comment movie

(2013-05-21 13:48:02)

sometimes the truth is so obvious, but hard to be followed

This movie seams to be about the next Pope. And many would see thestory in some relation to the Chatolic Church or the faith. However itis not.It is about a person confronted with a situation which should be hismaybe the biggest challenge or even greatest honor but for some reasonit is not. It does not matter what is a cause of this dissociation. Itdoes not matter how serious the situation looks like in the eyes ofother people. In a specific moment, when the man realizes that it isjust not his life, everything looks like a charade. Even the veryimportance of the cardinals or expectations and worries of all thefollowers around the world.The movie guides spectators through the inner struggles of the personwho is still in doubt because of the outer image and because of thesocial pressures.In the contrary to the possible trivial ending that is so common inreal life, where we so often loose this inner struggles and just giveup, the main role next-to-be Pope succeeds in his efforts to find theway. There is no psychoanalysis, no politics and no dirty tricks of theadministration to break this man. He does not loose his faith and putshis future in the hands of God, believing that he will be understood.Sometimes such decisions require the strength of the man that couldeven be no-less but the Pope himself.On the other hand, there should be no situation in the world where youcould not say "NO, THANK YOU", if the next-to-be Pope can say NO to theworld and his God.

Iwould

(2013-05-21 00:03:02)

a funny and respectful movie with an unusual lead role

This is a movie about an elderly man who has been chosen to be the nextPope. But, beware: the operative word in the previous sentence is"man", not "Pope", because the story is not about the challenges ofbeing (or becoming) Pope: the story is about the struggles of beinghuman. That's the reason why each and every one of us should be able toeasily follow and enjoy this funny, educated movie. Taking for grantedthat all the viewers will be men (and women) themselves, it will beeasy for everybody to get in touch with the doubts, the fears and thememories that the main character has to confront after he is called totake on himself one of the greatest responsibilities that the world hasto offer.Of course a lot of risks were involved in dealing with such issues asfaith and self confidence using such an unusual and peculiar subject.But, just like a slim young acrobat on a flying trapeze daring toattempt a difficult exercise, the movie achieves the result of tellingthis strange story with grace, with humor, with kindness, and with arespect for the themes involved that, I think, the faithful part of theaudience should be able to appreciate even more than those among us whowouldn't define themselves religious, or catholic.Furthermore, I can't resist to notice how funny it is that a movierealized by an openly atheist author depicts catholic hierarchy withsuch a sympathetic view – with tones much more friendly, I would say,than the ones of many mainstream blockbusters we have seen in recentyears. So, go watch this movie with confidence (it's an entertaining,interesting work of fiction), and trust (it's soft-spoken, andrespectful): you could take even your kids along – and, go figure, evenyour confessor!

junkielee

(2013-05-19 06:14:13)

We Have a Pope

Saw the film in yesterday's Febiofest opening ceremony, with NanniMoretti and Sandrine Bonnaire's presence to receive special achievementawards for their dedication of cinema. As a Cannes' underachiever last year, the film sports a vigorouscomedic sugar-coat from the very beginning, after a majesticallyspectacular funeral of the deceased Pope and ignites by a cardinal'spratfall in the dark, then the new-elected Pope, a dark horse as noneof the potential candidates are willing to take on the burden title (anunconvincing but laughable situation inside the chamber election) isnot prepared for the supreme responsibility and fails to bulk himselfup to soldier on his first public appearance for his election, thefarce has grown out of control, exaggerated by the stunt of the elopedPope roaming around Rome all by himself (unrecognized by the mass as noone is informed the name of the new Pope out of the Vatican), also theescaping procedure is too unpractical to exert for an octogenarianMichel Piccoli. The laughters are perpetual during the screen time, but Nanni Moretti'ssarcastic lightheartedness has gradually outrun his incisive judgement,the whole buffoonery of the cardinals and regularly repeated gags arerunning out of vitality, culminating a quirky self- consciousnessduring the slow-motions of each cardinals who are competing strenuouslyfor the international-tour of the volleyball competition set in theyard just beneath the Pope's chamber (each team is divided by regionsand the intelligence quotient of all these wise men are skepticallychallenged by the wide-eyed conversions. On the other hand, the Pope'sroute on the run also falls restrained (Mr. Piccolo's approachableperformance is a pro against the odds of the priority of a ridiculekeynote).The film could have got Michel Piccoli's surefire paramountaccomplishment during his over 65 years acting career span, which isremorsefully undermined by the willful levity of the film and thedenouement is too unorthodox to endorse even from an agnosticpoint-of-view.

alan-607-758799

(2013-05-18 16:29:15)

Wrong description.

