I Have Watched “The Two Popes” Nine Times. It Should Win No Oscars on Sunday.

Sorry to each of my two popes.

Peter Mountain/Netflix

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.

It was the fourth time I watched The Two Popes that I realized I could not stop.

I first saw director Fernando Meirelles’s fake conversation between real popes Benedict and Francis with my Roman Catholic family over the holidays. My grandfather liked it. I liked it. And I thought it would end there with some good Catholic bonding between us. Thank you to The Two Popes. Done.

Little did I know what The Two Popes would do to me. When I ran into friends, and I told them how the movie was surprisingly good, we decided we should watch it. We did.

I ran into different friends, told them how it’s surprisingly good, how we should watch it. And we did again.

Then a few nights later, I wasn’t around friends and so I said to myself: Let’s watch The Two Popes, it’s surprisingly good. And I did, a fourth time.

I have now watched The Two Popes nine times.

Still, I see the truth: It should win nothing at the Oscars on Sunday. 

The Two Popes is, fundamentally, a romantic comedy. Or maybe a buddy comedy? All I know is it is comforting. It is not that interesting or thoughtful. I really don’t want to even analyze it here because it doesn’t deserve that; it just deserves our bland, thoughtless enjoyment.

I partake in each pope in The Two Popes in the same way I do my Catholicism generally—consolation when I need to not be cynical or ask too many questions. This shouldn’t be rewarded in art. It is probably even dangerous. But, after a long day, I want to be soothed by the idea that two popes (radically different in theology) and each with hypocrisies (but one way worse than the other) are—actually—pals who eat pizza together in the Vatican.

That fake bliss should discredit the script, nominated for Best Adapted Screenplay. But what of the popes in The Two Popes are nominated for Oscars? Anthony Hopkins, who plays Pope Benedict, is up for Best Supporting Actor; Jonathan Pryce, who plays Pope Francis, is up for Best Leading Actor.

Again: Neither should win.

Both give good performances, and I would be lying if I said I wouldn’t be happy if either won. But can I be an impartial judge here? I’ve spent so much time with them that they’re like family, and, like family, I can admit that my joy for their accomplishments is entirely illogical. I am the Dad clapping for his child’s participation trophy; I want to see my popes succeed because I love my popes. But The Irishman has better acting, so does Pain and Glory—and whispering to myself here—I even liked the acting in that horrible scene from Marriage Story (at least by Adam Driver).

The lesson of my journey with The Two Popes is that, (1) I like movies where two old men talk in a room; (2) I cannot escape Catholicism (my Mom got me a book about all the popes for my birthday and I’m loving it); and (3) that you shouldn’t hate Pope Benedict.

None of those are entirely defensible positions.

Neither is the fact that before Sunday I will likely hit double-digits, completing watch number 10 of The Two Popes.

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate