The Two Popes (2019)

December 20, 2019 10:29 AM

With wonderful acting by Anthony Hopkins and Jonathan Pryce, a conservative Pope Benedict a liberal future Pope Francis must find common ground to forge a new path for the Catholic Church.
posted by growabrain (18 comments total)

I'm interested in this, but before I press play I'd like to know how it deals with the abuse cover-ups (is this a "some bad apples" interpretation, which would infuriate me, but also seems like the most likely approach)
posted by Gin and Broadband at 12:25 PM on December 21, 2019 [2 favorites]

The Two Popes is streaming on Netflix and playing at some theaters in the US.
posted by Etrigan at 6:55 PM on December 21, 2019 [2 favorites]

This is a fun, feel good, gossipy movie that touches on some controversies and completely avoids others. It's worth a watch but you might feel a little uneasy after.
posted by Bee'sWing at 2:29 PM on December 22, 2019

And, as for abuse cover-ups, that would be under 'barely touches on'.
posted by Bee'sWing at 2:46 PM on December 22, 2019 [2 favorites]

This movie has problems. Anthony Hopkins and Jonathan Pryce are very good at playing their characters, but they aren't playing Joseph Ratzinger and Jorge Bergoglio.
posted by Fukiyama at 8:20 PM on December 22, 2019 [1 favorite]

Quite enjoyable.

Seems to be a Rorschach test. By my accounting, the problems are trivial. If you're looking for an expose on the abuse scandals, look elsewhere. Frankly, we already know how that's played out. Or rather, how it hasn't. This movie isn't about that. It's tired-old-man-seeks-to-pass-baton-to-not-so-tired-old-man story. Portrays Ratzinger and Bergoglio pretty much as we imagine they'd be, considering how they've been portrayed in the media. And the portrayals are finely done by Hopkins and Pryce. Don't know how accurate the portrayals are, as the Papacy isn't a particularly transparent position, even for the relatively gregarious Bergoglio. I found it engaging and overall warmly sympathetic particularly to the now Pope Francis.
posted by 2N2222 at 9:52 PM on December 22, 2019 [4 favorites]

Seems to be a Rorschach test.

Ok, but I have a serious question, because I was kind of let down by The Remains of the Day. Does Anthony Hopkins eat anyone?
posted by Literaryhero at 7:29 AM on December 23, 2019 [3 favorites]

Don't know how accurate the portrayals are, as the Papacy isn't a particularly transparent position, even for the relatively gregarious Bergoglio.

Those were my problems along with the idea Ratzinger saw Bergoglio as his natural successor.

I am too close to the subject. Religious studies was one of my majors in university and I have followed the ins and outs of the Vatican since before JPII died. A book to movie adaptation would be a good analogy. The movie worked for me as a movie, but as far as the content, I've already read the book.
posted by Fukiyama at 8:48 AM on December 23, 2019 [1 favorite]

but they aren't playing Joseph Ratzinger and Jorge Bergoglio.
Yeah, such friendly relations seem far fetched given the different politics of the two. My understanding is that Francis has pretty much purged the College of Cardinals of all Benedict supporters.
posted by Bee'sWing at 11:48 AM on December 24, 2019 [1 favorite]

My understanding is that Francis has pretty much purged the College of Cardinals of all Benedict supporters.

The only Cardinal that has been removed from the college by Francis (to the best of my memory) was Theodore “Uncle Ted” McCarrick, a pro-Francis prelate. However, PF has made a few high-profile reassignments of some of B16’s Curial appointees and had several age-out of Curial positions and voting rights when they turned 80 years old.
posted by Ranucci at 8:03 PM on December 24, 2019 [1 favorite]

Yeah, Father Time has purged the college, not Francis. Francis has done great work though at each consistory so far appointing men with similar worldviews to his own.
posted by Fukiyama at 8:11 AM on December 25, 2019 [3 favorites]

I’m very curious to know the Vatican’s approach to dealing with movies like this. Clearly they allowed extensive access to Vatican grounds for filming. Do they allow this for any filmmaker that can pay for it, or do they insist on knowing the details of the project first? I doubt they’d let you film a porno in the Sistine Chapel, for instance. But even a movie like this seems sensitive from an optics standpoint. I can’t imagine the Catholic Church would want to highlight differences of opinion within the church (particularly between Popes, given the whole infallibility thing), or encourage speculation about whether or not acting Popes have struggled with their faith.
posted by dephlogisticated at 2:22 PM on December 27, 2019 [1 favorite]

dephlogisticated:

Not really. For example, according to Wikipedia, the Sistine Chapel was built on a set. And as far as differences of opinion, don't misunderstand what infallibility actually is. Not everything a pope says is infallible.
posted by Fukiyama at 12:28 PM on December 28, 2019

I've wanted to watch this since I saw the trailer and had to wait ages for it to come out on Netflix.

I really enjoyed this film: I liked the mix of languages with subtitles and laughed when Price says "speaking English is exhausting." Also how Bennedict speaks in Latin when he wants to say something that will upset the cardinals.

The film uses some real news footage, which I thought was very effective.

Yes, the film isn't centred on the abuse & cover up, but it does mention it and is suitably horrified at the cover up.

The stuff about Bergolio in Argentina during the Junta was very moving. I knew about the 'desparecidos' but ooof, it was tough to watch.

The bit about not hearing from God for ages despite being in a leadership position in the church felt very real and relevant.

I also liked the after/during credits bit of the two popes watching the world cup. (Argentina v Germany)
posted by freethefeet at 3:47 PM on December 29, 2019 [2 favorites]

Bee'sWing: Yeah, such friendly relations seem far fetched given the different politics of the two.

They started out very adversarial, at least from Ratzinger to Bergoglio, specifically because of their differing politics.

Fukiyama: A book to movie adaptation would be a good analogy. The movie worked for me as a movie, but as far as the content, I've already read the book.

That's a good way to put it. How else to condense years of story into a few hours?
posted by filthy light thief at 8:56 PM on December 30, 2019

Also: Kommissar Rex is a real show.
posted by filthy light thief at 9:30 PM on December 30, 2019 [2 favorites]

Caught it on the 'flix and enjoyed, clever conceit having the two meet for valid twisty reasons. My issue is the same as with most high level leaders interacting it just utterly oversimplifies the interactions. Understandably as real dialog would opaque, with jargon and mutual assumptions of the shared world. But these guys are players, Ratzinger was a down and dirty politico long before the Vatican. Francis had been promoted over his teachers when he was quite young and being in the middle one of the worst military juntas ever, he was a survivor, seems like a very very good man but one does not survive going head to head with corrupt south american generals without playing the game very very well.

The banter between two organizational chess masters must make 4D chess seem easy, each comment would reference many levels ahead. There was some attempt by the writers and probably impossible but it just seemed a bit hollow.
posted by sammyo at 9:20 PM on January 4, 2020

I Have Watched “The Two Popes” Nine Times. It Should Win No Oscars on Sunday (Mother Jones)
posted by bunderful at 7:04 PM on February 8, 2020