Conclave
Edward Berger’s new drama “Conclave” has been hailed as one of this year’s best films. And it is, for the most part, a tight, gripping production for adults, featuring solid acting and a strong adapted screenplay by Peter Straughan. I say “Conclave” is for adults not because of language or taboo subject matter, but due to the fact that younger viewers simply won’t care about the text.
The story
A conclave occurs when the College of Cardinals gathers at the Vatican in Rome to elect a new pope. In “Conclave,” based on Robert Harris’ 2016 novel, the voting cardinals – which number over 100 – gather upon the death of a popular pontiff to perform their task. The versatile Ralph Fiennes plays Cardinal Lawrence, the dean of the College of Cardinals – and therefore the man who will spearhead the proceedings.
Cardinal Lawrence has previously telegraphed his reluctance to assume the Papacy himself, and remain in his current position. Still, Lawrence is well regarded amongst the group, and with each round of voting seems to garner additional support. In the film’s best performance, Stanley Tucci plays Lawrence’s friend and confidant Cardinal Bellini, who (along with Lawrence) represents the church’s more liberal wing. Unlike Lawrence, Bellini has specific goals for his potential Papacy and is not afraid to share them amongst colleagues.
Other papal candidates
Preferring the church revert to some of its older, more rigid, beliefs and methods is Cardinal Tedesco, played by Italian actor Sergio Castellitto. Adaptable John Lithgow plays the popular Cardinal Tremblay, whose beliefs lie somewhere in the middle. Isabella Rossellini is Sister Agnes, head of the nuns who serve as caterers and housekeepers during the sequestration of the cardinals. And in the film’s oddest inclusion, Carlos Diehz is Cardinal Benitez, a man who has been made a cardinal only very recently by the late pope. Benitez is not on the official invite list but is accepted by the group due to his difficult work in the war zone of Afghanistan.
Backdoor maneuvering
At first, the primary drama of “Conclave” is the backdoor maneuvering of the members of each wing of the church – more to block the ascension to the throne of cardinals of certain beliefs rather than to promote the ascension of others. It’s a mildly fascinating, “behind closed doors” look at the proceedings used to choose the leader of the world’s largest church. Most of us probably assume such strategic sessions occur; “Conclave” shows us how it all works.
Add to these dealings the underlying desire to choose a pope with no baggage related to the persistent Catholic priest sex scandal, and “Conclave” begins to live up to its hype about a third of the way through. The opening sequences spend a lot of time depicting the ritual – the “heavy importance,” if you will – of the proceedings with which the cardinals are tasked. The screenplay doesn’t lend itself to melodrama until we have a chance to meet, and understand the motives, of the chief players.
Hushed and dark
Much as in Peter Landesman’s 2017 drama “Mark Felt: The Man Who Brought Down the White House,” “Conclave” features a lot of deeply hushed conversations in dark rooms, between characters unable to speak certain beliefs and truths to the larger group. As in Landesman’s film, it is occasionaly difficult to follow which characters know exactly what information about the others. Add to that the sanctity of the Catholic confessional, and “Conclave” begins to become “messy.”
Engrossing final act
But the final act is full of engrossing surprises and revelations which captivate us and move us to the edge of our seats. As in any great screenplay, these disclosures are forecast during the preceding dialogue, yet still jostle us upon their disclosure. We never feel as if any developments are pulled out of the proverbial hat. And the ending presents the church with quite a dilemma.
Why is it important?
Now, I understand Harris’ novel – and therefore Berger’s film – is mere fiction. But it is set against the backdrop of the Catholic church. And many of the topics with which the cardinals wrestle – the sex scandal, the theological direction of the church, etc. – are real. My only issue with “Conclave” is that I never feel like Berger and Straughan demonstrate why any of this is important. Why should non-Catholics care about the selection of a new pope? How does this affect the lives of the rest of us? For that matter, how will a new pope affect the lives of the world’s Catholics – whose beliefs are as varied as those of the College of Cardinals. “Conclave” is supremely interesting, but only up to a point.
Andy Ray‘s reviews also appear on https://townepost.com/