.

I’m not the first to say it but this new movie about the election of a new Pope feels very timely, coming out as it does as Trump is returning to the White House. The film revolves around the idea that no candidate is perfect and how it may be necessary to disregard their past actions and attitudes, no matter how heinous, for the sake of filling the position and allowing the institution to continue, even at the risk of putting a power hungry and prejudice person at the top. 

This seems exceptionally prescient of the filmmakers as this has been in production for a while but actually it is the third big Hollywood movie you could make these connections with in the last month. Wicked is about a weak man retaining power by demonising large sections of the population and turning those citizens who he says are the real citizens of the land against them. Then there is Gladiator II which has a naive and unquestioning populace propping up a vain and pompous supreme leader and his self serving senators. 

This has got me wondering if every film with a questionable person in a position of power can be related to Trump in some way or other. Is it that these movies have tapped into the moment or does Trump in fact tick so many despot boxes that comparisons can be made anywhere? Let’s try.

Okay, so Lord of the Rings is about an evil ruler who was once thought to be defeated only to slowly return to power again. In his rise he shows no concern for the environment in an effort to push his own agenda and advantage those who are loyal to him. Oh and he’s been compared to Nazis. 

Then there is Star Wars that sees a man who was once a respected and popular member of society, despite always displaying some disturbing tendencies, who then makes some choices to protect his own position after he has had a relationship with a woman he really shouldn’t have, which ultimately leads to his full fall to the dark side and a period in which he rules with an uncompromising manner and a cold heart. 

Harry Potter has a villain, again once thought beaten, who quietly works with his loyal supporters to regain dominance. He puts unqualified people in positions of political power as a reward for their loyalty but turns on them if they do not serve him as he wants, and he manipulates the media to discredit those who stand against him.

What about Dracula? He doesn’t approve of eating cats and dogs but won’t hesitate to go for your jugular if he needs to.

Joker is a crazy haired criminal in an ill fitting suit who just likes to watch the world burn. 

Even in Inside Out 2, Anxiety comes out of nowhere, manically takes over our brains and is coloured orange. 

Let’s not forget as well that Biff in Back to the Future Part 2 and Daniel Clamp in Gremlins: The New Batch are both actually based on Donald Trump.

Yep, there might be something in this.

Anyway, back to Conclave. What is clear is that under the direction of Edward Berger the film is as gripping as any political event it may be mirroring. It has been suggested that on paper this looked quite dry, featuring a load of Catholic cardinals gathered in the Vatican to talk about finding a new pontiff. That’s not really fair as on paper in Robert Harris book it was still exciting but still this is way more gripping than you might expect it to be. There is not a huge amount of action but the intrigue levels are through the frescoed roof and it is built up in such a way that Isabella Rossellini’s nun walking into a room is as tense as any car chase or explosion. At the start the previous Pope has suddenly passed away and Ralph Fiennes’ senior cleric has to organise the selection of his replacement. As things progress though truths and rumours emerge around the key players and Fiennes has to determine which are which and deal with the consequences. 

There have clearly been a number of films about the Catholic Church but this one finds a neat balance between critiquing belief and religion. It is clear these men have a genuine faith but their human impulses are fighting against their supposedly God given duties. The story hits right home on the problems this presents without labouring its point. There are those here who believe their opinions and actions to be justifiable under their doctrine and those who might be consciously stretching the rules, but the film does not have to spell out who and when. Similarly all of the questions posed are answered by the end but in a way that leaves the audience to join the diocesan dots.

Speaking to friends who have seen the movie there is one big event, possibly even a twist, toward the end that none of us have been surprised by. It feels quite heavily signposted early on but I don’t think it is an issue that this is always where the plot was leading because I think that this is deliberately always where the plot was leading. What is important is the final reveal that it prompts and this is not something that I saw coming at all. In terms of this denouement, it did at first seem a little out there but the whole movie is a good old fashioned potboiler and its closing moments are actually a perfect cap on this. Old fashioned it may be but relevant to current events, and yes American political events, it also is. There are not many changes from the original novel but one seemingly subtle difference they have made here links things strongly to something significant that happened on 24th June two years ago. (I’m trying to skirt spoilers here so I apologise if your knowledge of both the book and recent historical events are detailed enough to know what I am talking about without looking it all up.)

Outside of the writing and the direction, Conclave is also carried by its excellent performances. John Lithgow and Stanley Tucci are both reliably strong but it is Fiennes who stands out. He was nominated for an Oscar twice back in the 90s but I think this might be his year. He is certainly going to get another nod for this and it will be well deserved. He’s kind of overdue a win too, which might edge him above Chalamet.

Wherever it might sit in the cultural and political landscape then, Conclave is a brilliant piece of cinema. It may not have to be seen on the big screen but you’ve got time over the holidays so why wait. 

.

The Ripley Factor:

I’ve not put this section at the end of my reviews for a while because in many respects we have moved past the need to analyse the representation of women in cinema. This movie is particularly interesting in this respect though. Centring as it does on Catholic priests this is a story almost entirely about men but rather than that excusing the marginalisation of any female characters it fights against it. I’ve mentioned Isabella Rossellini’s powerful contribution already but even beyond this Conclave is a film that makes women important without regularly putting them on screen. In the same way that characters like Orson Welles in The Third Man and Marlon Brando in Apocalypse Now dominate their movies with being in them very much, so too do women play a deeply important role here.