Educhico

Like so many other cases, the success of what might be considered a relatively small venture in the form of A Quiet Place led to the inevitable and perhaps unjustified creation of a sequel. It turned out to be a clear profit given the low budget of the first film, but which ends up not recapitulating the novelty of the first one, but rather repeating it and taking the effect out of it.

At first, I couldn't have felt a greater smile than the one that increasingly outlined as I watched the opening scene of the film, in a wise decision to take the opportunity to see this film in its IMAX version. Because that format does the best for highlighting the capabilities that Krasinski increasingly demonstrates as a director and that offers greater impact to the represented events.

The focus on dramatic elements that we know from the first chapter, or on elements that better frame the geography of the following events; the occasional use of silence to offer a greater impact to the moments that will follow; the continuous take that allow us to maintain the attention to the various elements and guides our vision. All elements we know to make good directing, but which illustrate here the thoughtful and efficient narrative thought, in its controlled application in this genre (and specifically at the beginning of this chapter), managing to offer impact to a flashback for which we know to be zero consequences for the protagonists. At the same time it presents us narrative elements relevant to the film in hand, and brings expectations for what we will see next.

We quickly realized, however, the impact that this prologue has on the rest of the film, since what it does will never be equaled or surpassed, not even narratively. There is already a repetition of the same beats, in which the tension begin to lose its impact, as they revisit the same finite number of scenarios in which sound is applicable as a sign of imminent danger. There will always come a point where one of the protagonists will make a noise that leads to an escape, often with the appearance of a character at the key moment, where before the scenarios were framed so that the characters reach a resolution for themselves.

Even when three different situations are framed simultaneously, with different characters in different degrees of danger, one of these situations is enhanced by an foolish decision by one of the characters, not consistent with what has been shown of him so far, just to create a moment of tension.

And where in the original there is the gradual emergence of the potential of the discovered "weapon", here we already know its effects and, therefore, any attempt in its use is lost in our exact knowledge of its application. It even results in the almost exactly same revisitation of the previous movie's ending. If the element essential to the premise becomes redundant and devoid of its expected impact, what more can we expect then?

So, in the same way, there is an attempt to expand the initial idea and the underlying universe, in the illustration of the consequences of the events in a population forced to survive by whatever means necessary. We received tips from some groups of people deprived of their humanity, reduced to the routine of setting up baits so that other people can be caught in their place. Tips that never slip into the rest of the argument, where those never become a constant threat in parallel to the creatures. Instead, they are just another useless obstacle, as no character perishes or suffers permanent consequences to them.

And where in the final act we are presented with the notion of a piece of land surrounded by the substance that the creatures cannot cross, finally a stronghold where sound is a possibility without fear of reprisals, not enough time is offered to savor the calm before the storm, where we could have followed our character's settlement, knowing the eventual and inevitable fall to come, almost as an hitchcokian exercise.

Perhaps Krasinski has gained experience in his role as a director, but finds himself still in need of further experimentation and learning as a screenwriter. Where the extra hands of the first film could have cooperated again for a clearer and more focused script, as the first movie did through its only four existing characters. And if here the other family members are almost enough to maintain our emotional investment, if there is a third chapter, the formula needs to be revised, so as not to become completely devoided of the impact that we remember from the first entry into this universe.

A good attempt at showing the more personal relationship between two people knowm more as landmarks for the institution they represent, The Two Popes ends up failing in the way it intends to point out the errors underlying the emergence of the relationship in question.

There is an initial boldness in the way Meirelles exposes the festivities for the appointment of the supreme head of the Catholic Church, illustrated to the sound of ABBA's Dancing Queen, as a previously rehearsed choreography of a series of bureaucratic elements that, in the end, seem to remove much of the supposed spirituality that should guide the decisions in question, themselves later questioned by Bergoglio's own reluctance.

Unfortunately, it is nothing more than a very brief stylistic note, where even at the end is not even taken up again, which could have symmetrically exposed the attitude of the new appointed Pope. Thus, we just take from the end a typified moralizing speech in light of a common montage of documentary images.

Rather, we find the focus of the script on the strange friendship that ends up arising from such different personalities. One of the best scenes is undoubtedly when both meet at the end of the first day, when we see Bergoglio insisting on the reason that brought him there while Joseph just tries to enjoy the only moments of a rare and sincere peace, even if disturbed by his constant doubts. It demonstrates his most personal, human side, doubtful of his role as head of the Church at the time. Where we not only see the public figure and his the factual errors, but we understand them as a result of the dissonance with his own faith.

And in this way, we see him free himself in front of his "brother", ideologically distant but closer than he initially thought. His love for music is exposed in a more admiring way, where before it was only reverentialy expressed, both allowing for the first step towards approximation as opposing points of the change they see as necessary.

But apart from the interpretations of the two actors, which in this way allow the narrative to be focused on these two people, it suddenly loses when in its midpoint gives way to an elongated analepsis where we see Jorge's initial journey, which completely interrupts the gradual relationship of friendship that we see emerging between the two clerics and, moreover, takes from the impact it should have on our perception of the complex persona that Bergoglio intends to show.

Perhaps it would be preferable that the story about Jorge's past had been told as a prologue, without actually knowing who the presented character was, so that during the film these events remain present. Not only would the narrative at hand remain at a steadier pace, but when Bergoglio tells his story to Ratzinger in his own words, we would recall the opening events, now from a more personal, emotional point of view, only illustrated by Pryce's interpretation. Because we have knowledge from the start of who it is, we judge the past events in face of who he is now, rather than confronting the somewhat questionable and fateful options of Jorge's youth with his current position.

In the end, the film illustrates the divergences in convictions and spirituality between the two men, and where it genuinely manages to demonstrate the inapparent humanity of Ratzinger only through pure dialogue, the questions regarding their positions within the Catholic Church, as well as some of the moral difficulties that Bergoglio also went through, are carried out in an obvious and inefficient way, without the subtlety that the director alludes to at the beginning and that he tries to demonstrate with the two essential interpretations.