Conclave begins with the image of a cardinal tensely making his way along a Roman highway late at night, his crimson biretta cap clasped tightly in his hand. It’s a stark, almost funny image, the elegant robes of this high priest trudging through a bleak, contemporary urban setting. The characters of Conclave won’t spend much time in the world at large — this is one of the few times we will see one outside in Edward Berger’s film — but the dissonance will continue to resonate. These are men carrying out what they view as an ancient function: electing a new Pope, now that the old one has died. They diligently shut out the modern world, but it’s still there, outside the windows and beyond the doors, constantly felt in everything they do.

At the center of the squall is Thomas Lawrence (Ralph Fiennes), the dean of the College of Cardinals, whose job it is to run the conclave, as cardinals from around the world gather inside the hallowed sanctuary of the Sistine Chapel to cast ballots for a new pontiff. It’s a perfect role for Fiennes, who can do both placidity and intensity — sometimes, somehow, all at once. Thomas exudes gentleness and tolerance. He’s a deeply conflicted man who admits, in an initial address to the conclave, that he values doubt and abhors certainty — and yet, as the picture proceeds, he becomes more obsessed with controlling the outcome.

Berger’s film is adapted, quite faithfully, from Robert Harris’s 2016 novel, and it combines the pulp velocity of a great airport read with the gravitas of high drama. It solemnly depicts the ornate rituals around the death of the Pope — the ribbons placed across his door and fastened with melted red wax, the seals clipped off his rings, the constant prayers and the secretive mutterings — with only a slight nod to the sheer pointlessness of it all. It means something to these men, and that’s enough. Same, too, with the lugubrious dance of the conclave itself, with its round after round of balloting and tallying and quiet reflecting.

Many film critics who participate in year-end awards voting will find themselves nodding with recognition during Conclave at how allegiances shift between ballots in response to who’s ahead, who’s likely to win, and whose support seems to be crumbling. I have no idea how accurate this is to the way cardinals actually vote, but both the book and the movie have the confident ring of truth, or at least truthiness. And it’s interesting to learn that the Very Serious Men who elect popes scheme as effectively as the New York Film Critics Circle did when it voted (well-deserving) underdog Rachel Weisz best actress in 2012 to prevent front-runners Jessica Chastain and Jennifer Lawrence from getting the prize instead; or when the warring camps of Days of Heaven and Deer Hunter supporters at the National Society of Film Critics in 1978 famously fought each other to a standstill and allowed Bertrand Blier’s Get Out Your Handkerchiefs to sneak in and win Best Picture that year.

Where was I? Oh, right, Conclave. Amid such stately ceremony, Berger finds ways to insert gradually escalating tumult and cattiness. Though he tries to be fair and balanced, Thomas is allied with Aldo Bellini (Stanley Tucci), a progressive candidate who wants to continue the Church’s liberalization and engagement with the world. Opposing them is Goffredo Tedesco (Sergio Castellitto), a reactionary Italian who thinks the Church has been on the wrong track ever since it got rid of the Latin Mass in the 1960s. But there are other candidates as well — chiefly, Joseph Tremblay (John Lithgow), a supreme politician who, for all his outward soft-spoken humility, clearly has great ambitions. And then there’s Joshua Adeyemi (Lucian Msamati), a charismatic cardinal from Nigeria who could become the first Black pope.

None of these people actively campaign for the papacy. Save maybe for the flamboyant Tedesco (a not very big role that Castellitto turns into a full, rollicking meal), they’re all lowered eyebrows and hushed whispers and collegial exchanges, soberly prostrating themselves before God and seeking His guidance…all the while quietly and viciously stabbing each other in the back. Such muted machinations present a wonderful showcase for these actors, as well as Isabella Rossellini, as a head nun who becomes more central to the plot, and the relatively unknown Mexican actor Carlos Diehz, as a heretofore unknown cardinal named Vincent Benitez. Secretly named the Archbishop of Kabul, Benitez shows up unannounced on the day of the conclave and sends what promised to be a predictable gathering into the first of its many entertaining tailspins.

