Over Rated + Boring

Over-rated - clearly YES
Boring - mostly YES

Idea was OK
Plot development could have been better as script overall was weak

There were some solid acting performances but it was hard to get overly excited about them since the story seemed drawn out and going nowhere until the end.

Clearly a bad choice for Best Picture

Back to OP then:

(i) & (ii) I am 48 & watched on BBC2 yesterday afternoon for the first time.

(iii) & (iv) Not a fan or hero worshipping

Thought the film was absolutely brilliant - think I'll go & watch it again if it's on the iPlayer yet.

Well, you're unlikely to find it interesting if you are not interested in history, or if you like films with a lot of violent action etc. You should probably stick to Star wars.

[deleted]

The movie is for adults who appreciate thoughtful, subtle dialogue and don't demand non-stop action in order to be entertained. For further information: the plural of "criterion" is "criteria' not "criterions;" your assertion that any movie based on kings etc. of medieval times is pretentious is beyond silly and makes me believe you are a troll--pretentious of what? Do you include, say, Game of Thrones in that indictment?; the author's name is Bolt, not Holt; the movie is not set in the Middle Ages, but the Renaissance. If you don't understand movies made for mature audiences, you shouldn't go around commenting on them.

This is one of the best movies I have ever seen and very few movies have connected to me so deeply as this one has. The reason for this deep connection is I believe the philosophy I try to live by. I have been deeply influenced by Ayn Rand's writings in the past. The two biggest positive attributes of the best characters of Rand are integrity and refusal to compromise. While one cannot practically live by those virtues to the absolutes, I try my best. It was a great experience to see one such real life personality so beautifully portrayed on film by Scofield, directed by Zinneman. Had I been alive during the time of Thomas More, I would have called him a fool, wept for him and made him my idol. I still did that by the end of the movie.

[deleted]

I absolutely get your point. This movie requires 1. a familiarity with Henry VIII's struggle with the church, 2. an interest in this subject, and 3. a keen ear for dialogue. The film becomes interesting to a viewer who sees these historical figures come to life and we get to know them better, specifically Henry, Cromwell, Norfolk, and Thomas. The ongoing battle between Richard and Thomas, and Richard's growing personal hatred of Thomas, brilliantly sets up the trial IF you like this sort of thing. I would be hard pressed to find a screenplay with so much great dialogue. There are an uncountable number of lines that use metaphor, vocabulary, turns of phrase, and wit to elucidate the most complex of ideas and the most subtle of meanings. The excitement of the story has to do with Thomas ability to be defiantly principled and yet in doing so, not endanger his friends or family. He outsmarts the snake Cromwell at every turn. By the story's end, we think back to his blunt, rather embarrassing rejections of Richard and remember that his own family warned him to put Richard down. In some ways, it was Thomas's own perfectionism that lacked humanity and led to his fall. Richard uses his ambition to try to blackmail Thomas, and he succeeds, doesn't he? That part was damn fascinating to me. But I only came to admire the writing after watching it a second time. This film is for a small audience. It got 6 Oscars and does anyone remember it or talk about it? No.