So Two Popes

I've said it many times before and I'll say it again: It's acceptable for the language spoken by actors to be the wrong one (in regards to the characters and setting) as long as it's consistent, because then viewers can suspend our disbelief. THE 2 POPES is one of the most frustratingly inconsistent examples I've seen in my entire life! POPE FRANCIS is played by a Welsh who speaks mostly in English with a weird Welsh/Argentinian hybrid accent. Whenever he has long lines in Spanish, he's dubbed. Aside from it being very obvious, he's not dubbed whenever he slips in a few Spanish words during English dialogue. When he's younger, he's played by an Argentinian who, naturally, doesn't sound anything like his older version. My head's about to explode! At least POPE BENEDICT XVI is given a better characterization. He's also played by a Welsh (one who just uses his native accent), but at least he speaks the same way throughout the entire movie. Not to mention that he almost never speaks in German and, when he does, it's usually a quick word. I know I know, they wouldn't have had the budget and exposure they needed without English-speaking famous actors. Well, if they hadn't cast Jonathan Pryce, they still would've had Anthony Hopkins. Maybe you're not interested in these details and you want me to talk about the performances from a general point view (conveying emotions and so on). Yes, the 2 leads and the voice actor do an overall good job (it's not their fault that they were given the wrong tasks), and so does Juan Minujín. Maybe you want me to focus on judging the production itself. Well, aside from the obvious dubbing, which is a technical flaw, the camera work is weak and Anthony McCarten's script needed some adjustments. You know, assuming it needed to exist in the first place. Is it just me, or did the number of movies and shows that were based on recent events was broken in 2019? DEAD KIDS (the 1st Filipino Netflix movie) is about something that literally happened last year. We got 2 projects about the Roger Ailes scandal. Look, the limit should be at least 10 years. We need the time so that the fictional retelling can help us remember (assuming we forgot) and evaluate how much things have or haven't changed since. Where was I? Right, the script. Here's a drinking game: Take a shot every time someone looks perplexed and someone else replies "It was a joke." There are moments of witty dialogue, but the way soccer is incorporated into so many things (it's even used as a metaphor for something serious) becomes annoying. Why the need for stereotypes in the first place? Isn't the point of all these holy men gathering to show that they're all equals regardless of where they come from? There's a gag in which FRANCIS wants to eat but BENEDICT keeps blessing the food. Yeah, it's cute, but it's obvious that BENEDICT hasn't finished because he doesn't "Amen." Should I dare to question FRANCIS' knowledge of the religion? The plot itself was going along just fine until FRANCIS' flashbacks. Don't get me wrong; they're the best-written, directed and acted scenes of the movie. It's just that everything comes to a halt. While it provides context, it's not that relevant to what the title characters are discussing. When it went back to present day, I thought "That was riveting! It felt like a climax. That means we're now going to see the resolution." However, there were still 30 minutes left. I thought "How is that possible?! Oh right, the climax can't be about a conflict that's not the central one. Well, it's the movie's fault for structuring the narrative in such a way. Maybe they should've called this THE 2 PLOTS!" OK, I'll see myself out.

5/10
-------------------------------------
You can read comments of other movies in my blog.