The description of the movie is wrongly understood. This movie isdefinitely NOT about the relationship of Pope and his therapist. Thefailed therapist has and episodic side-role. The movie is about aBishop who cannot take the burden of responsibility and attention thatfalls upon him. How he struggles and how he finds courage to solve thesituation. There is no relationship between a Pope and therapist whohave a 10 sentence conversation. Even the other therapist - therapistswife does not have any major impact or role in the movie whatsoever.Okay she kind of connects with the Pope but has more of a satiricalrole considering the outcome and storyline. Misleading is thisintroduction. Please change it.

velijn

(2013-05-16 08:25:46)

An ass between two bales of what?

Moretti is an interesting director and his documentaries and movies(like "The Son's Room") shows us why. But what in the name of the HolySpirit is he trying to tell us here? To get a foothold inside theVatican, the nucleus of one of the great (well, at least by numbers)religions in the world, is a daunting task. It becomes clear that thedirector had been more interested in the the mindset of the man who'sto be the next pope, than in any political or human machinations of theelectors. We know our popes of the past - Peter O'Toole's or JohnGoodman's pope are a delight - but any effort to get into the innerworkings of the Vatican has eluded us: Preminger's "The Cardinal" andAnderson's "The Shoes of the Fisherman" just scratch the surface andare too reverential, so Fellini still steals the show with hisdelightful religious fashion show in "Roma".And that for a job description to head a congregation of over abillion, elected by a college of a mere hundred or so cardinals. Stufffor either historical pageantry (we all love our Borgias) or an insightinto the mindset of electors or popes-to-be, about why a job can makeor break a man, or how the past does influence your future. Insteadwe're offered the choice of an ass between two bales.Is it is meant to be a farce? Then the bunch of actors hired to play abunch of totally idiotic cardinals playing volley-ball in the aftermathof the conclave are right fitting in. But because of that it is verydifficult to sympathize with the turmoils of a Pope-to-be with thoseallusions to All the world's a stage, the heavy references to Chekhovand all that. I mean, who wants to be a pope over this lot oftwittering morons? And Piccoli is certainly not a fool, but a tormentedsoul who seems to have lost his confidence and the past. How does thatfit in with farce? With a bunch of blabbering idiots playing pinocchioor volley-ball and a man in crisis? So, is it then meant to be aprobing insight into the soul of a man who's thrown into this world asthe next Pontiff? Is this a probe into the turmoils of a Pope-to-be -by the way, gently played by Piccolli - with allusions to All theworld's a stage, the heavy references to Chekhov and all that? Afterall, apart from power-hungry popes in fiction, it is indeed an almostinhumane job. Then the bunch of actors hired to play a bunch of totallyidiotic cardinals inside the conclave or playing volley-ball in theaftermath are totally unbelievable. They deny us any symphatising withthe main character as we're lead to believe that some of the mostpowerful men in the world are blabbering idiots playing pinocchio.Alas, the director, playing the part of an atheistic psycho-analist,fits right in with this cardinal bunch.The director should have known that the real world is barging in withalmost every frame, with a church and its board of managers wadingthrough a lot of controversial items. As a viewer you can't excludethat: we don't live in a vacuum. Moreover, the allusions to John XXII,Paul VI and John-Paul I are drawn with heavy strokes indeed.So, we're stuck between two bales of hay. Bad choice. The directorcouldn't make an artistic choice and left us with no choice at all. Inthe end we can understand the Pope's decision, but not because we carefor him or his struggle, but who in his or her right mind would governa church with a council of idiots? Mmm… that may be the point thedirector is making?

