acting and content, this is one of the best films of the last 50 years.

Life doesn't imitate art

[lawrencejohnson804 · 6/10 · 15 September 2014]

Some reviewers here find it remarkable that "Shoes" predicts a Slavic Pope, and then, lo and behold, John Paul II is elected just ten years later. He was a Slav; and that's about the end of the similarities. John Paul II was from a good, middle-class background and no crazy Socialist like Pope Quinn; he was never in a gulag or Commie prison, either.

If this was supposed to be the Church in the late '80's, I can only say: I wish! It seems like the biggest change at the Vatican, according to this goofy movie, was the papal apartment: John Gielgud seems to be hanging out in a Vegas hotel. And no one seems sad when he dies: all the Cardinals wear their festive lace rochets during the mourning period when traditionally lace was set aside. Oh well, the budget was probably fairly limited after the expenditure on the look-alike Sistine chapel.

There were, however, a couple of things where art imitated life: the ridiculous subplot with David Janssen was meant to reflect West himself, always angry at "the Church" because of his adultery and failed marriage. So, there has to be a "sympathetic" philanderer/adulterer to let West grind his personal ax a little. Likewise, the weirdo priest played by Werner needs to be there to spout all the silly ideas from the 50's and 60's that West and his pals thought were going to change the Church and the world.

One curious but unverified footnote: like Pope Kiril, Paul VI supposedly ordered a white business suit made; but when he tried it on (in the words of a friend), he realized he looked like a bald, little Italian man in a white suit, and that was the end of it.

Some beautiful scenes of Catholic ceremonies, nice views of Rome; otherwise, tedious, dated, and preposterous.

The Russian Gambit

[Uriah43 · 7/10 · 23 October 2018]

Having been imprisoned at a labor camp in Siberia for over 20 years, a Catholic archbishop by the name of "Kiril Pavlovich Lakota" (Anthony Quinn) is transported from there to Moscow to confer with the premier of the Soviet Union "Piotr Ilyich Kamenev" (Laurence Olivier). As it turns out, Kamenev was once the warden of the labor camp and knows Kiril extremely well. And it's because of this that Kamenev has decided to release him back to the Vatican in the hope that this gesture will help him with a much more serious problem involving a severe famine in China that threatens to envelope the world in a nuclear war. To his surprise, his gambit pays immediate dividends with the unexpected death of the current pope and the subsequent selection of his replacement-Kiril Pavolvich Lakota. Now rather than reveal any more I will just say that I enjoyed the manner in which the director (Michael Anderson) managed to capture the pomp and circumstance involving the Vatican and the selection of a new pope. I also liked the performances of Oskar Werner (as "Father David Telemond"), David Janssen ("George Faber") and the aforementioned Anthony Quinn. On the other hand, I didn't especially care for the performance of Burt Kwouk (as "Chairman Peng") or the rather simplistic and abrupt ending to the film. But even so I enjoyed this film and have rated it accordingly. Above average.

Incomparable performance

[mpcurtis-72830 · 6/10 · 22 March 2019]

I think anyone would agree the film has severe faults, but Quinn's performance is excellent. Yes, it's better than Zorba. Anyone can play a Bohemian; playing a believable pope is much harder. Whether one likes it or not, we now have a real liberal pope, but the world of the 60s was not ready for one, especially with nightly Vietnam War protests taxing conservative's hearts. His liberalism and a meandering script hurt the film at the box office.

Excellent movie, but a smidge dull

[gonecuckoo · 8/10 · 30 July 2015]

I have to give this movie an 8 out of 10, which isn't too bad.

First off, I remember seeing this movie on cable, in the VERY EARLY days of cable, and I had to have been maybe nine or ten at the time.

It wasn't until about a year ago, that I saw it for the first time when I really understood what was going on with the characters.

Anthony Quinn, usually a ham and a half, turned in a very restrained, yet passionate performance as a man who was bulldozed into being a pope. He wasn't expecting to even be named as a Cardinal after his release, much less get elected to the Papal Throne! Poor thing looked like he'd been smacked with a board when they all stood up and started nominating him, in spite of VERY vociferous protests.

