One scene that confused me... - A Man for All Seasons (1966) Discussion

[–] TudorLady 13 years ago

I think it could be that Rich is associated with Cromwell and More is wary of him. He knows that Rich is seeking power and a position at court and is doubtful of his motives. When More says 'you couldn't answer for yourself as far as tonight' I think he may be referring to when Rich quotes Aristotle and then when More questions him about it he says it was nothing. I might be wrong but I think More was a good judge of character and was not prepared to recommend Rich to anyone.

He wasn't far wrong as it turned out!

The King's Good Servant but God's first

reply

[–] DC1977 13 years ago

Thanks for the response.

Rich quoting Aristotle occurred much earlier in the film, right at the start before More became Chancellor.

The scene I'm referring to takes place after the King visited More once he had become Chancellor.

I could understand More being suspicious of Rich but this was far more noticeable in this scene than at any previous stage in the film and even Will Roper seems to know of Rich by reputation.

The scene just doesn't add up for me.

In any case, even further down the line, I'm surprised that More would have even spoken to him when Rich visited him in the Tower to take away his books!

This led to the perjury that condemned More.

reply

[–] zgystard 13 years ago

As a man trusted by the king and later chancellor and experienced in the ways of the law and power and the royal court, More obviously knew quite well what the score was in general and had sources of his own. You don't get that far if you don't. He sized Rich up very quickly.

Remember the scene as More is leaving to see the cardinal when he talks to Norfolk. Norfolk says, "What does he [Rich] want?" More replies: "What do they all want? A place at court." Norfolk: "Do you recommend him?" More: [pause] "No."

Roper's "Oh!" is explained just by assuming he's heard at least rumor.

As for More speaking to Rich at all, in the movie More simply pitied him at some level and didn't see any reason not to have an innocent conversation. But the earlier relationship between More and Rich is not historical. Bolt invented it for dramatic purposes, and it worked beautifully.

reply

[–] DC1977 13 years ago

Thanks for the response and I do remember the scene where More says to Norfolk that he doesn't recommend him to a place at court.

However if Rich was THAT bad I don't see why More wouldn't steer clear of him altogether instead of offering him a house and a teaching post.

The 'you couldn't answer for yourself as far as tonight' scene still doesn't work for me. It seems as though something is missing as though another scene has been cut from the film especially as Rich actually has nothing to answer for.

Everyone suddenly perceives him as being 'bad' as though Rich has just done something wrong but he hasn't.

reply

[–] cwente2 13 years ago

I understand your sense. It seems like there's something missing in the film. In the play, however, there's a longer build up to the "Rich, you couldn't answer for yourself even so far as tonight" bit. There's more from Roper as well added into the mix. Had Bolt left the entirety of the exchange in the play in the film we wouldn't be having this conversation at all. Can't for the life of me figure out why he didn't.

reply

[–] DC1977 13 years ago

Thanks, I'll check out the play to see whats missing.

reply

[–] cwente2 13 years ago

DC,

In case you haven't a copy of the play handy, here's what I mean (from the "published" version):

Roper -- Oh, if you stand on your office --

More -- I don't stand on it, but there are certain things I may not hear!

Roper -- Sophistication. It is what I was told. The Court has corrupted you, Sir Thomas; you are not the man you were; you have learned to study your "convenience"; you have learned to flatter!

More -- There, Alice, you see? I have a reputation for it.

Alice -- God's body, young man, if I was the Chancellor I'd have you whipped!

(enter STEWARD)

Steward -- Master Rich is here, Sir Thomas.

Rich -- Good evening, sir.

More -- Ah, Richard?

Rich -- Good evening, Lady Alice. Lady Margaret.

Margaret -- (Quite friendly but very clear) Good evening, Master Rich.

(A pause)

More -- Do you know -- (indicates Roper) William Roper, the younger?

Rich -- By reputation, of course.

Roper -- Good evening Master ...

Rich -- Rich.

Roper -- Oh. (Recollecting something) Oh.

Rich -- (Quickly and hostilely) You have heard of me?

Roper (Shortly) Yes.

Rich -- (Excitedly) In what connection? I don't know what you can have heard -- (He looks about; hotly) I sense that I'm not welcome here!

More -- (Gently) Why, Richard, have you done something that should make you not welcome?

Rich -- Why, do you suspect me of it?

More -- I shall begin to.

Rich -- (Drawing closer to him and speaking hurriedly) Cromwell is asking questions. About you. About you particularly. (More is unmoved) He is continually collecting information about you!

More -- I know it. (Steward begins to slide out) Stay a minute, Matthew.

Rich -- (Pointing) "That's" one of his sources!

More -- Of course, that's one of my servants.

Rich (Hurriedly, in a low voice again) Signor Chapuys, the Spanish Ambassador --

More -- --collects information too. That's one of his functions. (He looks at RICH very gravely)

Rich -- (voice cracking) You look at me as though I were an enemy!

More -- (Putting out a hand to steady him) Why, Richard, you're shaking.

Rich -- I'm adrift. Help me.

More -- How?

Rich -- Employ me.

More -- No.

Rich -- (Desperately) Employ me!

More -- No!

Rich -- (Moves swiftly to exit; turns) I would be steadfast!

More -- Richard, you couldn't answer for yourself even so far as tonight.

