In den Schuhen des Fischers

Gulag worker Kiril Lakota is soldering pieces of metal together in a Soviet prison camp when he hears his number over a loudspeaker. He is summoned to the office of the premiere of the Soviet Union -- the same man who had imprisoned him 20 years earlier. The premiere asks the man, a bishop in the Ukrainian Catholic Church, if he is ready to go back into the world. The next thing he knows, Kiril is on a flight to the Vatican, where he is greeted and lauded by the pope. Later, the pope dies and through a complicated system, Kiril is elected pope and uses his own name as the name he will use during his papacy. Before being elected, Kiril has befriended Fr. David Telemond, a brilliant but controversial priest who is suffering from a terminal blood disorder and whose works are suspect. Later, as Pope Kiril I, he names Fr. Telemond as his personal secretary, over the advice of a well-meaning but jealous older cardinal. The petty squabbles of the cardinals, the love affair of a television journalist who covers the Vatican, the distress of the man's wife and the sharp differences between the rich and the poor of the Vatican soon pale, however, when World War III looms because the Chinese people are starving and no one has come forward to help. When Pope Kiril I comes up with a solution that will feed the Chinese people and avert a 3rd World War, the church is shocked and the people laud his actions. What does he decide to do? Watch the movie to find out ... it's well worth it.

The performance of Anthony Quinn as Kiril I is truly outstanding -- his Ukrainian accent, his almost mystical yet practical manner and his eloquent speeches make this an Oscar-worthy performance (why he wasn't nominated, I'll never know). Oskar Werner as Fr. Telemond was equally touching. Flattered at being chosen to be the pope's friend, secretary and confidant, he comes to realize he has taught the pope many things while learning a few things himself. Thinly based on the life of Fr. Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, Oskar Werner gives a moving performance as the terminally ill, brilliant but troubled priest-philosopher-thinker. This is by no means a perfect movie --- some of the clothes are dated and the music at the party where the reporter meets up with his mistress is annoying. But minor flaws aside, this is a wonderful movie that gives tremendous insight into the workings of the Vatican, the papacy and even the human heart.

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."

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.

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.

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.