Oskar Werner, who is rapidly becoming one of my favorite actors, was just as passionate as Father Telemond, the troubled young priest (really? Wasn't he in his forties at the time? But that's a teeny quibble.) I watched as he was taken to pieces by the first commission, and yet throughout it all, he didn't really lose his temper. He knew what the outcome would be, no matter what he said, so he told the absolute truth. The Church needed a good kick up the bum and he was the one attempting to do so. Too bad it was pretty much inured to being kicked.

There are ways around being silenced and forbidden to publish that he could have taken and didn't.

A. Leave the Church (which he admitted that he couldn't do), and publish anyway.

B. If he had any REALLY good friends on the outside that were in a position to do so, he could have sold them the publishing rites for a dollar, and publish that way. They weren't bright enough to think of that option or forbid it to him, so technically, he wouldn't have been disobeying them.

Unfortunately, he was much too honest of a man and priest to do that, so he accepted their decision.

The subplot with David Janssen, his unhappy wife and cutesy putesy chickeeboo could have been eliminated completely, and made for a much tighter film.

The subplot with the Chinese nation being on the verge of starvation and NO ONE HELPING!!! was a little bit hard to believe. You can't tell ME that the Red Cross, and other relief organizations wouldn't have come a knocking on China's doors to help out, no matter what the U.S. etc. said. Their purpose is to help those in need, PERIOD END OF STORY!!! I was saddened at the death of Fr. Telemond, but really, since they spent a lot of time talking about it, it was pretty much expected.

The scene between Anthony Quinn and Leo McKern was touching. I knew that Cardinal Leone was jealous of the relationship between the Pope and Fr. Telemond, but it was nice to see him finally acknowledging it.

The ending was a bit, I dunno, cheesy isn't the word to use, but it didn't seem all that genuine to me.

Sure, the speech was nice enough, but it just didn't really have any 'oomph' to it, I suppose.

Still and all, excellent movie, but a smidge dull.

Anthony Quinn makes an excellent Pope

[michelleishappy · 7/10 · 17 April 2022]

Excellent scenes of the Vatican. I've been there about 25 years ago, and one never forgets the grandeur. Abd that's the beautiful contrast in this movie: the humble, simple Priest, elevated to Cardinal and then swept into the Papacy.

An Ukrainian Catholic bishop is elected Pope and tries to prevent WWIII.

[Deusvolt · 8/10 · 13 May 2005]

The election of a Pope from behind the former Iron Curtain has come to pass. The proposition that China would launch a military invasion of its neighbors to feed its starving masses was implausible even in 1968. All the major powers, including the former Soviet Union would not have stood for it. And today, with China being the most active powerhouse of the world economy whose interests are intertwined with the United States and the European Union, the proposition of a Chinese military adventure for economic gain seems preposterous.

What remains to be current in the film is the subplot regarding Fr. Telemond (Oskar Werner) who is based on the real-life Jesuit scholar, Fr. Teilhard de Chardin, a paleontologist who got in trouble with the Roman Curia because of his attempt to reconcile science and religion through a new theology based on the natural sciences. This aspect of the film came to mind as I followed developments on the controversy between proponents of the "intelligent design" approach in teaching science versus the secular evolution approach.

In the film, Fr. Telemond in expounding on his theological evolution before a papal commission of the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith could not adequately explain his adherence to the idea that God created the world through evolution when it was pointed out to him that evolution proceeds through violence (cf. "survival of the fittest") which would mean that God is the "author of violence" as Cardinal Leone (portrayed by Leo Mckern) put it. In hindsight, the Catholic Church had long ago made peace with evolution when Pope Pius XII said that it doesn't matter how the creation of the world is explained as long as it does not preclude or deny the existence of The Creator.