Despite the fact that they’ve all been cocooned deep inside the Vatican, with the doors barred, the priests of Conclave are all quite aware of how everything they do will have real-world repercussions, particularly in the way the Church is perceived. That fragile isolation isn’t just a psychological element. We sense throughout that the outside world is undergoing turmoil of which these men are mostly unaware — though we suspect they soon will be, both metaphorically and physically. Berger expertly milks that anticipation, then nails several artfully heated and lively climaxes. My audience at the Telluride Film Festival began roaring with delight and surprise, and I’ve heard similar reports out of Toronto screenings as well. So, well, don’t be surprised if this sinfully entertaining movie wins a few awards.

Disclaimer: “Speak No Evil” has not yet been released in theaters, with its wide-scale distribution officially set to begin Friday. The Lantern recently participated in an early film screening as well as a virtual roundtable interview with lead actress Mackenzie Davis.

Snakes. Heights. The dark. These common fears are widely acknowledged as daunting. 

“Speak No Evil” — director James Watkins’ English-language remake of Danish director Christian Tafdrup’s 2022 film by the same name — draws attention to another primordial fear that may just be more frightening than any other: dinner parties. 

Whether it’s dinner with in-laws, drinks with co-workers or high school reunions, everyone has had to begrudgingly put on a good face to maintain the fragile balance of politeness and decorum that keeps an awkward situation from getting ugly. 

In “Speak No Evil,” an American family befriends an overly exuberant British couple while on vacation, eventually agreeing to spend a few days at their house so their shy children can bond with one another. 

What starts as a seemingly successful playdate quickly turns into a fascinating battle of wills between the two sets of parents, as the British couple’s eccentric personalities begin to make the Americans question if their hosts are hiding a dark secret.

“Speak No Evil” isn’t a horror movie in the traditional sense of the term. It lacks the jumpscares and consistent frights necessary to consistently conform to the genre, but what it does offer is arguably more terrifying. 

The film explores how much people will excuse in the name of courtesy, even if it comes at the expense of their own well-being — or their immediate safety. 

Though it may not be the most textbook horror flick, “Speak No Evil” is overpoweringly uneasy. 

The sometimes-cringe, sometimes-disturbing feeling permeating through the screen isn’t caused by gore or monsters; rather, this discomfort emerges from filmmakers pointing a mirror at viewers, suggesting that if they were in a similar situation, they’d express similar behaviors to avoid an uncomfortable conversation or two.

The main controversy surrounding “Speak No Evil” is its remake status, seeing as the original film was released just two years ago. Some have criticized the apparent need to pander to English-speaking audiences that are too lazy to read subtitles. 

It’s true the newest “Speak No Evil” doesn’t do much to justify its existence, apart from featuring a terrifying performance from James McAvoy — arguably his best showing since his role as a young Professor X in the “X-Men” franchise. 

The film is essentially a beat-for-beat remake of its Danish predecessor, with the only notable difference being its slightly more comedic tone.

Debates around remakes aside, “Speak No Evil” is here, and it’s undoubtedly an entertaining, well-paced horror-comedy that features great performances from its leads, including McAvoy and Mackenzie Davis (“Black Mirror,” “The Martian”). 

Ultimately, “Speak No Evil” is an uncomfortably relatable film that adds to 2024’s growing slate of underappreciated horror flicks.

Rating: 3.5/5

Billionaire rap mogul Sean “Diddy” Combs has been mired in numerous accusations of sexual assault and other misconduct in the last year.

On Monday, a Lenawee County circuit court judge in Michigan issued a $100-million default judgment against Combs, who was sued for sexual assault by inmate Derrick Lee Cardello-Smith.

Cardello-Smith, 51, reportedly filed a civil suit in June that alleged Combs, 54, drugged and sexually assaulted him in 1997 at a party in Detroit. During a virtual hearing in August regarding a request for a temporary restraining order, Cardello-Smith indicated he would be requesting a default judgment in the case since Combs had failed to respond to the lawsuit within the mandated timeline. Combs was absent from Monday’s hearing.

