|Page 1 of 4:||   |
|Index||31 reviews in total|
This is a movie about an elderly man who has been chosen to be the next
Pope. But, beware: the operative word in the previous sentence is
"man", not "Pope", because the story is not about the challenges of
being (or becoming) Pope: the story is about the struggles of being
human. That's the reason why each and every one of us should be able to
easily follow and enjoy this funny, educated movie. Taking for granted
that all the viewers will be men (and women) themselves, it will be
easy for everybody to get in touch with the doubts, the fears and the
memories that the main character has to confront after he is called to
take on himself one of the greatest responsibilities that the world has
Of course a lot of risks were involved in dealing with such issues as faith and self confidence using such an unusual and peculiar subject. But, just like a slim young acrobat on a flying trapeze daring to attempt a difficult exercise, the movie achieves the result of telling this strange story with grace, with humor, with kindness, and with a respect for the themes involved that, I think, the faithful part of the audience should be able to appreciate even more than those among us who wouldn't define themselves religious, or catholic.
Furthermore, I can't resist to notice how funny it is that a movie realized by an openly atheist author depicts catholic hierarchy with such a sympathetic view with tones much more friendly, I would say, than the ones of many mainstream blockbusters we have seen in recent years. So, go watch this movie with confidence (it's an entertaining, interesting work of fiction), and trust (it's soft-spoken, and respectful): you could take even your kids along and, go figure, even your confessor!
Every comment I see about Habemus Papam seems to focus a little too
much on the depiction of the Catholic Church and its figures of
authority, maybe because of the title. Let it go, it's not a critical
movie of the religious institution, and it's certainly not a mocking of
It is actually a story about a man's confrontation with great responsibilities, set in a very peculiar yet strangely believable scenario.
I'd say that the central plot and general feeling of the story could be reasonably translated into a different setting. The Catholic Church replaced with a government, the newly-elected Pope replaced with the newly-elected or crowned leader, etc. Maybe a different setting would fall short trying to depict the seriousness of the situation - can you think of a higher position of authority than that of the Pope? -, and maybe it wouldn't be such a charismatic movie if all the central influential characters weren't light-hearted old men, such as the cardinals in this instance... but it could definitely be done.
There are several high points in this movie, most of them straightforward enough that you don't have to be a cinema-nut to appreciate. The acting is terrific, the general quality is comparable with the most hyped Hollywood films (I'm guessing that not needing helicopters, extreme CGI and explosions really helps keeping the budget low). I'm not an 'artsy cinema nut' - and I loved it. (In fact, liking it so much and finding only reviews about it being about 'the Pope' bothered me, that's why I registered to write this review).
Anyway, this was different from everything I had ever seen before, and always in a good way. Well, at least never in a bad one! There is indeed some kind of fresh entertainment and novelty in knowing that your finely tuned powers of plot prediction are useless against a storyteller's unusual way of telling an interesting story. I don't even know who this storyteller is, but assuming it is the director Moretti - he did a good job.
Maybe a more 'conventional' viewer, if there is such a thing, might be unsatisfied because of the peculiarities - some open ended scenes, even one untied subplot; unexplained character reactions that seem entirely sincere nonetheless. While I noticed these things, they didn't annoy me enough to detract from the general experience. And as long as you watch it without a 'conventional viewer's' mindset and expectations, I can almost guarantee that you will be pleasantly entertained.
Let me clarify: don't expect situation jokes. Don't expect an inner journey into the darkness of a hero's troubled dark soul. Don't expect a wacky incarnation of comic relief. And let me repeat this one more time: you don't have to be an 'artsy cinema nut' to enjoy it; just don't expect to be presented to the same old situations and movie gimmicks.
It's actually worth a lot more than just for it's quirkiness, but if for nothing else, watch this so you can briefly purge your mind of the sameness that plagues the screens.
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
Nanni Moretti's film has an interesting premise - what if the Cardinal
elected Pope felt himself incapable of doing the job? That is an
intriguing idea to explore, and you could do it as political drama or
out-and-out farce. What you cannot do is have both. But more intriguing
than a man having an interior struggle with being elected God's
representative on Earth, would be the external struggles unleashed by
his public refusal to accept the office. That is where, unfortunately,
Moretti's film ends - at the point where it should start.
