Movie review: Cardinals bear baggage in Vatican thriller 'Conclave'

"Conclave" (PG)

At the Myrna Loy

Grade: B

"Conclave," described by some as Pope Pulp, is a Vatican thriller about the selection of a new Holy Father.

The film belongs alongside films like "DaVinci Code," another drama that uses the Catholic Church as a backdrop for fictional melodrama.

"DaVinci" set off heated controversy and was deemed blasphemous by the Vatican.

I surveyed the local religious community in Helena at the time, and the majority dismissed "DaVinci" as fiction, believing that no one would ever mistake the script for being historically or religiously accurate – rather just predictable Hollywood hyperbole.

Director Ron Howard was asked about the "DaVinci" controversy, and his reply could just as easily be applied to "Conclave."

"It's not theology. It's not history," said Howard.

The criticism did not reduce box office: "DaVinci" earned $200 million here, and another $700 million worldwide.

With the arrival of "Conclave," it's déjà vu all over again.

"Conclave" spins a fictional story that unapologetically paints a rather unflattering portrait of the sequestered cardinals who must choose a successor.

Predictably, "Conclave" has already been harshly criticized by Catholic publications as propaganda and has, on cue, been deemed blasphemous. I suspect the studio welcomes the headline-generating fury – all press is good press.

However, large numbers of critics are predicting "Conclave" will be one of the 10 nominees for the Oscar for Best Picture. It's well acted, and gorgeously staged. The robes alone are stunning. Where can I get one? Nordstrom?

Let's let the critics speak first:

"I cannot support this blasphemous film, which completely misaligns with our values and mocks the Church," wrote Christina Sorrentino in Missio Dei, an online Catholic publication. "It is yet another anti-Catholic work that seeks to undermine the credibility of the Church and the faith of her members."

Both the 2016 British book by Robert Harris and Peter Berger's movie are clearly inviting criticism and debate. Stirring the beehive can create a lot of buzz.

The controversies revolve around a few "shocking" revelations, at the expense of the Catholic Church. The first involves a love child. The second shall go unspoiled, awaiting your own discovery.

Suffice it to say that the Big Reveal is saved for the finish, providing the script with its coveted shh-don't-tell ending.

I've always regarded such OMG endings as script-writing shortcuts – except in cases where it's been carefully foreshadowed and, in retrospect, could have been predicted. The ending must be earned, in other words.

Not so in this case. The shock is for shock's sake, to give the book/film a box office and cultural hook.

But I have another more substantive qualm with "Concave:"

Why is there so little dialogue about faith in a film about people of faith? These cardinals, tasked with a heavy duty, don't spend much time in either prayer or in quiet talk about their choice.

The spiritual burden appears to be felt by precious few characters, among them the dean of the college of cardinals (Ralph Fiennes), who manages the selection process, and by a nun (Isabella Rossellini).

Most of the other characters seem like pawns in a Hercule Poirot mystery whose secrets shall be exposed, one by one.

When the cardinals aren't busy sinning, they're actively politicizing – maneuvering for votes for themselves or their causes. These are remarkably selfish priests. One might expect a touch more humility to pop up amid a nest of red-bedecked cardinals – the script seems intent to metaphorically defrock the faithful. Yes, there are exceptions, but disproportionately few.

I suppose their final choice could be construed as unselfishly spiritual, were it not so rushed and so hidden. Who knows why?

So, I won't be cheering for the chalice full of nominations awaiting "Conclave." Technical recognition seems certain, and both Fiennes and Rossellini are deserving acting nominees.

Color me disappointed that such a beautifully crafted film that recreates religious rituals and Vatican ambiance so meticulously didn't dig more deeply into faith, instead settling for a potboiler expose on carnal cardinals.

But I'm not going to waste energy being offended or outraged at literary/cinematic excesses. Same old, same old.

I'm just sad at the wasted opportunity.

Time to rewatch "Man for All Seasons," I guess.

Brent Northup has been reviewing movies for 48 years in Helena, Seattle and Houston. He is a professor of communication and journalism at Carroll College.

Receive the latest in local entertainment news in your inbox weekly!