"Conclave" - Review

Upon the death of the Pope, unassuming Cardinal Thomas Lawrence (Ralph Fiennes) assembles the College of Cardinals, in his capacity as Dean, to elect a new one. Secluded from the rest of the world, the Cardinals vote upon their preferred candidates: Liberal reformer Aldo Bellini (Stanley Tucci) hoping to capture the progressive vote; middle of the road Joseph Tremblay (John Lithgow) doing his own thing in the corner; popular Nigerian candidate Joseph Adeyimi (Lucian Msamati); and bespectacled Italian traditionalist Goffredo Tedesco (Sergio Castellito) capturing a time long passed. Lawrence oversees this dramatic tug of war, and must also contend with a recently inducted Cardinal of Kabul, a young man known as Vincent Benitez (Carlos Diehz), and a simmering undercurrent of resentment and drama...

Well constructed with immaculate cinematography and impeccable sound design, very much a pedigree picture with the talent involved, it has an excellent speech from Fiennes at the start of the film about doubt. It weaves its themes of a man succumbing to the base instinct of ambition amongst this nest of vipers well, and the cast are strong across the board: particularly Fiennes, the ever wonderful Tucci, and the always excellent Lithgow and Rossellini; but Castellito also threatens to steal the show with a discussion of linguistics and boundary lines.
The weakness of the film comes in its writing and plotting, and I can only imagine that this is the result of being adapted from the often-silly novels of Jonathan Harris.
The examination of the Conclave and its procedure, a unique setting for its politics, is undercut by soap opera revelations and gossipy bickering, populated by characters we know are evil because...
John Lithgow plays Cardinal Tremblay, so we know he's up to no good, which is enhanced by every line reading requiring a twirl of his moustache. Cardinal Tedesco is vaping, so we know he's bad (though to be fair, there is a fun little contrast throughout of the cardinals in their finery using smartphones and smoking cigarettes, it's cute), and we know that the Nigerian cardinal is homophobic because a character tells us so. I like the characters when they are doing their politicking, but it is by the grace of the actors that they are saved from being cardboard cutouts. It jam packs a lot of things in, and just about juggles them, but it is at the expense of some of the plotting, and with one twist too many to keep it "fresh" and "daring".
Honestly I'd have been delighted with discussions of theology and terse arguments about doctrine and theory.
It's a solid film, and worth a rental.

"Cat Person" - Review

Margot (Emilia Jones) works at a cinema, and bumps into a semi-regular customer named Robert (Nicholas Braun), and after some initial awkwardness, gives him her number. Her more cynical friend Taylor (Geraldine Viswanathan) has doubts, but they start dating, and going through the awkward trials and tribulations of modern dating.

Jones (who played Alice in "Utopia"... huh) is excellent, playing Margot as unsure and awkward and trying her best to navigate this relationship, with little dream sequences and conversations with herself. There are lots of relatable parts to her, and little moments and touches which throw you into her headspace, including a rather well-done sex scene.
But for me personally, it was the performance of Braun which really stood out: he filled it with little touches like his angry shaking off of a hand at his shuolder when opening a door, his awkward pauses or silences during conversations, his somewhat uncomfortable initial conversations with Margot at the start. He managed to be full of red flags without being overtly, comically sinister, and the whole film became a death by a thousand cuts: he's not abusive or violent, he's just a bit weird and mismatched, but the movie has you thinking that Margot is maybe taking this a bit too far (up until a rather unforgivable point). The makers make EXCELLENT use of the fact that Braun is 6 foot fucking 7. But even after the inevtiable break up, and the crossing of the line from Robert, the film takes pains to have it be relatively realistic in its depictions of break ups and behaviours: was Margot being too naive or was her desperate thrust for politeness and manners going too far? It's a murky, grey, uncomfortable film about the awkwardness of romance.
However.
Tonally, it stumbles in a few places as it doesn't know what it wants to be: is it a wacky dark comedy (where the characters huddle around Margot and shuffle out of the restaurant comically) with quick-talking sassy friend Taylor dishing out sick burns and running away with the entire movie (as Viswanathan is wont to do!) and imagined sequences of wackier murders; or is it a dark thriller with a stalker and a woman's descent into paranoia and danger? The tonal shifts can be jarring. One moment we are watching a toe-curling attempt to appease her step father, the next there is a sequence of her up all night, wondering if she realy did see Robert waiting outside...
It yo yos between these things, and whilst Viswanathan is incredibly funny, it threatens to derail proceedings.
The finale will be controversial, but I rather like it: there's some great payoff to previous moments and recontextualising of her previous assumptions and fears, and some actually rather valid points raised by Robert about all of the behaviour up until this point. It risks "both sidesing" the issue, but I think it balances it relatively well, though after "Bottoms" I am not sure I can accuse any finale of being "out there".