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.
I’ll start by saying I’m not Catholic and know next to nothing about the Catholic Church. Perhaps that means I’m not the best person to review this movie. The title of this film, “Conclave,” was meaningless to me until I saw the movie. On the other hand, maybe that lack of knowledge gives me an alternative lens for viewing. One of the themes this story covers is the Catholic Church’s attempts at modernizing the religion.
Based on a book released by Robert Harris in 2016, “Conclave” focuses on what happens following the death of an unnamed pope in an undisclosed year. A conclave, for those like me who don’t know, is when the College of Cardinals (cardinals are the senior members of the clergy) come together to elect a new pope. The film, directed by Edward Berger, is something of a thriller. It’s not precisely an edge-of-your-seat type of entertainment (although, with its score, it tries to be). For those willing to pay attention and allow themselves to be sucked into the story, it offers its share of thrills and shocks.
The story follows the Dean of the College of Cardinals, Lawrence (Ralph Fiennes), overseeing the sequestered cardinals in their voting for the new pope. The frontrunners for the position are Cardinals Bellini (Stanley Tucci), Tremblay (John Lithgow), Adeyemi (Lucian Msamati), and Tedesco (Sergio Castellitto). Each man has his agenda for the papacy with the film taking on some political parallels to the US’s current presidential campaigns.
This methodical, slow-burning film requires rapt attention from the viewer. It’s a lot to keep up with and can be overwhelming, especially during the first portion of the movie (it didn’t help that the audience around me was distracting).
Photographically, the shot compositions are interesting, if not a bit on the stagy side. They reminded me of the framing you’d see in older films that modern cinema has somewhat moved away from. This staginess adds an air of artificiality to the proceedings. I also felt as if the imagery was frequently too dark, with faces and objects buried in shadows—a look that I imagine is intentional, playing into the secluded element of the voting process.
There are payoffs scattered throughout the second half, leading to a conclusion that does what you expect — until it doesn’t. I found the movie to be very measured and a little dry. This is the type of film the Oscar voters will eat up. It’s a “safe” movie, for lack of a better word. That’s not to say it’s a bad movie. I’m glad I saw it. It’s not a movie I’d encourage people to rush out and see in the theater despite its technical merits and good performances. To be honest, this one might play better at home.
In Theaters Friday, October 25th
Great review. Ralph Fiennis should win an Oscar for his performance. Not being a Catholic though the process of picking a new Pope was interesting.