Meanwhile, imbecilic cardinals dance, clap their hands, throw hissy fits at card games and mess up in slow-mo volleyball. Is this pomp and costume reduced to its ignoble essence, or just poor characterisation? The Pope goes walkabout and ends up hanging out with an acting troupe. Is this religion as grand theatre, or Roman Holiday for a top clergyman? Tone, theme and satirical targets all lack focus in this under-realised piece. Moretti's own character has one scene of comic failure with the protagonist, and then seems merely to function as a cutaway from the main plot line. Excising this psychiatrist completely would go some way to tightening up a very disjointed piece.
Michel Piccoli is engaging as the Cardinal encumbered with a crisis of confidence, but that performance gets lost in the narrative failings that frame it. Such is the lack of focus that audiences come away wondering what the film is meant to be. A baffling film, and not in a good way.
This film has had a very diverse range of reviews, and this is probably
because its full appreciation requires a finger on the pulse of the
Moretti makes a statement about the current state of the Church, which behind its omnipotent facade seems to be unable to truly face the challenges of remaining relevant to its followers. Rather than set up an intricate political plot of intrigue and betrayal, Moretti chooses to represent this powerlessness through a single person, an unassuming cardinal who feels unable to take on the responsibility. At the same time, though, he reveals that the state of unease is widespread among the cardinals, who dread the thought of having to take on this leadership, as much as the thought of losing their leader.
A banal way forward would have been for the cardinals to turn against each other, or against the Pope; instead, here they find relief in reverting to games and simple everyday activities, as if the isolation inside the Vatican walls is lifting an unbearable oppression from them, as they can do normal things as normal people do.
The film has several imperfections, and one feels sometimes the story gets somewhat contorted, especially when the new Pope rekindles his old love for the theatre. Still, it is a visually attractive film, sensitively scripted and well acted.
This is a surprisingly sympathetic film made by a non-believer who is often critical of the Church. Moretti is appreciative of the magnitude of the problem faced by the church, but most of all one has the impression that he cares deeply about the people involved: those on the balcony, those behind the curtains and especially those down below, in the square.
This film is mildly recommended.
In one of my all-time favorite romantic comedies, Billy Wilder's enchanting Roman Holiday, a princess, with an aversion to her royal responsibilities and its added pressure of pomp and circumstance that comes with it, flees her guardians to escape to a simpler commoner's life in Rome. Complications ( and love ) ensue. In Nanni Moretti's engaging We Have a Pope, the job description might have changed slightly, but the same intensity and stress of duty and honor remains. And while the main character is never in search of love, complications begin to pile up.
The pope has died and a new successor must be elected. After multiple voting, the conclave of cardinals decide that Cardinal Melville would be the best candidate to fill that void. The crowds form outside the Vatican awaiting their decision, all eyes focused on that central balcony of St. Peter's Basilica and its new pontiff. Yet inside, it is another story entirely as the newly anointed and appointed leader refuses to take on that role. A psychotherapist is brought in to convince Cardinal Melville that this big white whale of a job belongs to him. So what does the cardinal do? He escapes, seeking la dolce vita that others have.
Now Moretti's basic idea is an intriguing one, that one man who so many look to for spiritual guidance is himself in search of that elusive goal and is in the midst of his own personal crisis of faith. Morretti serves his story well as a director, setting up his characters, all of whom are held captive in their grandiose surroundings and involving the movie audience with the regal pageantry and splendor.
But as screenwriter, his script loses its focus with some subplots and actions that never quite gel. Just as his character becomes lost, so does his film. Scenes involving his interactions and experiences with the common folk fall flat and don't seem to resolve the complex issue or provide any insight for this troubled soul's introspection. As the film progresses, the remaining cardinals become more one-dimensional and their behavior, while slightly amusing, become easy folly as they play volleyball in their fancy silk trappings, merely decoration rather than real people. ( Only Renato Scarpi as Cardinal Gregori provides any depth to his character. ) Plus, the role of the psychologist ( also played by Moretti ) becomes a mere afterthought, never really building any relationship with his patient. And, those annoying Leaps of Logic comes to the forefront during his respite allowing him his "Roman Holiday", though those everyday "economic" expenses are not explained in the least ( free hotel room, food, theater ticket, bus transportation, etc.).
The film detours to an unsatisfying and unexpected conclusion that basically negates everything before it. As Cardinal Melville grapples with the anxiety of becoming one of the world's most exalted religious leader, Moretti too never comes to terms with his initial fascinating premise and his film's plot structure.
Fortunately, the talented French actor, Michel Piccoli gives a wonderfully subtle performance as Il papa. His nuanced facial expressions and sad soulful eyes convey the character's humility, fear, and wisdom beyond his years. It is superb acting that nearly makes up for some of the film's missteps along the way.
