The Two Popes on Netflix

Status
Not open for further replies.
Yeah, I also enjoyed it. But I think in terms of the abuse crisis they got it wrong… Benedict, I believe, did his best to start cleaning things up. He defrocked literally hundreds of priests for child abuse and tightened the Vatican’s protocols for dealing with abuse cases.
 
I thunk they got it right about the abuse crisis, though people seem to have missed it. After Francis has admitted not doing enough during the dirty war, Benedict confesses about Maciel. This is where Benedict did not do enough; “higher ups” kept him from moving against Maciel until he became Pope. This bond, as unprofitable servants, is where the two came closest to each other, and brought forgiveness to each other.

The SDG review linked above is excellent, but gets this wrong. It compares Benedict on the abuse crisis with Francis on the abuse crisis… I came away comparing Francis on the horror of the dirty war with Benedict on the horrors of sexual abuse. They did not do enough, and needed forgiveness.
 
EvangelistVictor said:
his embracing of Liberation Theology!
Click to expand...
It seemed to me that his regret wa NOT embracing it with his brother Jesuits.

It also seeemd to me that their initial conversation in the garden spoke to the two very different ways of viewing the Church: unchanging, faithful, uncompromising on the truth, and responsive to the pastoral needs of the day. Obviously, both are needed.
 
Of course it is probably a mistake to claim what his brother Jesuits were up to was “Liberation Theology”. The government was clearly oppressive and malignant.
 
InThePew said:
" what Roger Ebert wrote about Memoirs of a Geisha applies to all of these films: The more you know about the subject matter and movies, the less you are likely to enjoy them.
Click to expand...
This! I read all the reviews I could find and this was the one that resonated most. Regrets.
 
Ok. Now this is the best review. Bishop Baron’s.

Still regrets, that movie making so often misses the mark. This one’s just another drama of passing substance.
 
7_Sorrows said:
I would have liked to have seen the
background on Benedict XVI life before he became Pope as well, but we all
know the narrative they wanted to portray.
Click to expand...
I don’t think the movie maker bore any malice, or real criticism of BXVI. I think they wanted a wider audience than they most likely would have gotten. This manufactured drama has wider appeal. $$
 
Crocus said:
I don’t think the movie maker bore any malice, or real criticism of BXVI. I think they wanted a wider audience than they most likely would have gotten. This manufactured drama has wider appeal. $$
Click to expand...
The following is part of an interview the director

GD: You talked about agreeing with Pope Francis. Obviously Pope Benedict is on the polar opposite of a lot of what Pope Francis is talking about. In terms of finding a way to represent his character, to identify with his character, was that a challenge or how did you approach that?

FM: For Benedict, yeah. When I first read the script, for me it was very clear. It was the good pope and the bad pope. That was my first reading and then when I started preparing, I understood more of Pope Benedict’s point, and he has a point. He’s one of the most important intellectuals of the century. I understand what he says and I like some of the sermons. I would vote for Pope Francis but it became much more like a gray area, and then Anthony Hopkins came on board and he also understands Pope Benedict. He has such a charisma that gave Pope Benedict this charisma that Hopkins has. So you watch the film and you don’t just dislike Pope Benedict anymore. It’s very balanced. You can agree with one or the other but this was mostly thanks to Hopkins performance.

www.goldderby.com

Fernando Meirelles (‘The Two Popes’ director) on the challenge of making his Netflix film cinematic [Complete Interview Transcript]

Fernando Meirelles has returned to the awards race with “The Two Popes,” starring Jonathan Pryce and Anthony Hopkins as Pope Francis and Pope Benedict, respectively. Some of Meirelles&#…
www.goldderby.com www.goldderby.com

Meirelles, and Hopkins, clearly did not do their due diligence in researching BXVI
 
Justin_Mary said:
But I don’t think I liked the “greater message.” To me it was about a stale, out of touch Church in need of reform.
Click to expand...
I watched an interview with the writer and director (both lapsed Catholics and seemingly secular progressives) and I gathered this was the point of the movie. It sounded like it’s all presented as a debate between “good, progressive Francis” and “bad, conservative Benedict” with the writer and director siding with Pope Francis. I have zero interest in watching a creation that’s intentionally that one-sided, especially when it’s about a made-up conversation that lots of people are going to assume or at least wonder if it’s true.

However, I’m quite sure that both actors did an excellent job!
 
Last edited:
AngelaMarie said:
The following is part of an interview the director

**GD: You talked about agreeing with Pope Francis. Obviously Pope Benedict is on the polar opposite of a lot of what Pope Francis is talking about.
Click to expand...
I’m sorry but the questioner does not even know what he is talking about. It’s knee jerk stereotyping based on media caricatures.
 
My partner and I just watched this movie on Netflix and we concluded that both Francis and Benedict seemed almost too true to form.

Benedict was the painstakingly fuddy duddy while Francis forever the reformist. Enough to the point that they were flat characters.

My question would be…is the film accurate, or just a dramatic retelling of only a few facts stitched together?
 
Last edited:
40.png
The Two Popes on Netflix Popular Media
I see that the movie The Two Popes is available on Netflix. I haven’t had a chance to watch it yet, but has anyone else? if so, what are your opinions?
Click to expand...
Another thread on CAF with comments from some who saw it, references to reviews, etc.

I would say movie is based loosely on polular perceptions, unwarrented negative portrayal of Pope Benedict, interaction dramatized for popular appeal, don’t take too seriously as fact, enjoy the performances and the physical setting.
 
Last edited:
Crocus said:
40.png
7_Sorrows:
I would have liked to have seen the
background on Benedict XVI life before he became Pope as well, but we all
know the narrative they wanted to portray.
Click to expand...
I don’t think the movie maker bore any malice, or real criticism of BXVI. I think they wanted a wider audience than they most likely would have gotten. This manufactured drama has wider appeal. $$
Click to expand...
Well, it was on Netflix, it wasn’t in the theatres. Not sure if it will go to
Redbox. Why call it The Two Popes then?
 
Wampa said:
40.png
Justin_Mary:
But I don’t think I liked the “greater message.” To me it was about a stale, out of touch Church in need of reform.
Click to expand...
I watched an interview with the writer and director (both lapsed Catholics and seemingly secular progressives) and I gathered this was the point of the movie. It sounded like it’s all presented as a debate between “good, progressive Francis” and “bad, conservative Benedict” with the writer and director siding with Pope Francis. I have zero interest in watching a creation that’s intentionally that one-sided, especially when it’s about a made-up conversation that lots of people are going to assume or at least wonder if it’s true.

However, I’m quite sure that both actors did an excellent job!
Click to expand...
I agree with you.

Also, both actors were very believable in their roles. Good casting.
 
I think the movie is quite inaccurate in its portrayal of the titular characters and it seems as politically skewered as anything. But it was beautifully filmed and I liked the tale of two fictional popes coming together in spite of their personal and political differences.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top