Cinema has already dealt with the popes, their lives and deaths, including the process of electing the new sovereign pontiffs by convening the Conclave. There have been feature films and television series, dramas and comedies, historical or current affairs films with real or fictional popes. ‘Conclave‘ (2024) adds to the collection a political thriller that has all the makings of a success: an excellent cast, a director – Edward Berger – who has in his filmography several solid successes both on television (‘Deutschland 83’) and on the big screen (‘All Quiet on the Western Front’ – a rare remake of quality) and a script based on a novel by Robert Harris, whose books were the sources of several good movies. My expectations were therefore high, my cinematic experience not quite up to par. I found in ‘Conclave‘ pretty much everything I expected minus a touch of originality that would take it out of the comfort zone of the predictable.
The starting point of the story is the death of a pope. His orientation had been liberal, in the Catholic context of this term. The assembly of cardinal electors is convened and they will debate and vote on who will be the new pope, in conditions of seclusion, ‘until white smoke comes out’. The responsibility of procedural leadership falls to Cardinal Lawrence, the former pope’s trusted man. Ideological currents are confronted, personalities are confronted and people who each have something to hide in their past are confronted. They are all men, but women will also play an important role in the events that are triggered. For a good part of the time we are dealing with a political drama in which the elections in the Conclave do not seem very different from those we know from secular politics. The surprises and twists of the situation will appear in the end.
‘Conclave‘ has two very strong points. Stéphane Fontaine‘s cinematography creates an immersive experience by introducing us to the corridors and dark chambers of the Vatican and the famous Sistine Chapel (recreated in the Cinecittà studios) where the Conclave meets, plus some spectacular angles and shots. Casting and performances are formidable. Ralph Fiennes creates one of the greatest roles of this part of his career, bringing to the screen the thoughts and feelings of a high prelate who lives the responsibility of the moment while struggling with his own doubts about the corruption of the institution he serves. He is my favorite at the Academy Awards. Two of the supporting roles of the cardinals in the Conclave are entrusted to Stanley Tucci and John Lithgow, formidable actors but very far, apparently, from this type of roles. Well, they manage to induce personality and color to each of the characters they play. I can’t be upset by the presence of Isabella Rossellini, an actress I love. She deserves an Academy Award, but maybe not for the role in this film. When screening ended I felt that I was still left – as the saying goes – with a half-empty bag next to the praised tree. I think the fault lies mainly with the script, which seemed predictable even in the parts where it intended to be unpredictable. The institutional crisis of the Catholic Church and the confrontation with the complex realities of today’s world are profound and require a more intense approach and a sharper introspection than that provided by this good political thriller.