John Madden

(2013-05-15 22:20:31)

The key is in his name

This worthwhile film is a comedy the way Romeo and Juliet is: both havesome funny moments, BUT...The production values are high and the arcane court ceremony of theVatican is recreated meticulously--much better than in "The Shoes ofthe Fisherman". This is as close as most of us are ever going to get toa papal conclave.More remarkably, writer and director have shown realistically the humanside of this powerful, devout, celibate world. The cardinals aredepicted in all of their enormous ethnic and cultural diversity, aswell as in their frailties and strengths, not as a bunch of holy joesbut as real people struggling as best they can with hugeresponsibilities. Yes, some smoke, and they are capable of playingpick-up ball games.The character of the cardinal who is elected, and accepts, but then hasa breakdown when cannot face assuming the job, seemed implausible to meat first. After all, he has spent a lifetime assuming larger and largerresponsibilities--and he could have said, "No."But it slowly dawned on me that his otherwise unexplained name,Melville--unusual for someone apparently Italian--holds the key to themovie. When his corpulent frame is vested in his papal robes, he is thegreat white whale depicted by Herman Melville in Moby Dick, and thismovie is that story told from the whale's perspective. As Ahab wasobsessed in pursuing and catching the whale, this pope franticallytries to escape from the persona that will eventually lead him to hisdeath.

VillageVoiceNY

(2013-05-15 09:11:43)

Institutional Failure: Toothless Satire of the Church in We Have a Pope

Suitable entertainment for a Knights of Columbus fundraiser, NanniMoretti's Good Friday– released We Have a Pope finds the Most HolyFather, wracked with self-doubt about his new position, on a walkaboutin Rome. Back at the Vatican, the cuddly cardinals who await his returnsquare off in a round-robin volleyball tournament. The original Latintitle of Moretti's tragicomedy, a soft send-up of the Catholic Church,is Habemus Papam. The "am" in the second word should be chopped off.Actor-writer-director Moretti, a darling of Cannes, where We Have aPope...Read the full review here: http://www.villagevoice.com/movies/

jadepietro

(2013-05-14 19:22:22)

Il papa, Can You Hear Me?

This film is mildly recommended.In one of my all-time favorite romantic comedies, Billy Wilder'senchanting Roman Holiday, a princess, with an aversion to her royalresponsibilities and its added pressure of pomp and circumstance thatcomes with it, flees her guardians to escape to a simpler commoner'slife in Rome. Complications ( and love ) ensue. In Nanni Moretti'sengaging We Have a Pope, the job description might have changedslightly, but the same intensity and stress of duty and honor remains.And while the main character is never in search of love, complicationsbegin to pile up.The pope has died and a new successor must be elected. After multiplevoting, the conclave of cardinals decide that Cardinal Melville wouldbe the best candidate to fill that void. The crowds form outside theVatican awaiting their decision, all eyes focused on that centralbalcony of St. Peter's Basilica and its new pontiff. Yet inside, it isanother story entirely as the newly anointed and appointed leaderrefuses to take on that role. A psychotherapist is brought in toconvince Cardinal Melville that this big white whale of a job belongsto him. So what does the cardinal do? He escapes, seeking la dolce vitathat others have.Now Moretti's basic idea is an intriguing one, that one man who so manylook to for spiritual guidance is himself in search of that elusivegoal and is in the midst of his own personal crisis of faith. Morrettiserves his story well as a director, setting up his characters, all ofwhom are held captive in their grandiose surroundings and involving themovie audience with the regal pageantry and splendor. But as screenwriter, his script loses its focus with some subplots andactions that never quite gel. Just as his character becomes lost, sodoes his film. Scenes involving his interactions and experiences withthe common folk fall flat and don't seem to resolve the complex issueor provide any insight for this troubled soul's introspection. As thefilm progresses, the remaining cardinals become more one-dimensionaland their behavior, while slightly amusing, become easy folly as theyplay volleyball in their fancy silk trappings, merely decoration ratherthan real people. ( Only Renato Scarpi as Cardinal Gregori provides anydepth to his character. ) Plus, the role of the psychologist ( alsoplayed by Moretti ) becomes a mere afterthought, never really buildingany relationship with his patient. And, those annoying Leaps of Logiccomes to the forefront during his respite allowing him his "RomanHoliday", though those everyday "economic" expenses are not explainedin the least ( free hotel room, food, theater ticket, bustransportation, etc.).The film detours to an unsatisfying and unexpected conclusion thatbasically negates everything before it. As Cardinal Melville grappleswith the anxiety of becoming one of the world's most exalted religiousleader, Moretti too never comes to terms with his initial fascinatingpremise and his film's plot structure.Fortunately, the talented French actor, Michel Piccoli gives awonderfully subtle performance as Il papa. His nuanced facialexpressions and sad soulful eyes convey the character's humility, fear,and wisdom beyond his years. It is superb acting that nearly makes upfor some of the film's missteps along the way.While many of the compelling elements are up there on the screen for afine film, We Have a Pope simply needed to have a better script ( andending ) to achieve a level of success. Still, Moretti does stay trueto his vision and never becomes sentimental or mawkish. In We Have aPope, while the job may remain unfilled, the moviegoer in us allregretfully remains unfulfilled as well. GRADE: B-ANY COMMENTS: Please contact me at: jadepietro@rcn.com to add comments.Visit my blog at: www.dearmoviegoer.com

