Les souliers de Saint-Pierre

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.

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.

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.

This film, directed by Michael Anderson and 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.

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.