The current brouhaha in Kansas is the product of a misunderstanding of evolution both by the religionists and the agnostic-atheists. The theory of evolution along the now classical Darwinian lines does not explain the origin of life but only the diversity of life. Much less does it attempt to explain the origin of the universe.

Unfortunately, the enemies of religion ever since the Enlightenment have tried to use science to disprove the existence of God and there are those among them, either misinformed or malicious, who teach that evolution and astrophysics have negated the idea of the existence of a Creator. Current understanding of quantum physics imply that the substance of matter in its smallest manifestations may not be "material" after all, in the sense that "matter" has been understood. Einstein, of course, has shown the equation between energy and matter. But more recent discoveries borne out of smashing atoms and subatomic particles indicate that the smallest quanta are capable of uniting with other particles not because of their materiality nor even of their energy content, but because of the information they contain. Thus, the perceived self-organization of "matter" seems to be guided by antecedent information it contains. So the intriguing question is begged: Who put that information there?

Clearly Kiril was sent to the Gulag because he is a Catholic Bishop in an atheistic Soviet empire. Worse, he is Ukrainian Catholic. Even under Czarist Russia, a confessional state under Greek Eastern Orthodoxy (in this case Russian because the Greek Orthodox Church is divided along national lines), Catholics were frowned upon. The Ukrainian Catholics though not Roman Rite Catholics, have their own rite and are united with the Holy See. And of course, the Ukrainians never thought of themselves as simply an ethnic group within Russia but as an actual nation, an attitude that did not sit well with the ruling powers at the Kremlin.

Trivia: In both the movie and the book, members of the Curia wondered whether Pope Kiril would use the traditional crucifix (a cross with the corpus depicting Christ) as his pectoral cross, the sign of his office as Bishop of Rome according to the Latin Rite or, whether he would use an icon. As historical perspective, the Iconoclastic Controversy (when some quarters interpreted images as idolatrous in the Old Testament sense) in the Byzantine Empire was resolved by allowing representations of God and His saints in flat or semi-flat media as in painting and mosaics but not in the round as in statues. Pope Kiril stuck with the icon. Typically that would have shown Christ on one side and the Virgin Mary as the Mother of Perpetual Help on the other.

You would note also that Kiril opted to use his own name with his title of Pope foregoing a tradition of taking the name of a saint or predecessor whose examples a pope wishes to emulate during his reign. This was well as it should have been because Kiril is obviously named after St. Cyril, who with his companion St. Methodius converted the Slavs to Christianity. They, of course, came from the Eastern Roman Empire (now referred to by historians as the Byzantine Empire) whose center of power was Constantinople where Greek had supplanted the Latin of the fallen Western Roman Empire.

The line I liked best in the movie was delivered by the Soviet Premier (played by Olivier) who, upon seeing Bishop Lakota (Quinn) after so many years in the Gulag, remarked (and here I freely quote from memory): "Before you acted as if you had the truth in your own private pocket and no one could dispute it with you. But now you don't seem so sure. I like you better now."

An absolutely sublime film

[GusF · 10/10 · 16 March 2015]

Based on the 1963 novel of the same name by Morris West, it tells the story of a Ukrainian archbishop named Kiril Lakota who, after being released from 20 years imprisonment in a Siberian labour camp, is elevated to the Cardinalate. He does not want the position, begging Pope Pius XIII for "a simple mission with simple people," but it is essentially forced upon him. When the Pope dies, Cardinal Lakota is elected to succeed him and even more reluctantly accepts that position, taking the papal name Kiril I. In the meantime, the world is on the brink of full scale nuclear war due to a breakdown in Sino-Soviet relations exacerbated by widespread famine and starvation in China.

Anthony Quinn is simply marvellous as the brilliantly characterised Pope Kiril, a man of great intelligence, wisdom, compassion and dignity. In a wonderfully understated performance, he plays the new Pope as a quiet, contemplative man who cares deeply about the world and its people, Catholic and otherwise. He finds being called to fill the shoes of the fisherman not only a daunting task but a lonely one too. Feeling cut off in the Vatican, he has his personal aide find him the black cassock of an ordinary priest so that he might walk through the streets of Rome in disguise, something which may have been inspired by "Henry V". Tending to a Jewish man on his deathbed, he recites the Kaddish which he learned from a rabbi in the prison camp. He is a true man of the people.