mateo montoya

(2013-05-11 00:15:24)

great prophetic movie

I saw the movie a few days ago and, even though I did not like theending, I gave a 9/10, because I loved how the Cardinals were made tolook so godly and so human at the same time. Michel Piccoli did suchgreat acting. Last but not least, besides being very entertaining, the movie now hasproved to be prophetic, as Pope Benedict has resigned to everyone'ssurprise. That alone makes this movie, a great movie.PS: For the person who wrote: "Waste of time, written by an atheist sowhat do you expect", and then complains of "an insult to allBelievers". I am not an atheist; I believe in God. But my thinkingbrain felt deeply insulted as I was reading the rant.

Nick Suess

(2013-05-10 15:34:32)

Suitability to lead

The one glaring plot hole in this charming movie is that in order tohave arisen to the rank of cardinal, the pope-elect must surely havefirst displayed more than his fair share of the characteristics ofambition and the desire to climb the slippery pole (no, no matter howappropriate it may seem, this is not a reference to the previousground-kissing guy in the job) to the top. But then it could be thatright there, three or four metres short of stepping onto the balcony tobe acclaimed by the faithful, he experienced his own personal 'Road toDamascus' moment, with the realisation that he was simply not up to theawesome task of leading such a vast global flock. However, if thesubtitles correctly translated his speech at he end, what he said thenwas that the entire pack of cardinals behind him was not up to the taskeither. To me that was a very pointed comment to sum up all we had seenin the preceding 90 minutes or so.That the college of cardinals was portrayed as a sort of boys' club wasa clever dramatic trick. Commenters here have asked why they weren'tacting out the roles of Machiavellian plotters, and I feel that Morettichose this depiction in order not to draw the viewer away from the mainplot of the pope's personal dilemma. There can be no doubt that duringthe election the two or three front runners displayed their desire towear the white skull cap, and disappointment when they felt it wasslipping away from them to a rank outsider, but Moretti left thepower-hungry story there.And so with what ultimately became a surreal display of old men inskirts playing volleyball, Moretti lampooned the Vatican and stated hisvery clear question - are these very strange elderly men even remotelysuitable to lead the hundreds of millions who still ascribe to theirbadly tarnished faith despite its amply demonstrated incapacity toembrace anything that has happened over the last five centuries, fromGalileo to gay rights?

Robert W.

(2013-05-01 23:27:41)

