Conclave is the story of the election of a new pope by a group of archbishops after the death of the current one. In terms of general plot, that’s the long and the short of it. But of course, the movie gives layers to peel back along the way that make this an engaging watch throughout its 2-hour run time.
Point 1: The Technical Aspects
The film may seem unassuming in its plot and scope or in simple glimpses of the film, but the people involved in making the film make up a very impressive resume of past works.
The film is masterfully directed by Edward Berger whose previous film, All Quiet on the Western Front, was nominated for 9 Academy Awards including Best Picture while winning 4 for Best International Feature Film, Best Original Score, Best Production Design, and Best Cinematography. Berger brings his excellent vision to this quasi-chamber piece that could have easily been rote and plodding to make it consistently intriguing. The pacing of the film is top-notch while the framing of shots and blocking used to accentuate every scene’s best assets is hard to ignore. I personally felt like many of the directorial choices in terms of lighting and sound design harkened to horror beats, which added another bit of tension to the film’s thriller mood.
The screenplay is written by Peter Straughan who was nominated for an Academy Award for Best Adapted Screenplay in 2011 for Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy. His ability to constantly create twists and turns throughout the film to keep the audience guessing about who would win the papacy is commendable. You’d think that a film like this wouldn’t have the strongest story but I feel like when the premise is so straightforward, it’s what you do in that constricted environment that makes or breaks the movie. Staughan finds a way to keep you on your toes throughout.
Without running through every person involved, some other standout contributors are the film’s cinematographer Stéphane Fontaine who consistently captured the beauty and grandeur of the Vatican locale that the film is set in, the cutting score by Volker Bertelmann that took the tension up a notch at every turn, the costume designer Lisy Christl for making the garb a character of its own in scenes, and the production designer Suzie Davies without whom this would just not be convincing at all.
The combination of work by the aforementioned people as well as the village it took to make it look and sound like it did on screen must be commended.
Point 2: The Performances
As much as the technical aspects of the film create the immaculate canvas of the film, the performances are the colours that paint the picture. Ralph Fiennes fills the vast majority of the screentime with his portrayal of Cardinal Lawrence. His characterization of a man who is set on ensuring the best result while wrestling with a characterization of himself that he refuses to accept all while managing the most important process of his lifetime is effortlessly captured in his performance. Fiennes also delivers some excellent speeches and lines that will stay with you after the film. A tour de force work that will surely garner nominations if not wins.
Stanley Tucci, John Lithgow, and Lucian Msamati excellently play the roles of a progressive, a moderate and a minority choice for pope, respectively. The interplay between Tucci’s Bellini and Lithgow’s Tremblay may remind some people of another recent election. Both play their nuanced roles well. Msamati brings the element of diversity to the table as he vies to be the first African pope. His views are known to be conservative, but the fact that he’s a minority gives him his own strengths. With these three characters, specifically, the film finds a dynamic of push and pull that starts to fray the sanctity of the process itself.
Sergio Castellitto to me was a standout in a smaller role of a far-right Roman traditionalist hoping to return the church to its roots. Despite being portrayed as the antagonist of the story, his performance mixes charisma and excellent comedic timing to really steal the show anytime he was on screen.
Isabella Rossellini and Carlos Diehz also do great jobs in the limited albeit critical complementary roles.
Point 3: The Hubris
The real crux and interest of the movie isn’t actually the election of the pope, but rather the people vying for the papacy and how that changes them as people along the way. The juxtaposition of the highest divine post in the world with the inescapable humanity of those who would aim for it is a delicious mix. Despite the spoken intention being about finding the best for Catholics, the ambition to want such a position does not come without selfishness.
I cannot find a better theme for this story than hubris, which is defined as a dangerous character flaw capable of provoking the wrath of the gods. This hubris shows itself in many forms, whether it is in the form of self-importance, overambition or outright bigotry. The various characters show it in their own ways, but it is a common throughline from beginning to end. My personal favourite was seeing Cardinal Bellini’s humility that served as but a veil for his hubris to hide behind, and as soon as his position was threatened, the veil lifted in dramatic fashion. The hubris is also shown in the way that doubt is discussed in the film. Is a crisis of faith a strength or a weakness? Is complete confidence real faith or hubris? The film explores these questions very well through its various characters’ interactions and beliefs.
I’d love to delve into this more, but I will let you discover the film for yourself.
Point 4: The Big Swing
The main talking point for everyone leaving the movie will be how it ends. I myself have mixed feelings about it. I do not particularly have anything against the content of the ending. I think it’s a very bold direction to take, but I’m not entirely sure if it was necessary for the already compelling story being told in the film. It’s definitely an interesting decision that is very likely to polarize audiences. I wouldn’t be surprised if some don’t even quite understand it. But if a certain someone’s review entitled “Catholics Should be PISSED At This Movie” is anything to go by, this is likely to cause some controversy. However, the movie has been out for some time now and perhaps not enough people have seen it to jump on this as a big talking point.
I believe the film would have been more focused and tighter as a whole if this big swing at the end was not taken, but I can’t deny that it’s something that’s hard to ignore as a final bow on a great film. How you feel about it could make or break the movie for you.
I’d prefer to let you discover the ending for yourself, so I won’t discuss it further, but it would have been disingenuous to not at least make it a major aspect to point out in this review. Also, don’t worry, the image I chose for this section is a misdirect! There is no hint towards the ending at all.
Overall, Conclave is a great film that’s likely to garner a lot of awards nominations and wins. It’s a tight 2 hour thriller with great technical work that you should definitely take the time to see!
