We Have a Pope (2011)

I loved Habemus Papam. It has a highly original plot and it takes place in a highly unusual environment. Papal elections does not sound as an intriguing movie setting, but the film is captivating. Who could have thought that 200 elderly men all dressed in the same way could be so entertaining?! But they are! The casting is excellent; everyone has a face and an individuality. I am especially thankful for the casting choice for the lead character, played by the great Michel Piccoli, and "il portavoce", played by my favorite Polish actor Jerzy Sztur (I was so happy to see him inhabit an Italian movie screen so comfortably). Michel Piccoli's presence expresses perfectly the humanity and the philosophical aspect of his character. And Jerzy Sztur lights up the scene as a perfect comical actor.And yet despite its unusual setting, the film deals with the classical plot of a person out of his own element. And as in every mistaken identity story, the journey into the unknown turns out to be a journey to oneself. You leave behind the familiar and you find the indispensable. Here, the Pope incognito roams the streets of Rome and gradually learns something important about himself.At the same time, as Pope enters Rome, Rome enters Vatican. This happens through introduction of laypersons into the sanctum sactorum of Vatican, such as the psychologist (who brings with him not only atheism, but also the ball game) and the Swiss guard officer (who introduces the cardinals to the popular music).I liked the nice small touches throughout the movie, like the fact that the Pope had a dream of becoming an actor in his youth (just like John Paul II), or the Chekhov's play Seagull serving as a pivotal reference on realization that you might have wasted your life, or the imperturbable portavoce losing his face and cursing in Polish… In general, it's an elegant comedy that combines philosophy with laughter and offers life's wisdom that not only Popes will find useful.P.S. And speaking of Popes, Benedict XVI resigned a year after this movie was released, so

I would rate this film a four. But I would give a zero to the people who caused it to be labeled a comedy. Yes, the premise could have been comedic. A pope in need of therapy? One thinks of movies like Analyze This with Robert De Niro and Billy Crystal. But there is little comic about the way the pope's need for therapy is handled here. A pope trying to flee his responsibilities by pretending to be someone else? Perhaps you might expect an Italian farce, a la Roberto Benigni. Again, you will be disappointed.This movie is definitely not "A story centered on the relationship between the newly elected Pope and his therapist." The Pope spends very little time with his therapist and there is no "relationship."This is a bittersweet meditation about what happens when a confused, inarticulate man, suffering from (perhaps justified) feelings of inadequacy, is given a huge responsibility. There are no laughs, and there are only a few potentially comic situations that could have been much funnier than they were. At most, you could call a three or four sentences of the dialogue "wry." The plot isn't much to speak of either. The church is treated with too much reverence, as though any sort of satire is too risky. Even devout Catholics will wonder about the missed opportunities. (A random episode of Father Brown takes more good-natured satiric risks than this whole film, and it's a detective series.)If you go in expecting a melodrama, a character study, a premise for a story without much of a story, you may enjoy the fine acting, the scenery, and the elegiac mood. If you are expecting humor, fun, satire, and the satisfaction of a story well told, you are going to be puzzled.

I am sure this movie will offend the sensitivities of ardent Catholics. After all anything that questions in any way the simplicity of their beliefs offends them. Nanni Moretti made perfectly Italian comedy. Without exaggeration, without huge belly laughs, but putting gentle smile on viewers face. A cardinal, amongst many who pray not be elected, becomes a pope and experiences an existential crisis. Nanni Moretti is obviously not a believer, but he is not a militant atheist either. He observes with regretful expression, because as he once said he is sorry that he is not religious. What holds this movie together is magnificent Michel Piccoli, a legend of European cinema. With his gentle smile and demeanor, this confused cardinal puts a very sympathetic face on the church that desperately needs help.

I am a Catholic and this film breaks my heart for the lack in respect some people can have towards a faithful religion such as the Catholic Church. The film leaves no message of hope and contains varied and mixed portrayals of the Catholic Church. In the history of the Church, it has been necessary to use secrecy within its walls, just as most nations do, but to suggest that Cardinals and leaders are simply blind sheep, being strung along by their faith without reason is enough to be mad at this film. The Church leaders are not whimsical or frivolous in nature. Nor are they weak minded, as the film suggests. They may be filled 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 of drug dependent old fools. I strongly suggest looking else where for a cheap laugh because the implications the director wants to convey weaken the Church, her honor, and the ability she has to continue to be one of the remaining moral voices this world still has. Also, the ending is, as wikipedia points out, a big let down.