You see, there's a little more there that makes the occasion for "... you couldn't answer for ..." more understandable. Later, the debate between More and Roper is more involved and much more confrontational than in the film -- Eg., Roper says, "I've long suspected this; this is the golden calf; the law's your God." etc. . . .

reply

[–] DC1977 13 years ago

Thanks very much for taking the timee to do that :-)

I'm still not completely clear what More is referring to when he says 'You couldn't answer for yourself even so far as tonight' :-(

reply

[–] cwente2 13 years ago

Well, hard to explain undramatically. To me, the key is the line in the play: Rich -- "I'm adrift. Help me." It's like he's being seduced by Cromwell, though he won't, or can't, say it. The line, though pleading, is a kind of blackmail attempt. If you don't "employ me", Cromwell's waiting to "employ me" in ways unfriendly to Sir Thomas. Rich can't answer for himself straight-forwardly in this regard -- as Sir Thomas would have liked him to do, and as Sir Thomas would, himself, have done. Not to mention Roper's unspoken suggestion that Rich may "already" have been a part of Cromwell's scheming, and Rich's abruptly nervous response to the implication. . . Helpful?

reply

[–] angelosdaughter 12 years ago

I think More senses Rich's desperation and also that he is for sale. Such a person is not trustworthy. I haven't watched the movie for awhile, but I think this happens after a prior conversation in Rich mentions something about Cromwell being willing to help him and More says something like, "If you have Cromwell's help, you don't need mine.' Whereupon Rich responds, "You don't know how much I'd rather have your help than his." Rich has tipped his hand. More knows he can't be trusted. Roper who I think has been at university with him, may also be aware of Rich's lack of scruples.And so it proves out. Witness Rich's conversation in Cromwell's office in which he is assessing what Rich would be willing to do for his patronage. Before long, Rich in response to Cromwell's probing questions, finally admits he would do whatever is necessary.

reply

[–] deeveed 12 years ago

I have to hand it to More. I find him a very interesting personality as he was in office and consequently in service at the highest levels of government to some of the great and most powerful people of that time. He was definitely not naive when carrying out his duties and making assessments of men and their character (the Tudor monarchy could've looked and populated differently in positions of the realm if he ran it)From the looks of it, he had a built-in Tudorian bs detector. He must have had a great sense of service to unfortunately have to hang out with fellows like Rich and his ilk which were many.

reply

[–] Hancock_the_Superb 13 years ago

Well, Rich has already established himself as willing to do anything to gain power, no matter how humiliating or amoral.

In the film the key scene is More's conversation with Rich after returning from Wolsey. More offers Rich a very generous position which he spurns: "If I was a great teacher, who would know it?" I think from that moment on More gets that Rich's interest is power, not public service. Rich doesn't seek More's friendship so much as he wishes to take advantage of Sir Thomas's generosity.

There were a few scenes in the play which flesh this out better. I remember a long and complicated scene early in the play involving the Common Man, Cromwell, Rich and Chapuys the Spanish Ambassador, where Rich already shows willingness to collude with Cromwell if it serves his purposes. He's also said to have been badgering Wolsey in a way similar to More and gets a low position as Norfolk's bookkeeper or some such.

I do think the movie simplifies the drama a bit by focusing on More and reducing the supporting cast's complexity. The above scenes with Rich develop his character more sharply, but I think enough is present in the film to draw conclusions.

"Greater love hath no man than this, that he lay down someone else's life for his own."

reply

[–] TwittingOnTrender 13 years ago

I also thought it was bizarre that Thomas ran off at the mouth so much when Rich came to take away his books. He must have known how dangerous he was, why would he instigate a friendly conversation, and one so potentially damning? I assume standards of evidence were different then, and it does seem to have been something of a kangaroo court, but this "evidence" was totally uncorroborated.

No Guru, No Method, No Teacher.

reply

[–] cwente2 13 years ago

I'm not so sure More "ran off at the mouth". He was, no doubt, deperate for someone to talk to. He was in complete isolation, remember. And, he knew Rich was a bright fellow and could engage his mind -- for a few brief moments. Irresistable! The "potential" you talk about was only "dangerous" should Rich lie about what was said -- as he did. In this, More's desperation produced the single mistake (believing Rich would not have stooped so low as to flat-out lie under oath) that would ultimately cost him his life.

reply

[–] TudorLady 13 years ago

More believed the conversation was 'off the record', a discussion between two lawyers which would not be admissable in court. However, Cromwell was desperate for a conviction and was taking no chances. The jury was rigged and he knew Rich was desperate for power and would do (or say) anything to get it. There was no way More was going to be be found not guilty.

The King's Good Servant but God's first

reply

[–] deeveed 13 years ago

The jury was rigged and he knew Rich was desperate for power and would do (or say) anything to get it. There was no way More was going to be be found not guilty.

Definitely a show trial. Unfortunately, I get into the film so much that I hate to see Rich lie like a rug and ask how can such a remark go by without an violent objection from More in a "court of law". But such are the happenings in a particular reign. Henry, the "Defender of the Faith", what irony. And I can see how More has to wave off Rich's remark. He can't fight a stacked deck after a blatant lie.."I am a dead man". I take the slight "wave" as More swiping off an insect off his being. In another way, More is 'free' from his enemies with that lie.

reply

[–] davidlrattigan 8 years ago

I don't recall what aroused More's suspicions, but it showed him to be a shrewd judge of character.

I thought More's words to Rich alluded to those of Jesus to Peter on the eve of his crucifixion: "This very night, before the rooster crows, you will disown me three times."

Having said that, Rich is more of a Judas (whose betrayal Jesus also predicted) than a Peter.

reply