When I was a kid, brought up in the Roman Catholic Church, my Mum taught me that, when a pope dies, all the cardinals get together to choose a new one. God guides them so they vote for who He has chosen, and it has to be unanimous.

Whether or not that unanimity requirement was ever really true, I can't say. But that's certainly not how it happens in this film. I imagine this tale is closer to the reality, humans being political beings with preferences and schemes. And God not existing, of course. Or, if 'He' does, certainly not taking that kind of hand in human events.

I enjoyed this story of the events after an unnamed, imaginary pope's death. It's well acted and beautifully shot. It does have one or two moments that tend to the over-theatrical, let's say.

But I have to wonder why the filmmakers chose to tell it, and why now. It's an adaptation of Robert Harris's novel from 2016, and could ask the same question of him: why that story, whey then?

And I guess you tell the story you want to tell, and why not? If other people enjoy it, or get something from it, that's all that matters, really.