While many of the compelling elements are up there on the screen for a fine film, We Have a Pope simply needed to have a better script ( and ending ) to achieve a level of success. Still, Moretti does stay true to his vision and never becomes sentimental or mawkish. In We Have a Pope, while the job may remain unfilled, the moviegoer in us all regretfully remains unfulfilled as well. GRADE: B-
ANY COMMENTS: Please contact me at: firstname.lastname@example.org to add comments.
Visit my blog at: www.dearmoviegoer.com
Nanni Moretti is the Woody Allen of Italian cinema.
Just as Woody Allen would have dealt with Jewish subjects, Moretti is concerned with what makes the world of papacy tick in the Vatican and looks at the subject from a psychoanalyst's point of view and as a citizen of the neighboring city of Rome.
It is not surprising that Moretti himself plays the cheeky role of the best psychoanalyst in Italy, who has separated from his wife (who in her turn thinks she is a better psychoanalyst than her husband and is having an affair outside her marriage with yet another psychoanalyst). Even her two kids seem to be psychoanalysts in the making. Even one of the Cardinals is surviving with the help of an incredibly potent anti- depressant, an indirect swipe at the mental condition of some of the Cardinals!
The Pope-elect suffers from an inferiority complex that his sister was chosen as an actress in a play when he so desperately wanted to act in the play himself (a mirror image of the squabbling kids of the lady psychoanalyst in her car). Decades later he identifies himself as an actor going through a mental crisis.
Moretti means well. Moretti is interesting even when he attempts to point out quite correctly the myriad psychoanalytical situations that populate the Bible. There is visual psychoanalytic comedy, too, when Jerzy Stuhr's character receives a call from the Pope-elect and involuntarily stands up in respect as though his boss, the Pope, were standing in front of him.
While Moretti succeeds in getting amazing and credible performances from Michel Piccoli and Jerzy Stuhr (who are anyway great performers), Moretti is out of his depth in portraying a bunch Cardinals as pathetic, low-IQ human beings who sulk in front of a psychoanalyst. While there may be a few among the Cardinals who fit that bill, the majority of them are well-read, intelligent, above-average individuals who might be dogged in their views but all the same are quite capable of resisting the wiles of a psychoanalyst.
The best aside in the film for me was Moretti's comment that "gas" for your kitchen and heating is cheaper in the Vatican than in Rome and that you can get many goods including medicines there that you cannot get in Rome.
Moretti is good at being able to bring out his views without offending anyone but he, despite his best intentions, unfortunately never can be considered as one of the best directors in Italy. But he can take comfort that he made Mr Piccoli give a superb performance in his own film.
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
A few days ago, I watched Prometheus, and found it such a revolting
stupid waste of time, that I created my account here only to warn
anyone from committing the same mistake; Now, unhappily, I have to add
this HABEMUS PAPAM to the "what-a-waste-of-time-and-money" list...
Just like Prometheus, what starts out as a very well made film, with impressively credible imagery, costumes, ambiance etc., and generates very high expectations, COMPLETELY loses track, and becomes an utterly meaningless and pointless waste of time, with an INCREDIBLY bad ending.
When the movie begins, we see the election of the new pope, almost unanimous...a man with a gentle and humble face, and we expect he will lead the church into a glorious new path of renovation...but then, as he is being announced to the crowd, he screams and runs off to his chambers saying he just "can't do it".
Would he had killed himself, or thrown himself off the balcony, it would have been far better for us viewers...
With this unrealistic but interesting premise, we are enticed into expecting "what an interesting situation, let's see the pope as a normal man", the movie then shows the church calling in a psychologist to help him out of his crisis...the 1st encounter is comical, with the shrink and the Pope surrounded by cardinals...
At this point, still anticipating a good story, our expectations change, added by the anticipation of comedy, of funny situations, something akin to "King Ralph"...but then, then...the movie DIES. The plot simply STOPS.
For the next hour and 20 minutes, we see the pope running off into the streets, mumbling to himself, as lost as the storyline...NO deep insights, NO FUN whatsoever, NOT ONE interesting or deeper dialogue, he just hangs around a group of actors, one of whom is insane (a feeble and witless attempt at showing catholicism as a fraud?) so completely lost as to border insane. To think this sorry excuse of a mature man might have been a cardinal is simply unbelievable.
Oh yes, and all the while back in the Vatican, the shrink is doing...NOTHING. He plays cards and - VOLLEYBALL(!!!) with the old cardinals. He DOES NOT meet the pope again, don't be fooled by some "plot summaries" around.