A dawdling and sad attempt at comedy

Despite being called a "comedy", the Italian Hangover this is not. Itsfar more a drama than it could ever be a comedy. I don't know thereligious implications of the film, nor the accuracy of what itportrays and I don't care. I could enjoy the film without any of thatbut it was just such a struggle to get through. It felt so long and thepacing of the film was brutal. Its actually a shame because the moviehad a very moving lead performance, a very sad undertone, emotionsrunning high and a little bit of fun mixed in where the comedy wassupposed to be. However, many of what was supposed to be considered"funny" felt forced and thrown in for no reason. This would have made afar better drama and when you go into it with the understanding thatits a comedy, even a dark comedy, you have certain expectations. Istayed with the film as hard as it was at times simply because of thelead character. I had to see the pay off, I had to see where it wouldend and I guess that's worth something that I wanted to see that. Thegood news is that the ending was very good. It was sweet and emotionaland well done. The movie can be visually impressive but not enough towade through the sluggish story.Veteran Italian actor Michel Piccoli gives a moving and devastatinglyemotional performance as the newly elected Pope. He is just so full ofvery real emotions. He has incredible charisma on screen and did suchan amazing job. He was absolutely the highlight of the film and is thereason for what scoring I give this. Nanni Moretti is the Psychoanalystthey bring in to try and help the Pope overcome his anxiety about hisnew position. Moretti is good and despite some descriptions of the filmsaying this is about the new Pope and his relationship to histherapist, they have one or two scenes together and that's it. I wouldhave liked to have seen Moretti get more depth to his character. Thesupporting cast who play the Cardinals and the Pope's support staff,are all decent but none of them really stand out from the others. Infact they are all very similar and show the same facial expressions andemotions throughout, so you'll never really know who is who becausethey are basically the same character multiplied.Moretti who plays the therapist also co-wrote and directed this film.It is well shot, visually very nice, and I quite enjoyed an inside lookat The Vatican even if it was just a fictional account of the place.The story drags all of the positives down because it is simply tooslow. While the new Pope explores his love of theatre, the Cardinalsand the therapist play Volleyball at The Vatican...yes its thatstrange. I would have rather focused solely on The Pope's story and theinteresting people he encounters that helps him come to terms with hisnew position. Although the ending is heartfelt and moving, it also issort of unsatisfying in that none of the story leads up to how it ends.Sadly I want to really root for this because it is unique but I justhad to try far too hard to get through it. 5/10

george karpouzas

(2013-05-01 08:13:52)

The College of Cardinals as a team of Peter Pans devoted to their leader

This particular movie is based on a very original idea. It has scenesthat depict with vividness the process of Papal succession. It portraysthe ambivalence and doubts of a man and a collective entity when facedwith a weight of responsibility which is much greater than thatexpected to be shouldered by an average human being. It very wellconveys the atmosphere in St Peter's Square among the multinationalcrowd of the faithful as they wait for the election of their newspiritual Father. But it has a flaw.It promotes the idea that the collective entity known as the College ofCardinals, a team which along with the Pope rules the Roman CatholicChurch, is a group of grown-up boys, simple and faithful, humblydevoted to the Pope. It is strange that an institution that numberedamong its former Heads people such as the Borgias and the Medici, whichhas been responsible for such events such as the Crusades and hasinvented and controlled the Inquisition could be nowadays governed by agroup of naive simpletons. Of course the Roman Catholic Church haspromoted art and learning and has played a great role in the history ofEurope and the World.Still, an institution from which so much evil as well as so much goodhas sprung, does not in any sense done justice when its hierarchy isportrayed in such a manner. In that point I disagree with the reviewerthat considers that the movie has a sympathetic portrayal of the RomanCatholic hierarchy. I think the portrayal of the hierarchy is far toosimplistic and naive and gives the impression that even the professorsof Hogwards in Harry Potter are a group of people that collectivelypossess more gravitas and serious purpose than the College ofCardinals. Neither the faithful nor the opponents of the Roman CatholicChurch would find in this group either role models or worthyadversaries.Excluding that flaw, which incapacitates the movie from been takenseriously as a depiction of the workings of the higher echelons of theChurch bureaucracy, one can commend the views of the Vatican and ofRome it offers as well as the performance of the lead actors in theroles of the Supreme Pontiff and the Professor of Psychology.

CountZero313

(2013-04-25 21:22:22)

unfocused script leads to puzzling, genre-confounding film

Nanni Moretti's film has an interesting premise - what if the Cardinalelected Pope felt himself incapable of doing the job? That is anintriguing idea to explore, and you could do it as political drama orout-and-out farce. What you cannot do is have both. But more intriguingthan a man having an interior struggle with being elected God'srepresentative on Earth, would be the external struggles unleashed byhis 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 hissyfits at card games and mess up in slow-mo volleyball. Is this pomp andcostume 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 topclergyman? Tone, theme and satirical targets all lack focus in thisunder-realised piece. Moretti's own character has one scene of comicfailure with the protagonist, and then seems merely to function as acutaway from the main plot line. Excising this psychiatrist completelywould go some way to tightening up a very disjointed piece.Michel Piccoli is engaging as the Cardinal encumbered with a crisis ofconfidence, but that performance gets lost in the narrative failingsthat frame it. Such is the lack of focus that audiences come awaywondering what the film is meant to be. A baffling film, and not in agood way.

