Conclave

Review by Mark Woodring

Didn’t Dan Brown write a book about a conspiracy surrounding a dead Pope and the conclave convened to elect the next Pontiff?

Yes, he did; but not like this.

**NOTE: this post may be updated with audio once we actually have the chance to talk about it. Until then, you can read Mark’s review below. Remember, though, you can listen to all our discussions of this and every other movie directly over on ACAST. Stay tuned.**

Conclave - Review

Conclave (Focus)120 Minutes, Rated PG
Written by Peter Straughan, Robert Harris
Directed by Edward Berger

Synopsis:

When Cardinal Lawrence is tasked with leading one of the world’s most secretive and ancient events, selecting a new Pope, he finds himself at the center of a conspiracy that could shake the very foundation of the Catholic Church.

Dan Brown also loves to write books that “shake the very foundation of the Catholic Church,” so there’s that.

Conclave is a much more serious take on the idea of men of God selecting the leader of their church.

But men of God are still Men, and that means that they can be swayed by less than divine events.

Conclave is a much deeper dive into this world than Dan Brown could ever hope to give us.

The best thing about Conclave is watching this movie is seeing the relationships between the various cardinals develop, as well as the thoughtful examination of the factions that develop in any organization of size which wields influence across a large group of people.

Religion has been fractured since its inception. If it hadn’t, we wouldn’t have the almost innumerable sects we have today, plus the countless groups which have fallen into the dustbin of history across the millennia.

The cast of Conclave is top-notch, with Ralph Fiennes doing the heavy lifting. And lift he does. Trying to wrangle over 100 Cardinals, all with the weaknesses of normal men, vying to control who will lead them, while also trying to determine who among them is actually unworthy to seat in the Throne of Saint Peter due to those beyond the pale weaknesses and acts…

It’s a trying time for a man with doubts about his faith.

Lithgow is, sadly, underused, despite his role as a frontrunner. He appears in many scenes, but those mostly consist of panning shots across the conclave as votes are read out. This is depressing, as his actual scenes are quite well done.

Stanley Tucci has a bigger role, as his friendship with and endorsement by Fiennes’ Cardinal Lawrence, as well as his place as one of the ideological fronts which is wrestling for control, mandate it to be so. And he is great.

Of course, red herrings abound in this mystery, and quite frankly, “was the Pope killed, and if so, why?” is never a serious contender here. There are other mysteries, and all are examined to the point where they are both confirmed and eventually removed as the central mystery of the film.

And Conclave is ultimately about mystery: the mystery of the church, as well as the mysteries of the men who would lead it.

Without spoiling too much (aside from those who have read the book, which my research shows hews pretty close to the film), I can offer you the following tidbits of information and opinion:

  • The incongruity of the ancient Church of Rome with the trappings of the 21st century is both jarring and unintentionally humorous; the robed clerics of Catholicism scrolling through their smartphones and vaping…
  • The lure of power and position is the weakness of all men, even though who would try to convince us otherwise. And yes, that includes the politicians YOU favor over the OTHER ONES.
  • This movie does not avoid the topic which has long enveloped the Roman Catholic church: the being traditionalists vs progressives in terms of how the church will operate.

I am unsure as to whether the author of the novel on which this is based, Robert Harris, who is a former journalist, is overtly religious or anti-religious, because this story can go either way…

…especially in light of the unexpected reveal at the end. Not the completely predictable climax, but the reveal that follows.

I have always found it easy to separate “art from artist” in terms of politics, meaning that I could generally care less what politics an actor or director personally espouses when I evaluate their work. Is it difficult sometimes?

Absolutely, but if art is made and distributed for mass consumption, it must be evaluated such as it is, not as I would have it evaluated based on my personal opinion of whatever someone involved with the film might believe.

But throughout history, religion has been a bit of a “sticky wicket” if you will. This isn’t politics, it’s a life philosophy which transcends politics. You can’t simply register and vote out your religious leaders. Sure you can leave a particular religion, but that is so very often a monumentally difficult thing to do that even years later, can bring pangs of regret to someone who has done the leaving.

I, myself, was raised in a Roman Catholic household, and while I now (semi-facetiously) describe myself as the “only true Catholic: the lapsed Catholic,” I found myself at times uncomfortable with some of the directions Conclave seemed to be taking its narrative.

How then to judge such a film? I must work a bit harder to distance my evaluation from MYSELF and back toward the art, while also continuing to maintain enough objectivity to not go “easy” on the film.

I posted to social media immediately after screening Conclave that:

“I’m not ready to call Conclave the best movie [of] the year yet. But I’m not NOT calling it that yet, either.”

The weaknesses of mankind, then, rear their head.

Objectively, Conclave is a beautiful film. One cannot shoot a film set in Vatican City and the Sistine Chapel and not have it come out looking impressive, and Conclave delivers on that aspect.

The performances, as noted, are good to great, and worthy of discussion, as Conclave is being released in what we know as “awards season,” and is a film which easily falls into the established category of “Oscar bait.”

So, then, Conclave is a “good movie” by any objective standard. I can say that.
Can I say I liked Conclave, being as it hits so close to many of the beliefs I was raised in, despite my distance from them in the intervening years? Yes. Yes, I can.

Do I find myself disappointed in myself for saying that? In some ways.

Conclave raised many excellent arguments about religion in general and Catholicism specifically. Any reasonable argument for or against must be looked at and, if not accepted, then dismissed with reason worthy of whatever faith you follow (or not, depending).

At the end, I think more people who have grievance with the Catholic Church will laud this movie than those with more blinding faith in it. Indeed, I saw somewhat a sense of glee from some of my fellow critics following the screening, as if they were simply happy to see someone poke at the church they way they would, regardless of what deeper meanings might be present there.

Conclave does not shy away from issues of faith, doubt, and the sin of certainty in the church. Funny, then, to realize these three words are just as easily conjured in a discussion of secular issues.

There is a line in Conclave that I felt compelled to write down, despite my own distance from the church of my youth. After a religious terrorist attack damages the Vatican and kills some of those gathered outside, the factions of “old” and “new” church, the “conservative” and “progressive” wings as they debate how the church will respond, given the history of the religions. Both views provide some legitimate point of view, but these words struck me hardest:

“The Church is what we do next.”

“What we do next” is a phrase that again, can be applied in so many areas of all our lives outside religion, but here, they perhaps sway these men of God away from the travails of “men” and back towards “God.”

Conclave is an excellent, if difficult, movie, all things considered, but one I recommend, and will likely see again.

Conclave hits in theaters this Friday, October 25 and stars Ralph Fiennes, John Lithgow, Stanley Tucci, Lucian Msamati, Isabella Rossellini, Sergio Castellitto, and Carlos Diehz.

And remember, if the BEST thing you can say about a movie is that it’s “visually stunning,” then they’ve done something wrong.

Please don’t forget to LIKE, SHARE, and FOLLOW us on:

And please, if you like what we do, consider helping us keep on entertaining you. You can use this handy link:




 

Or, you could check out the merch in Our Store:

VSMP Merch Store

Not only will you be helping us out if you pick up some merch, you get cool stuff to wear around (including the coveted WTFWT? logo!)


 

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,