«The two Popes: it's all in the dialogue

Saturday Netflix & chill - Lauriane Pipoz

The two Popes is a film that claims to be «inspired by true events». The central idea is indeed based on the confrontation between Pope Benedict XVI and the future Pope Francis. But make no mistake: based on these facts, the scenario is romanticized. If you think of this film as a tale, let me tell you why it becomes a breathtaking success.

In 2005, the ballot for the election of the new pope showed a division between the very conservative cardinals and the more progressive voters. Benedict XVI (Anthony Hopkins), with his more traditional ideas, was finally elected. Several years later, following a scandal, he considers stepping down. A shocking face-to-face meeting with Cardinal Jorge Bergoglio (Jonathan Pryce), the representative of the more progressive forces, strengthens his resolve.

Three levels of understanding

This summary is the main plot of the film. But you have to consider that it's only one level of the film to fully appreciate it. One of three levels. The first is a behind-the-scenes tale about the Vatican. For it to be credible, it has to be based on an element of truth: it takes place partly in the Sistine Chapel, and shows us the process of electing the pontiff. But then, of course, in order to evoke emotion, it has to distance itself from it.

 This is why the «two popes» are stereotyped. Pope Benedict XVI is excessively closed-minded and eager to mark his difference from his former rival. «I don't agree with anything you say,» he hammers out at the start of the film. Conversely, the more the film progresses, the closer it gets, if not to Cardinal Bergoglio's views, then to the way he puts them. As a good conservative German Catholic, he comes to accept humor. He even developed a taste for it. This pope representing the elite increasingly adopts popular attitudes, ending up enjoying sports on TV.

But it's worth qualifying our position. Yes, Manichean oppositions are visible. In particular, the opposition between the intellectual and the common man, which is often emphasized. But there are a few elements that allow me to say that it's not as obvious as it could be. some critics have argued. Among other examples, Benedict XVI enjoys eating a meal in front of the TV with his bottle of Fanta. Of course, I don't deny that this is compatible with an intellectual attitude; the elites certainly enjoy these kinds of pleasures too. But what makes me think it's a guilty pleasure is the way it's staged: we see him having a good time through a heavy, half-open door. Are we to believe that the Pope is not as elitist as he likes to show off?

Great dialogue

The second level of understanding makes this film a true masterpiece: its dialogue, delivered by two great actors. These verbal jousts are the real centerpiece - and main interest - of the film. Funny, intelligent and interesting, they perfectly reflect the acting of Anthony Hopkins and Jonathan Pryce. I actually fell in love with the latter: not being a big fan of Games of Thrones, I discovered him in this film. And what a discovery! He infused every expression with tenderness, making his character likeable far beyond the facts. The emotional impact of this film is largely due to this fine, touching performance, which tells us the story of the building of a friendship between two men who have nothing in common.

The dialogue is brought to a climax by a skilfully orchestrated mise-en-scène. It's so beautiful that I'll make it the film's third axis: it could largely stand on its own. Alternating colors and shades of gray, static shots and linear sweeps, exaggerated zooms or the insertion of documentary images, the form suggests that the film needs to be watched several times to grasp all its subtleties. And the background suggests that the construction of the «two popes» would easily hold up to multiple viewings.

A witty and beautiful tale

You may choose to see «The Two Popes» as a documentary about the transition from Pope Benedict XVI to Pope Francis. In which case, it's a dud. Firstly, certain facts are deliberately romanticized for the film's purposes, such as the relationship between Jorge Bergoglio and his «fiancée» - excuse my shortcomings, I couldn't help myself. But above all, the part of the discussion between these two men concerning sexual abuse is left out. Which just goes to show the limits of documentary research on an institution where silence reigns supreme: testimonials from the main people involved and those around them would be indispensable to such an undertaking. And impossible to obtain.

This is certainly not the purpose of this film. Let's choose not to see it as a manifesto for Pope Francis and Church reform, but for what it is: a fiction based on certain dates and documentary elements. For the sake of anchoring it in a certain setting, to give strength and emotion (the magnificent aerial images of the election of Benedict XVI and the reunion between him and his successor!) to a film that then becomes a masterpiece.

Write to the author: lauriane.pipoz@leregardlibre.com

Photo credit: © Netflix