Jose Cruz

(2013-04-25 11:46:12)

Disappointing

I was a bit disappointed by this film because its beginning was verygood, but the film's quality started to decline soon and gradually itbecame a mess. By the end the film was a complete mess and left a badtaste in my mouth. I was disappointed as the beginning promised muchmore than it was delivered in the.I was going to this film with different expectations, though, because Iexpected this film to be more philosophical and to have smarterdialogue. Instead, the film portraits the church as a bunch of idiots.It is a very bland and unoriginal criticism on the Catholic Church.Indeed, today nothing is safer than to beat on religion, a reflectionperhaps of the post-modernism of our present days.

chaos-rampant

(2013-04-20 13:07:23)

Habemus really?

This is going to be one of the most watchable films of the year, aconversation piece to shoot the breeze around religion. It is about anew Pope elect who, after the elaborate ritual has drawn thousands ofpeople in anxious anticipation outside the Holy See, discovers that hecannot go out on the balcony and give his blessing. He cannot be whathe's expected to be.So the eye turns inwards for self-discovery. On that level the filmadopts a tone of melancholy yearning. It is sad, just to see a manweighed down by the will of god, possibly dismayed at the silence. Onthe flipside it is funny, when all the ordained officials are worriedabout is the ceremonial shibboleth or a cup of cappuccino. It isgenerally bittersweet with old life greeting itself from a pulpit thatdemands closure, revelation. Meanwhile conjecture and idle speculationare continuously throughout the film being blabbed from the TV.But does it matter, which is to say can it weigh down on us or instilla silence in which to seek our words? I'm not just idling here, what Imean is this; although enjoyable on a very plain level, melancholy withred curtains fluttering in absence, and since it competed with bothTree of Life and Melancholia this year at Cannes, does it offer its ownascetic images to contemplate?The answer is likely no, but not for failing to provide opportunities.Exemplified in two instances, double perspectives both; one is ofcourse at the beginning, with outside the triumph and celebration oforganized faith, faith in god's will, but from inside there is only theconfused, agitated mind of a plain man who must embody that will. Theother is when the cardinals rejoice that the Pope is finally doingbetter; but of course, from our perspective, we know that inside thechambers is only an even more plain man as substitute, baffled at hisnewfound importance. He stages behind the papal curtains a play oflight and shadow for the gathered congregation outside, this is afitting image of what Moretti is looking to exemplify.So in both cases we are directed to recognize a charade of profoundestdeception or false hope. Where god should be made manifest, we haveinstead the same hapless poor schmucks as the rest of us. There is nohigher wisdom, atheists will rejoice in this. Another opinion is thathis depiction of cardinals, despite the odd sour face, as kindly oldmen, overgrown children really, is not as scathing as some might havehoped.But the old man heard at the sermon, about the wisdom that comes fromhumility. Some weighs we let fall on our shoulders, because there's notwo ways around it. So even though this spiritual absence becomesdeafening in the finale, I just cannot embrace any of it. Catholicism may or may not deserve our modern scorn, but faith isn'tdoctrine. Faith being a personal attainment, it is not an old mangreeting us from a balcony.

Violet Weed

(2013-04-20 06:46:22)

Waste of time, written by an atheist so what do you expect

I am soooo glad I didn't pay anything but the eight bucks a month costof netflix for this piece of garbage. It is an insult to all Believersin God and Jesus Christ, not just an insult to Catholics. I am not aCatholic but I am a 'slain in the spirit' believer. If you are aBeliever, one of God's Children, then this 'comedy' (which it is notalthough described that way) is blasphemous. In the past 45 years Ihave read / devoured (as twere) many books by Christians and about Godand Jesus. Many of those books were written by the Popes. Each Pope hasproved to me, by his written words, that he is also Born Again. Would aCardinal, elected almost unanimously, to be Pope, reject that election?turn his back on God and God's people? I highly doubt it. I am going tolobby to have this movie removed from the 'faith and spirituality'group within Netflix to something 'darker'. It 'could' have been a goodmovie, but the only 'good' thing about it was getting to see some ofRome again after having been away from Italy for the past 30 odd years.Don't waste your time on this garbage. It's just another attack by thedevil as assisted by his minions.