In the end, as lost and whiney as before, not one iota the wiser, the pope returns, and gives his 1st speech to the crowd: "I'm not the right person, sorry everybody, I'm not up to it." And walks away back into the room. THE END. WTF???
He does NOTHING a normal man would - he does not resign, he does not appoint a successor, he does not warn the cardinals he wants to resign, he simply punches the whole of Christendom in the face with a "I'm sorry" whimper.
And the college of Cardinals, portrayed as a bunch of mindless aging old men fit for a nursery home, lets him go through to the end. The leaders of a 2000 year old organization act like a collective bad case of Alzheimer's...
I'd rather they'd poisoned him the night before and chosen another cardinal than watching that absolutely implausible "plot".
A COMPLETE waste of time, money, scenery, everything...and between Prometheus and this one, I've wasted quite a lot of my time and patience as well.
Learn from my mistakes, keep away from these dumps, and please wish me luck, I'm trying to find a good movie to recommend, but it's not being easy lately.
I caught half of this movie and decided to search and record it. Then I saw it with friends who could not stop laughing throughout the movie. The acting was superb, the story line - not a dull moment! We had a feeling as if someone had a premonition of what is to come in 2013. Some scenes in the movie are quite memorable - when each of the Cardinals utters a personal prayer "Not me!" The volleyball game which shows the cardinals as regular human beings...The scene in the theater when the "Pope" recites the part being played on stage, and then when the cast are in the restaurant and he feels totally detached. A lot of touching moments in this film. It is interesting and enjoyable whether you are a Catholic or not!
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
IMHO, the paradox and the highlight of the movie is that the main
character - the newly elected Pope, saying "no" under such public
pressure, found extraordinary inner strength and honesty, which
outwardly had been manifesting as "tiredness and weakness".
In my opinion, this movie is equally true to (any) all official Church denominations (not only the Catholic Church). here i want to make an important reservation: i don't mean to hurt anybody's feelings. i am in great awe and reverence to any monotheism and/or spiritual feats of all the saints of all religions. However, to my mind, this film is mostly intended for the people, who, for various reasons, have lost their personal (direct) aspiration to God and rely more on their priests and/or the rightness of their Church's teachings. Most likely they will find it hard to accept this movie, because it is difficult to see and accept that their (respective) Main Church Leader is just an ordinary man, who doubts and seeks God, as well as any other mortal being does and that any official Church denomination is mostly a "Big Theater" with its backstage, where quite earthly problems are being resolved. that is why it may come as a big dis-llusioning experience. but as the spells are disappearing, i believe, this movie is a great gift to all of us, no matter what faith denomination we are considered to be.
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
***this review may contain spoilers*** The other reviewers, in my opinion, focus too much on the minutiae of this story. I must admit my first reaction to the film is that it lacked coherence and punch. However, in the middle of the night, awakening with my own "road to Damascus" (as one reviewer said)regarding this film, I realized that the story elements served to make the statement that the authority and credibility of the Catholic Church in the 21st century is about to undergo a complete transformation, if not collapse. With all the sexual abuse scandals worldwide, the lack of appropriate consequences for the bishops and cardinals who protected those offending priests (see Cardinal Bernard Law, who was given an important position in Rome, after leaving Boston in disgrace), and the appalling treatment of and attitudes towards women all point to an institution that can only survive as long as a belief in the concept that the pope is "god's representative on earth" prevails. Within the context of this film we see that the newly elected pope is just a human being like any of us, and maybe only men, not god, have chosen him to lead. When the infallibility of the pope is called into question, then the whole thing begins to unravel. This belief in the pope's infallibility is what the authority of the Catholic Church rests upon. If he's just another guy, does he have the moral authority to make pronouncements about gay marriage, women as priests, celibacy of priests, birth control, and so many other controversial issues. At the end of the film, when Melville finally leaves, the cardinals are completely aghast, showing absolute shock in their reactions, covering their mouths in horror, realizing that their world is about to drastically change. It is no longer "business as usual." I think Moretti knew that this is exactly the message he was unleashing with this film. And to him, I say Bravo!! By the way, I was raised Catholic, have a sister who is a nun, and I attended a Jesuit university, until I was told upon entering a pre-law class on the first day of school that "all you women -- you go to the back of the room. You get a C for the term." There are many, many good people who follow the Catholic faith. But I am referring to the male hierarchy which, since the beginnings of the church, have used all kinds of means to grasp and stay in power. This film takes a little of that power away from them.
|Page 1 of 4:||   |
|External reviews||Official site||Plot keywords|
|Main details||Your user reviews||Your vote history|