Conclave

Conclave is just basically a really good movie. Nothing moves too quickly; actors acts; characters are characterised; the plot points are set up and paid off; we are kept guessing until the last possible moment; and the denouement is surprising, but not too surprising. 

The Guardian critic felt that the plot was to some extent lifted from National Velvet. I kept thinking of that time Mary Ingalls stood agains Nellie Olsen to be class president. There are only so many ways you can tell a story with voting in it. At one  point one of the Cardinals hoists up a large lampshade by pointing out that the papal conclave is becoming rather too much like an American political convention. Another one is concerned they might end up choosing the least worst candidate for Pope.

The (fictional) holy father has died, leaving the (equally fictional) English Cardinal Thomas (Ralph Fiennes) to officiate over the election of his successor. Thomas is a liberal -- he doesn't want to go back to the time when Catholic families had to have ten children and thinks the church should take a "common sense" approach to gay people. Other liberals support him: but he positively doesn't want to become Pope, and is actively campaigning against himself. The traditionalist candidate, Cardinal Tredesco (Sergio Castellitto) is fat and Italian and overbearing and wants to reinstitute Latin mass. Everyone agrees that it would be very liberal and forward looking to appoint the first black pope, but the popular Nigerian candidate (Lucian Msamati) thinks that homosexuals should go to prison in this life and hell in the next. And so on...

The film is to some extent a whodunnit -- or at any rate a "who did what to whom and does it disqualify them from getting the top job" -- which makes it somewhat hard to write a spoiler free review. If you have seen the trailer, you may think that the big twist has been revealed in advance, but in fact the explosion outside the Vatican is a fairly minor plot point. The movie never turns into a Dan Brown thriller. If you are expecting anyone to discover the Holy Grail in a hidden vault you will be disappointed. It's about who becomes Pope. 

Which slightly makes one wonder how on earth as it is in heaven the film ever got made. A lot of earnest men in robes solemnly writing names on pieces of paper and counting them up, while whispering to each other in corridors: it's not exactly a crowd-pleaser. Could it possibly be that Good Acting and Good Writing still puts bums on pews? 

The Two Popes (2019) went to some lengths to depict Benedict and Francis as rounded characters and human beings: Ratzinger was not demonised and the audience was allowed to understand his traditionalist position. Conclave makes it clear that the liberals are the Goodies and the traditionalists are the (rather stereotyped) Baddies. This means that the story is all about process: the big ideas aren't really up for discussion. It takes faith absolutely for granted and treats it with complete respect. There are no Dawkinsian journalists, no secret atheist bishops, and while everyone seems to be permanently engaged in crises of faith, no-one is overtly skeptical. The late Pope, we are told, had started to have Doubts: but his doubts were about the church, never about God. All the prayers we hear are quite sincere: the nicer Cardinals say a few formal words in Latin and then speak from their hearts in the vernacular. 

It's all a bit outrageous and contrived: rumours of what the late pope might or might not have said on his death bed circulate; incriminating sealed papers are discovered; misappropriation of church funds is alleged; a sexual scandal comes to light. The final twist may be a step too far, and elicited a small laugh from the audience, though I think on the whole it works. It's compelling and gripping, although if you are anything like me you might find it hard to keep track of quite so many Italian names.

I think it lacks what El Sandifer calls "the quality of aboutness". Are we watching the machinations of a society of Freemasons or Druids or (I couldn't help thinking) Time Lords -- an ancient order with rituals that make sense on their own terms but are of no particular relevance to anyone else? Or are we supposed to think that this thing, the Roman Catholic Church matters: that these men are right to want to keep the organisation going despite its admitted flaws? Thomas is a good man, but does the film convince us that he can only be a good man in the context of all this Latin and chanting and candles?  

I was also reminded, slightly, of the John Finnemore sketch in which a cardinal suggests that the next pope should be a black, British, female pop-singer because it's "high time for a change". 

"High time for a change" replies the dean "Is not one of the guiding principles of the Catholic Church." 

Did you find this interesting? Then please...

Join my Patreon

or

Make a one-off donation on Ko-Fi