Rating: 3/5
Synopsis:
When the Pope passes away, Cardinal Lawrence is tasked with handling the next conclave. In this secretive process, he must lead the voting process to fairly select the successor. But through a series of unforeseen events, Cardinal Lawrence soon realizes that a conspiracy may lie beneath the surface. As he uncovers a series of secrets left by the previous Pope, he must maintain his faith and do what is best for the future of the church.
Positives:
“Conclave” has garnered a lot of awards buzz. After a solid trailer and intriguing premise, this was definitely on my radar! The film was so close to being in my favorites of the year list, but unfortunately an ending out of left field really brings the film down. But there are plenty of positives to find here, starting with the performances. Ralph Fiennes brings us an incredibly nuanced character. Even when he is not speaking, his visual expressions of worry and frustration are conveyed wonderfully. He delivers a handful of monologues that had my attention captured completely. But there are plenty of supporting performances that are excellent as well. John Lithgow and Stanley Tucci give the most robust supporting performances, being at the center of Cardinal Lawrence’s dilemma. The rest of the cast does a stellar job too. It helps that the actors have a terrific script, so credit to the writers for making the election of a Pope so tense and exciting.
Another impressive aspect that “Conclave” conveys is the current state of religion. We are often seeing a mix of ideologies being represented within faith groups. We observe the four main candidates up for the Papacy: a hardline fundamentalist, two moderate conservatives, and a reformation progressive. Each man seeking the Papacy has a unique ideology for how the Catholic Church should move into the next era. It nicely conveys how a church could become fractured in the modern age. I like that the film explores each vision for the Catholic Church in a way that challenges the ideologies while relaying the human flaws in the process. What would likely be seen as a Godly selection turns into a deceptive series of challenges, deceitful sabotage, and greed. We see the manmade fingerprints all over a process that theoretically is about pleasing the Lord. It was fascinating to observe the many conversations taking place, constantly being unpredictable and keeping the situation tense. Never did I think a film about selecting a Pope could be as thoughtful, unpredictable and riveting as “Conclave”.
Negatives:
What could have been one of the best films of the year makes a crucial mistake in the final minutes of the film. From a filmmaking, performance, and writing perspective, “Conclave” is top notch. But the conclusion of this movie is so far out of left field that it renders the achievements less satisfactory. The film constantly plays with perspective, challenging each ideology and motivation of the candidates. But the way the film finally ends up selecting the Pope felt quick and rushed, where the selection felt like a whimper. But after that, there is a reveal about the winning candidate that felt forced and unrealistic in any time period. I didn’t believe for a second that Cardinal Lawrence would have let this fact slide no matter how eloquent a speech was given. Plus, I find that the way this character was scattered throughout the film to be a bit strange. Being that the Catholic Church is so secretive and selective with this process, there is no way something like this would have happened. This frustrates me because most of the film is entirely plausible and effectively crafted. But the ending soured me so much that it knocked down my rating quite severely. But credit to the filmmakers for sticking to the source material. I suppose I would challenge the author for his decision making because the ending would have been just as effective without the big twist.
Conclusion:
This film will likely go down as one of the most perplexing experiences I’ve had this year. On one hand, it is an expertly crafted political thriller with top of the line performances. On the other, it is undone by a frustrating and unnecessary ending that leaves audiences feeling divided. I understand the sentiment that was intended but it simply didn’t work for me. I believe the film is worth seeing given the circumstances but just be ready for a make or break ending.