Laurence Olivier is typically excellent as Kiril's former jailer Piotr Kamenev, who has likewise moved up in the world as he has become the Soviet premier. Another very strong character, he was presumably named after the early Soviet politician Lev Kamenev. By no means another Stalin, he is an intelligent and pragmatic, though conservative, Communist. He has no more desire for nuclear war than anyone else. As he realises that the Pope can influence millions of voters in the Western democracies, he seeks his assistance in mediating talks with China's leader Chairman Peng. Olivier has relatively little screen time but commands the screen whenever he appears on it and he has great chemistry with Quinn.

It has an excellent cast overall: Oskar Werner as Father David Telemond, who becomes Kiril's closest friend but is silenced by the Vatican for his heretical views; Leo McKern as Cardinal Leone, who often disagrees with the Pope's decisions; Vittorio De Sica as Cardinal Rinaldi, who proposes Kiril's election to the papacy and who sadly disappears from the film after its first half; David Janssen as George Faber, the Rome correspondent for an American TV network who doesn't take "Thou Shalt Not Commit Adultery" too seriously; Barbara Jefford as his long-suffering wife Dr. Ruth Faber; Burt Kwouk as Chairman Peng, one of his most serious roles; and, in a fantastic cameo, the great John Gielgud as Pope Pius XIII. It has also nice appearances from Clive Revill, Niall MacGinnis and Marne Maitland in small roles, though Frank Finlay is atypically bad in his one scene role as Igor Bounin.

The film benefits hugely from its top-notch script. It is filled with great characterisation and the dialogue is beautifully written. It is an extremely intelligent film which does not condescend to its audience. Much of the film concerns the internal politics of the Vatican, very much a world onto itself, as well as the Vatican's role in the politics of the outside world. It also features a fascinating examination of Christianity in general and Catholicism in particular through Father Telemond's unorthodox beliefs. Kiril's relationship with him is the most interesting part of the film. The Sino-Soviet subplot is extremely effective. On the other hand, the (unresolved) one concerning the Fabers' failing marriage is the least interesting part of the film but it's still well done.

It is very, very well directed by Michael Anderson, who gives the material a suitably epic feel. Shot entirely in Rome, the film made excellent use of the beautiful scenery of the Eternal City but, at the same time, it was not afraid to show its underbelly in the scenes where Kiril visits one of the poorest parts of Rome while disguised as a priest. They don't make them like this anymore, I'm afraid.

Lack of a concrete storyline damages an otherwise enjoyable religious drama.

[mark.waltz · 5/10 · 27 October 2011]

Almost semi-documentary like in its telling of the processes of electing a new pope, "The Shoes of the Fisherman" is more of a message to the wealthy Catholic church than an actual movie. Told in just over 2 1/2 hours, the film starts with Russian Bishop Anthony Quinn being released from captivity in Siberia after 20 years, and his appointment to a cardinal-ship in Rome by Pope Sir John Gielgud. No sooner has Quinn stepped into his cardinal robes than the Pope has passed away, and the viewer gets an in-depth look at the process of replacing him. It soon becomes clear that the cardinals are not in agreement of who should be pope, and when Quinn simply expresses his simple values of world peace and solving hunger issues in Communist China (which has the world on the verge of another war), he suddenly finds himself getting votes from supportive Cardinals. Elected pope against his will, Quinn soon learns some harsh secrets about being in such a position of power, especially that it is a very lonely life. Like Zorba the Greek, Quinn's Russian Pope wants to see as much of the world as he can to understand it, and he disguises himself (like Audrey Hepburn in "Roman Holiday") as a common man to see it. He runs into the troubled wife of an American reporter (whose infidelity had earlier been revealed), and helps her solve her crisis while she takes care of a Jewish patient. Back in the Vatican, the Pope finds out about resentments from Cardinal Leo McKern (giving a bravo performance) over Quinn's liking for a troubled young priest, and learns of what he must do to survive this lonely life. What comes at the end is very touching, and even quite important in the current state of affairs.

