Helga without the H

Almost every year I attempt (with varying degrees of success) to watch as many Oscar nominees as possible before the ceremony. I post half-assed reviews here on my blog, and then at the end I write up some sort of silly analysis, predictions, reactions, etc. The quantity and quality depends entirely on how much time and energy I have each year, and I’m not gonna lie, this year’s already starting pretty dang rough! But let’s see how it goes. Today we turn to:

Conclave

[8 nominations for best picture, actor (Ralph Fiennes,) supporting actress (Isabella Rossellini,) adapted screenplay, editing, makeup/hair, and score]

The Golden Globes were this week, and I’ve decided to try to get a jump-start on this year’s Oscar binge by catching some likely nominees early. Conclave seemed like a good starting point, because it had a whopping 5 Golden Globe nominations in major categories (drama film, drama actor, supporting actor, director, and screenplay) and a win for screenplay. Plus it was free on Netflix. Fingers crossed that it has Oscar nominations, or I’m about to waste my own time…

This was a fantastic sequel to The Two Popes. Even better than the first movie! Instead of TWO heavy-hitting acting superstars (Hopkins and Pryce), this time we had a whopping FOUR (Fiennes, Tucci, Lithgow, and Rosselini)! Two Popes was based on a boring play, whereas Conclave was based on an exciting book. Two Popes was basically just one big long conversation between 2 members of clergy, whereas Conclave had dozeons of conversations between several members of clergy! If these upgrades worry you because you think they stray too far from The Two Popes, don’t fret! All the basics we know and love are still there: crises of faith, debates about the role of the Catholic church, Popes hating each other, beautiful sweeping visuals of people in matching red outfits in gorgeous settings, fascinating mundane details of life in the Vatican, peeks at holy rituals, and a smidge (but just a smidge) of terrorism and mayhem to keep things spicy. Sure, Conclave isn’t actually associated with The Two Popes in any direct way, but it might as well have been given so many similarities. And the things that made The Two Popes work so well are all alive and well here in Conclave.

But where The Two Popes was quiet and contemplative, Conclave was a mysteries borderline thriller. In this film, a beloved and somewhat liberal pope has died, and our protagonist (played by Ralph Fiennes) is in charge or organizing the conclave: a meeting of all the world’s cardinals who gather at the Vatican and vote over and over again for who amongst them should be the next pope. Does it seem like throwing a bunch of old stodgy clergymen together in a room would be kinda dull? Indeed it is not! For these supposed pillars of morality and spirituality are actually human beings, meaning the whole crew is full of secrets, ambition, backstabbing, politicking, anger, and shame. Fiennes feels a responsibility to make sure that the next pope is worthy of the post, which leads him to investigate various claims against the frontrunners that might be disqualifying. All the while he is filled with internal conflict and doubt as to what is his proper path forward as he uncovers each new revelation.

The main themes in this film match those of The Two Popes. It is an exploration of what we should expect from our religious leaders. Each leading Pope candidate represents a different mindset as to what Catholicism should or shouldn’t look like. None are perfect, and our cardinals are left weighing not so much “Who is the right choice?” as much as “Which is the lesser evil?” Which morals are we willing to sacrifice for the sake of others? And which major sins seem to preclude success, where minor sins ruin lives? All of these debates, of course, are just as relevant in the everyday lives of us real folks as they are in these seemingly alien, untouchable Vatican corridors. And that is partially the point; we see cardinals smoking in the cloisters, having petty arguments, gossiping behind one another’s backs, etc, just like real people. They are human. But these humans are responsible for selecting one amongst them who, supposedly, is to be all holy, elevated, directly linked to God itself. How are they to select the most God-like amongst them, when no such person seems to actually exist?

Okay, this is my very first review, so I haven’t hit movie fatigue yet, which means I’m taking the time to think through the film more than I might by the time I get to movie #20. But as you can tell, the film had an impact on me. It really sucked me in and gave me a lot to think about, and the plot moved along with plenty of quiet twists and turns. So I very much enjoyed it.

Is it Oscar-worthy? Tough for me to say at this point when I don’t know its actual nominations. Despite the all-star cast, I’m not sure any of the performances were totally Oscar-worthy. I love Tucci and Lithgow, but honestly they felt like they were just kinda playing themselves. Roselini was thoroughly underutilized; I think she speaks about 3 times in the whole film, and doesn’t contribute much beyond the 1 dramatic line we see in the trailers. Fiennes was great in the lead, but honestly, beyond a couple scenes where he had to cry, he didn’t really have to do much. He had a lot of conversations, but his affect remained pretty matter-of-fact through all of them. It made sense for the character, but it doesn’t really provide much material to warrant a statue.

How about best film or best screenplay? After all, it’s one Golden Globe win was for screenplay. Hmm… Here’s the thing… while I did very much enjoy the plot and the themes, I still found the whole thing oversimplified. Each cardinal was a caricature. This story felt like the perfect story to tell as part of a sermon; each cardinal could be summed up in a couple sentences, as could each conversation and conflict. And so the realism of the film suffers. That could be ok in a film that doesn’t seem like it’s trying to be realistic, but this one seemed like it was going for it. The conversations could have been summed up in 2 sentences, but they weren’t; they were drawn out. It felt like a bible story (which, of course, are all extremely short and simple) dramatized and dragged out over two hours. To me, the surface-level exploration of deep themes is what holds this film back from perfection. But I’ll reserve my final judgment until I better know the competition.