The Shoes of the Fisherman (1968)

Director:

Michael Anderson

Writers:

James Kennaway (writer)
John Patrick (writer)

Release Date:

14 November 1968 (USA)

Genre:

Drama

Plot:

Set in a futuristic vision of the late 1980's, Ukrainian Archbishop Kiril Lakota is set free after two decades as a political prisoner in Siberia...

Plot Keywords:

Pope | Cardinal | Archbishop | Famine | Priest

Awards:

Nominated for 2 Oscars. Another 3 wins & 2 nominations

Cast

Anthony Quinn	...	Kiril Lakota
Laurence Olivier	...	Piotr Ilyich Kamenev (as Sir Laurence Olivier)
Oskar Werner	...	Fr. David Telemond
David Janssen	...	George Faber
Vittorio De Sica	...	Cardinal Rinaldi
Leo McKern	...	Cardinal Leone
John Gielgud	...	The Elder Pope (as Sir John Gielgud)
Barbara Jefford	...	Dr. Ruth Faber
Rosemary Dexter	...	Chiara
Frank Finlay	...	Igor Bounin
Burt Kwouk	...	Peng
Arnoldo Foà	...	Gelasio
Paul Rogers	...	Augustinian
George Pravda	...	Gorshenin (credit only)
Clive Revill	...	Vucovich

Runtime:

162 min

Country:

USA

Language:

English | Latin

Color:

Color (Metrocolor)

Aspect Ratio:

2.20 : 1

Sound Mix:

70 mm 6-Track

Certification:

Australia:PG | Canada:PG (Ontario) | New Zealand:G | Finland:S | Sweden:Btl | USA:G | Argentina:Atp

Filming Locations:

Cinecittà Studios, Cinecittà, Rome, Lazio, Italy

Company:

Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer (MGM)

Trivia:

Alex North reused the opening fanfare he wrote for 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968) but which was rejected by Stanley Kubrick, as one of the main themes in his score.

Quotes:

Piotr Ilyich Kamenev: Every day we ask ourselves what can we do about it before the nightmare turns itself into a mushroom cloud blotting out the sun.

Movie Connections:

Featured in On Location: The Shoes of the Fisherman (1968)

Movie must be understood in the context of 1968

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.