Judge Anna Marie Anzalone set Combs’ payment schedule to $10 million a month for 10 months starting Oct. 1.

Attorney Ann Olivarius, the chair and senior partner of law firm McAllister Olivarius, told The Times via email that while “default judgments are common … the stakes involved here are high.”

“Generally false accusations of sexual assault are rare and it is uncommon for a defendant to simply ignore proper service,” said Olivarius. “Combs and his attorney must have known that Judge Anzalone had deemed Derrick Lee Cardello-Smith’s service to be proper. I can only conclude that they took a calculated risk by refusing to respond to that service.”

Combs, through his legal representatives, denied the allegations and accused Cardello-Smith of “committing fraud on the court from prison.”

“Mr. Combs has never heard of him let alone been served with any lawsuit,” Combs’ attorney Marc Agnifilo said in a statement to The Times on Tuesday. “Mr. Combs looks forward to having this judgment swiftly dismissed.”

In addition to being named in numerous civil lawsuits alleging sexual misconduct, Combs has been the subject of a federal inquiry into sex trafficking allegations that led to the March raids of his homes in L.A. and Miami. Combs has denied nearly every sexual misconduct allegation levied against him but publicly apologized for assaulting Cassie Ventura, after video surfaced of him violently attacking his then-girlfriend.

“While raids on Combs’ properties have been conducted as part of a criminal sex trafficking probe, no criminal charges have yet been filed against him,” said Olivarius. “The ongoing scrutiny of Combs’ past is a reminder that the civil justice system can add firepower to a criminal system that is often struggling to cope. Civil courts can help bring serial predators to justice through media attention.”

Here is everything we know about Cardello-Smith’s lawsuit against Combs.

Who is the accuser?

Cardello-Smith was described as an “inmate known for his long history of challenging the judicial system with civil lawsuits” by the Detroit Metro Times. He is currently serving time at the Earnest C. Brooks Correctional Facility on numerous counts of criminal sexual conduct and kidnapping, according to online records. It was previously reported that between 2020 to 2024, Cardello-Smith was a named plaintiff in more than 30 civil lawsuits, some concerning prisoner rights.

“[Cardello-Smith] has filed multiple suits while incarcerated and has represented himself in each case,” said Olivarius. “I have no idea how accurate his testimony is, but I would expect the defense to push hard on this, seeking to undermine the credibility of his allegations.”

What are the allegations?

In his lawsuit, Cardello-Smith claims that he met Combs while working in the restaurant and hospitality industry around Detroit. He alleges he was drugged and sexually assaulted by Combs while he was working at a party in 1997.

What is a default judgment?

A default judgment is generally a ruling found in favor of the plaintiff when the defendant fails to properly respond to a court summons or appear in court. The specific criteria and procedures vary by jurisdiction, but the plaintiff usually requests the judge to decide the case without the defendant’s input since the defendant didn’t respond to the official notice that they are being sued.

Can Combs appeal?

According to Olivarius, “Failing to engage with the courts is not a good defense strategy, but it’s also a relatively easy thing for the defense to put aside.”

“It all comes down to whether Combs has a meritorious defense,” said Olivarius. “The courts are more likely to engage with the argument that the suit was without merit than they are to enforce a $100-million default judgment.”

A defendant subject to a default judgment can file a motion that asks a court to vacate the judgment in some situations. This includes a defendant providing a valid reason for not appearing in court or ignoring the summons, such as not knowing about the lawsuit because they were not properly served.

Adds Olivarius: “Beyond this, Combs and his attorney can appeal the $100-million judgment, even if the verdict holds. The courts have broad discretion here so it’s not a foregone conclusion that the default judgment will hold and it’s far from certain that the award will hold.”

There have been some questions raised about whether Cardello-Smith served Combs properly in connection with this lawsuit. Agnifilo has stated Combs was never served. But during the August virtual hearing, Judge Anzalone noted that the court has proof of proper service. At the same hearing, Cardello-Smith claimed that Combs had visited him in prison to discuss the lawsuit.