Vladimir Savin

(2013-04-18 20:50:03)

personal aspiration and the disillusioning experience

IMHO, the paradox and the highlight of the movie is that the maincharacter - the newly elected Pope, saying "no" under such publicpressure, found extraordinary inner strength and honesty, whichoutwardly had been manifesting as "tiredness and weakness".In my opinion, this movie is equally true to (any) all official Churchdenominations (not only the Catholic Church). here i want to make animportant reservation: i don't mean to hurt anybody's feelings. i am ingreat awe and reverence to any monotheism and/or spiritual feats of allthe saints of all religions. However, to my mind, this film is mostlyintended for the people, who, for various reasons, have lost theirpersonal (direct) aspiration to God and rely more on their priestsand/or the rightness of their Church's teachings. Most likely they willfind it hard to accept this movie, because it is difficult to see andaccept that their (respective) Main Church Leader is just an ordinaryman, who doubts and seeks God, as well as any other mortal being doesand 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 thespells are disappearing, i believe, this movie is a great gift to allof us, no matter what faith denomination we are considered to be.

Chris_Pandolfi

(2013-04-18 06:56:11)

The Reluctant Pontiff

No matter how capable we are in life, there are some responsibilitieswe're simply not able to assume. "We Have a Pope" tells the story of aman who comes to this realization after several days of soul searching.His name is Cardinal Melville (Michel Piccoli), who's part of aconclave gathering in Rome following the death of John Paul II. Afterseveral tedious and psychologically grueling rounds of voting, he'selected Pope by a substantial margin. His initial reaction appears tobe speechless surprise. But then comes the morning he's to beintroduced to the faithful, who have gathered by the thousands in St.Peter's Square; the instant the Cardinal Protodeacon exclaims, "HabemusPapam!" to the cheering masses, Melville has a screaming panic attackand retreats to an inner chamber within St. Peter's Basilica.The spokesman for the Holy See (Jerzy Stuhr), who obviously understandsthe importance of good PR, attempts to buy time by announcing to thepress that the new pontiff needed time for prayer and reflection beforetaking office, and that he should be making an appearance in a fewhours, at which point his name will finally be revealed. Needless tosay, it doesn't go as planned. What's worse, the College of Cardinalsmust abide by the laws of the Church, which clearly state that, untilthe Pope actually appears on the balcony and addresses the people, theelection is not officially over. This means that the entire conclavecannot have any contact with the outside world. This is normally anendurable event. In this case, there's no telling how long Melvillewill take. It could be days, weeks, perhaps even months or years.The College, desperate to bring Melville out of his depression andlethargy, make a last-resort appeal to Professor Brezzi, apsychoanalyst (Nanni Moretti, also the film's director and co-writer).Unfortunately, he's so restricted by bureaucratic rules that he cannotadequately do his job. He's forbidden to ask Melville questionsregarding his past or anything even remotely related to sex. Dreams areokay, but only with extreme discretion. And he must do all this in thepresence of the entire College, who must hear everything that passesbetween them. The kicker is that, because Brezzi has actually spokenwith the pontiff, he must now remain within the Basilica, cut off fromthe outside world. In the meantime, the spokesman orchestrates asecretive mission to transport Melville to see Brezzi's estranged wife,also a psychoanalyst (Margherita Buy). The College will be led tobelieve that Melville is in room by having a similarly built guardwander through his bedroom and occasionally ruffle the curtain.At this point, the film becomes increasingly unclear in its intentions,with scenes that address the overarching issue in odd ways. Immediatelyafter Melville sees Brezzi's wife, he gives the spokesman the slip andbegins wandering the streets of Rome, desperately trying to figure itall out. We learn, albeit vaguely, of Melville's failed ambition to bean actor; we even get a few fleeting references to his mother andsister, the latter successful in becoming an actress. Meanwhile, Brezziorganizes an indoor volleyball tournament for the College, each teamdivided by continent. His reasons for doing this aren't made explicit.Presumably, it's to alleviate his own boredom and restlessness while atthe same time providing the College with some physical activity.However, his dialogue suggests an ulterior motive, perhaps driven byhis own hostile feelings. He seems resentful, for example, that heseparated from his wife, who he believes was in competition with himover being the best psychoanalyst.What this has to do with Melville's crisis of conscience, I'm notexactly sure. It could be that, like Melville, Brezzi feels inadequatein his field of interest. However, his failure to diagnose and treatMelville was the result of imposed religious restrictions, notprofessional incompetence. Here's some food for thought: Brezzi tries,unsuccessfully, to convince the cardinals that all of Melville'sdepression symptoms are mentioned within the pages of the Bible – theonly book they would give Brezzi access to. Meanwhile, the spokesmantries his hardest to maintain the illusion that Melville is within hisroom, although with each day that passes, it becomes clear that itcannot be maintained forever. What is clear is that this Melville mustwork through this on his own terms at his own pace.Given the fact that the plot addresses a man's reluctance to become theleader of a religious institution, and considering that both Morettiand the character he plays are both atheists, it's tempting tospeculate that "We Have a Pope" is about a crisis of faith. Let meassure you that faith never once factors into the equation. It's notabout belief or non-belief. Quite simply, it's about knowing yourlimitations, about understanding that passion and support doesn'tnecessarily equate to expertise. This movie could have been about beingelected President, or being crowned King, or getting a job promotion;because each deals with the acquisition of power, the message wouldhave been exactly the same. You can have a firm faith in anything andstill know that you're not qualified to be a leader.-- Chris Pandolfi (www.atatheaternearyou.net)

