Monsenhor

I had watched this movie when I was growing up. May be I was 20 or so. There are only few movies after which I would think "what the hell did I watch just now?". This is one of them. What impressed me most were two things: 1. Character of Christopher Reeve wants to experience everything without inhibition. And is prepared to face consequences. In a way he is crazy brave. 2. Someone asked in one of the question\answer site if they knew a movie in which character goes in gradual degradation. This movie came to my mind. No matter what happens in the end, the character is aware that he has lived his life to the fullest (in a sense in a immoral bad way but I don't think he cares much about rules laid down by some other man).

One of my favorites.

Now, I didn't rent this thinking it would be a good movie. I had heard this was an uproarious unintentional comedy, so that's what I was expecting. There are a few laughs to be found, but I found this movie to be a mostly dull and murky drama. Reeve is totally miscast and out of his league here, even if the screenplay was better.

The tag-line for this film begins "Forgive me, Father, for I have sinned".

And that's not so much being said by the protagonist of "Monsignor" but by the director, actors, writers, best boys, gaffers, caterers and the guys who swept the floor afterwards on this disaster.

As the "Monsignor" of the title, Christopher Reeve plays a man who moves his way up through the Catholic church through dubious means - murder, theft, the Black Market during WWII... you know, the usual stuff. And there's even enough time for him to seduce a nun (Bujold)!

I know next to nothing about Catholicism, so I cannot say what if any of this kind of activity holds any validity. But what does this mean: that those involved in the Vatican's business affairs are only bookkeepers who work under the guise of religion for otherwise nefarious means? I'd hope not, but this movie seems to think otherwise.

Reeve is a good actor, always will be. What he saw in this kind of film is beyond me. Maybe he thought (like Faye Dunaway did in "Mommie Dearest") that something so broad and unimaginably coarse could only be played as a comedy, so why not just go with the flow?

And if he thought that, he was right! "Monsignor" has scenes that play as out-and-out comedy; never have you seen so many (unintentional?) sight gags in your life, and the stony faces that permeate this film might make you believe that Buster Keaton must have been a busy man at one time or another.

So, "Monsignor" is a bad film, but it's also good for one of those nights when you have a few friends over, a few beers, lots of popcorn and nothing better to do than have a few laughs at someone else's expense.

Those involved in organized religion, say.

Two stars. Eight if you're an agnostic.

As Christopher Reeve said himself, this movie could have been really good but the bad editing ruined it. And I wholeheartedly agree. It was a pretty bold movie, even for the bold 80's: a tale of a Vatican priest who deals with the mafia, seduces a nun and takes up arms in the war, bloodying his hands. This was clearly still a taboo, any kind of negative portrayal of the Catholic church and the Vatican. But somewhere during its 2 hours this movie lost its boldness and became just another failed experiment with an interesting idea.

In the year 1982, Reeve was clearly looking to establish himself as a serious actor and it couldn't have been easy for a guy who so convincingly looks like a superhero and who came to prominence as THE superhero. He was in Deathtrap that same year and did well in that part. One might say that this role has something in common with that one, because he plays an opportunist who is morally unclean. This movie has a really top notch cast, with Jason Miller, Fernando Rey and Genevieve Bujold as the brightest part of it. Miller, though somewhat miscast in the role of the Sicilian mafioso, brings the dark intensity similar to the one in his role as Father Karass. Only difference is, here he has a mustache. Joe Cortese is also good in the part of Reeve's old friend who becomes his business partner and the link with Miller. Fernando Rey plays the part of cardinal Santoni, who represents the political side of Vatican, the ambitious and power-hungry priest who is willing to close an eye to illegal stuff in order to achieve his own goals.

Anyway, this movie is interesting to follow but sometimes it can't decide whether it wants to be a drama about corruption and moral or a love movie. Some scenes are well shot and gripping, like the scene where the nun played by Bujold discovers Reeve's true identity and occupation. It is the dramatic highpoint of the film. But the love story lasts too short to really give the movie the edge it needs, another angle. Christopher Reeve is one of the film's bright points because he really does make his character believable. He's a priest who tried to be both a priest and a man. I guess you can say that this is the ultimate theme of the film, how hard it is to be a priest and give up the good things in life in order to serve God.

I think it's a great shame that this film has been largely forgotten and scorned by the critics and by the audiences. For despite it's editorial flaws and despite the screenplay not holding up till the very end, it still can be an interesting watch and a spiritual lesson.

I have read some of the negative comments on this film, they must have been written by staunch Catholics. One person said Miss Bujolds career was ruined by this movie if that is so it is a shame.

I have watched this Movie many times. Monsignor delves into the many aspects of human sin and how we all fail God every moment of every day that we live. I think those who dislike this film have latched onto the notion that nuns and priest are perfect,they should pick up the paper.

Monsignor is a sad film but a good one,sad because of the longings of the heart not fulfilled. This film hit home with me because of the many times our deepest longings go unfulfilled.

This movie also had many redemptive qualities to it. I also think I liked it because it did not go the way I wanted it to.