Quinn, as usual, gives an honest performance that reveals this character's humanity. He is quite likable from the start, and it is very apparent that such a pope (wearing civilian clothes when he goes off on Vatican business) could never exist, even in post Vatican II society. The problem is that this is a 2 1/2 hour character drama with no real conflict, just a series of situations revealed he must face when chosen pope. If there was more development in the story of a possible third World War which needed the church's interference, I could give this a much higher rating. It is beautifully filmed, and features a nice supporting performance by Sir Laurence Olivier as the Russian official who has Quinn released, and later meets with him to discuss the possibility of war and the resolution of world wide famine. I highly recommend it, but not without reiterating that it feels somewhat incomplete. In spite of its long running time, the film is not boring at all, and actually seems to move quite fast in spite of the lack of a story.

one of my favorite films

[AFFCON · 6 May 2002]

Technically, this is not a great film, but I'm still a sucker for Shoes of the Fisherman. I love its idealism. As a Catholic, I love the vision of courage that this film holds out for the Church -- it is the way I wish it really were. This film has an epic quality to it, with expansive, lavish settings and a rich texture. This is one of the few films I can watch again and again and enjoy every time.

This movie is not without its flaws. The editing is awkward and the film could have been tightened a bit (okay, a lot!). One of the things that bugs me is how the character of Cardinal Rinaldi (the Vatican Secretary of State played by Vittorio De Sica, who is pivotal in the early part of the movie) disappears in the second half without any explanation.

Also, the sub-plot with David Janssen as a philandering television reporter is annoying and superfluous. His only redeeming contribution is in how, during his reports, he provides good exposition about the traditions involved in burying one pope and electing the next.

But these things pale next to Oskar Werner's wonderful, understated perfomance as a philosopher/archeologist/priest who becomes friends with the soon-to-be Pope Kiril. (This character, Fr. David Telemond, is clearly based on Pierre Teilhard de Chardin.) The relationship of suspicion and affection between these two men is very engaging.

Werner has one of the best lines in the film when, after his character is censored by a pontifical commission, he says, "The Church. I hate her, still I cannot leave her. I love her, still I cannot live in her in peace." I think that line is beautiful and sums up the way many Catholics feel!

Finally, I have to say that I am not a big Anthony Quinn fan. I usually found him to be hammy. (I think he got a little too much mileage out of his Zorba schtick!) But in this film, he is wonderfully restrained. He gives a soulful performance as a reluctant hero who has suffered much and now only wants to be left in peace, but who also feels the call of his God and his fellow human beings. In my opinion, even though it is largely ignored by the critics, Quinn gave his best performance in Shoes of the Fisherman.

Isn't it interesting how life imitates art...

[waestrem · 10/10 · 19 June 2004]

I have enjoyed viewing this film several times. While I agree with other reviews that claim the film is a bit dull at times, I am inclined to agree more with their contention that it is an earnest film. Anthony Quinn provides a powerful and moving performance as the humble priest.

What has always struck me about this film is how the events depicted seem to have been realized in history as fr Karol Joseph Wojtyla, a polish priest, was selected by the College of Cardinals to wear the shoes of the fisherman as Pope John Paul II. In the film, Kiril Lakota was supposed to be the former archbishop of Lvov (Lviv). Today, Lviv is a Ukrainian city close to the Polish border. At other times in history, Lviv has been part of Poland.

The timing of events in Poland that led to the selection of Pope John Paul II were a precursor to the collapse of the Soviet Union.

I plan to watch this film again as the successor to Pope John Paul II is selected. I am not a catholic, but I find this glimpse into the traditions of the catholic church to be very interesting.