BoomerMovieFan1

(2013-04-04 23:16:56)

Most of the funny parts are in the trailer

"We Have a Pope" was advertised as a comedy, but it's really more of adrama with a few lighthearted moments. I was looking forward to thismovie after seeing the trailer, which made it seem like alaugh-out-loud comedy ("hilarious" according to a Huffington Postcritic quoted in the trailer). When the movie started, though, I wasthinking, "Wow, this is a slow start for a comedy." Minute after longminute of cardinals walking through the Vatican and chanting as theyprepare to elect a Pope. Unfortunately, this snooze-inducing pacedoesn't pick up much as the movie progresses.Oh yes, the premise is intriguing: The elected Pope has a crisis ofconfidence at the last minute and decides that he can't go through withit. He slips away from his handlers and wanders the city, trying toresolve his dilemma. But surprisingly, given a storyline with so manyinteresting possibilities, the screenwriter flounders. The Popemaunders from place to place, never meeting anyone we care about, neverhaving a meaningful conversation. He never learns anything, neverresolves anything.Meanwhile, back at the Vatican, the cardinals organize a volleyballtournament. (What the heck?) The director apparently thinks the idea ofcardinals playing volleyball is so amusing that he even shows them insports-movie slow motion. Yawn. As boring as the Pope's adventures are,this ball game is even more boring.About two-thirds of the way through the movie, we finally get a hint ofan interesting subplot. The cardinals discuss the odds published in thelocal paper regarding each of their chances of being elected. It turnsout that the Pope was selected despite long odds. But alas, the wholematter is quickly forgotten. "We Have a Pope" has very little character development, a skeletonplot, only two or three funny lines, and a disappointing ending. Ican't recommend it.

crottymcnaughty

(2013-04-04 18:31:00)

idk if i spoiled anything...so i marked it as a spoiler...but i didn't really give anything away...but the movie sucked

I am a Catholic and this film breaks my heart for the lack in respectsome people can have towards a faithful religion such as the CatholicChurch. The film leaves no message of hope and contains varied andmixed portrayals of the Catholic Church. In the history of the Church,it has been necessary to use secrecy within its walls, just as mostnations do, but to suggest that Cardinals and leaders are simply blindsheep, being strung along by their faith without reason is enough to bemad at this film. The Church leaders are not whimsical or frivolous innature. Nor are they weak minded, as the film suggests. They may befilled with humility, but they are not weak. Nanni Moretti is bold for making this film. He does, to some extent,capture the grandeur and solemnity of the Vatican and its practices,but then he destroys it by making the cardinals looks like a bunch ofdrug dependent old fools. I strongly suggest looking else where for acheap laugh because the implications the director wants to conveyweaken the Church, her honor, and the ability she has to continue to beone of the remaining moral voices this world still has. Also, the ending is, as wikipedia points out, a big let down.