Amongst the nominees for Best Picture at this year’s Academy Awards, is a film of note for Christians. Conclave is a film by German director Edward Berger, based on the 2016 book by Robert Harris. The political thriller, set in Rome during a conclave to elect a new pope, stars Ralph Fiennes, Stanley Tucci, John Lithgow, and Isabella Rossellini. Fiennes plays the lead role of Cardinal Thomas Lawrence who oversees the conclave, uncovering scandals and navigating the politicking of the various candidates.
Beautifully shot and performed, the film is generally respectful toward many aspects of Catholic practice, as well as toward faith in general. It never mocks the idea of belief in God or Christ, and instead focuses on the reality of the politics that happen in an organization at a high level. Though it is generally respectful of faith, the film ultimately fails due to overt bias and criticism of conservative political positions within religion, as well as a baffling twist ending.
When the pope dies of a heart attack, Cardinal Thomas Lawrence (Fiennes) is tasked with leading a ‘conclave’ as he is the dean of the College of Cardinals. Conclaves in the Catholic Church are held to elect a new pope. As the cardinals come together for the election, conservative and liberal factions form. Very quickly, secrets and scandals become exposed as Lawrence navigates the politics of the groups. As he deals with his own personal doubts, he tries to steer the gathering toward electing a pope that will be good for the future of the church.
The biggest positive of the film is its treatment of faith. The film never gave the impression of passing judgement on any of its character for believing in God and Christ. It handled the idea of belief respectfully and portrayed it honestly. One of the film’s themes is about certainty and doubt. In one scene, Lawrence is giving a homily to the cardinals in which he says “Our faith is a living thing precisely because it walks hand-in-hand with doubt. If there was only certainty and no doubt, there would be no mystery. And therefore no need for faith.” An interesting theme that was handled maturely and thoughtfully.
Cardinal Lawrence is portrayed as a character with a strong sense of right and wrong and strives to maintain the integrity of the position of pope by removing candidates that have been proven to be untrustworthy, grossly immoral, or compromised. At the same time, the point is regularly made that none of the men involved in the church are perfect, and grace needs to be afforded to men’s weaknesses. All in all, the film was largely respectful of the subject matter and technically impressive.
Edward Berger, who directed 2022’s remake of All Quiet on the Western Front, has proven to be an exceptionally competent filmmaker with both visuals and performances. The cinematography, set design, and costumes of Conclave are by far the strongest aspects. The Sistine Chapel was reconstructed as a set for the conclave voting scenes, which are the highlight sequences of the film. The cast is also strong, led by Fiennes, with solid supporting performances from Lithgow and Tucci.
The political perspective of the filmmakers comes through in the movie overtly. The liberal cardinals are portrayed as the ‘good guys’ and the conservatives are painted as backwards and bigoted. The portrayal could have been handled much more neutrally as these liberal and conservative dynamics are real within churches everywhere. Instead, the typical Hollywood political slant is ever-present. Tucci’s liberal Cardinal Bellini in one scene chides the conservative candidate Tedesco for not supporting homosexuals. One gets the distinct feeling watching the film, that the filmmakers agree with the Bellini character since Tedesco is clearly painted as the villain.
The narrative also suffers from the inclusion of a character that feels incredibly contrived and unrealistic. This character is tied to the baffling and bizarre twist ending of the film, so spoilers below.
—Spoilers—
Cardinal Benitez is a Mexican archbishop working in Afghanistan who none of the other cardinals knew existed prior to the conclave. He shows up to Rome unannounced and comes across as a mysterious but pious new brother. The character feels like a caricature of what non-Christians think a priest should be. He floats through every scene as if he, himself, is divine. His backstory is comically pure, working in war-torn areas of the world with no recognition for himself and no ambition to become pope. The final revelation about his character borders on absurd.
After being elected pope after giving a speech to rest of the cardinals about war (this coming after a Muslim suicide bomb goes off near the Vatican), Benitez is revealed to have a unique medical condition. He was born “intersex,” with both male external characteristics and a uterus and ovaries. He wasn’t aware of his medical condition until he underwent an appendectomy where it was discovered. Benitez declined to undergo surgery to remove the female organs, deciding to remain “as God made him.” He claims that, as pope, he is uniquely suited to understand both men and women and lead the church. This final twist was so specific and strange in the context of the story that it completely lost me.
—End of spoilers—
From a reformed Protestant point of view, it was obvious that there would be procedures and practices portrayed in the film that are points of theological and ecclesiastical disagreement. If one can set those issues aside, there are some aspects of the film that are enjoyable and should be appreciated. If it weren’t for the major drawbacks in the screenplay, the film could have been one of the few portrayals of the Catholic church, and by extension Christianity, that wasn’t simply a hit piece. From the secular world’s point of view, Protestants and Catholics are part of one religion. When Catholics are attacked in media, Protestants should understand they are usually being attacked, also.
Though the cinematography, performances, direction, and production are exceptional, the political biases and uneven screenplay make for a middling end result. While it is unique to see the idea of faith in Christ being treated respectfully, the final film is ultimately not worth seeing due to the weak ending.
Rating: 6.5/10
