The 2023 film adaptation of Robert Harris’s political thriller *Conclave* diverges from its source material in several significant ways, primarily through streamlined plotting, compressed timelines, and simplified character motivations. While the novel explores the Byzantine complexity of Vatican politics across a sprawling narrative, the film condenses these elements to create a tighter, more visual thriller that prioritizes immediate dramatic tension over the book’s methodical political maneuvering.
The core mystery—who will become the next Pope—remains central to both versions, but the path to revelation follows distinctly different routes. The most fundamental shift lies in the film’s compression of events and elimination of subplots that defined the novel’s layered narrative. Where Harris spent considerable page space developing Cardinal Lomeli’s internal theological doubts and the historical depth of papal succession politics, director Ralph Fiennes opts for a more streamlined approach that focuses on the central conflict and maintains forward momentum.
Table of Contents
- HOW THE CONCLAVE PROCEDURE DIFFERS BETWEEN BOOK AND FILM
- CHARACTER ARCS AND MOTIVATIONS SIMPLIFIED FOR SCREEN
- THE CENTRAL MYSTERY AND ITS REVELATION
- PACING AND NARRATIVE STRUCTURE
- RELIGIOUS AND POLITICAL CONTEXT
- SUPPORTING CHARACTERS AND SUBPLOTS
- THE ENDING AND MORAL RECKONING
HOW THE CONCLAVE PROCEDURE DIFFERS BETWEEN BOOK AND FILM
The novel devotes extensive passages to the ritualistic and procedural aspects of the Conclave, with Harris’s meticulous attention to vatican protocol becoming part of the book’s texture. Robert Harris, with his background in political journalism, uses the detailed mechanics of papal selection as a framework for exploring themes of power, faith, and institutional corruption. The film, by contrast, treats these procedures more as backdrop, moving past the ceremonial elements to focus on the detective work of uncovering the mystery.
In the book, the theological implications of electing a Pope weigh heavily on Cardinal Lomeli’s conscience in ways that the film only touches upon. The novel’s exploration of Lomeli’s crisis of faith—his questioning whether God still guides the Church—provides emotional weight that operates on a different register than the film’s political intrigue. The movie instead casts Lomeli primarily as a pragmatist and investigator, reducing the spiritual questioning that animates much of the book.
CHARACTER ARCS AND MOTIVATIONS SIMPLIFIED FOR SCREEN
Several major characters undergo significant reinterpretation in the adaptation. The four leading papal candidates take on clearer, more archetypal roles in the film version—essentially representing distinct ideological positions—while Harris’s novel makes their characterizations more ambiguous and their motivations more layered. This simplification serves the film’s narrative efficiency but sacrifices some of the psychological complexity that readers appreciated.
Cardinal Tremblay, one of the major candidates, receives notably different treatment. The film reduces his screen time and shifts certain plot elements that were central to his character arc in the novel. More broadly, the supporting cardinals function differently: in the book, they operate as a chorus of competing interests and theological perspectives, while in the film they become more interchangeable members of a political machine. This creates a potential limitation for viewers unfamiliar with the book—the film demands less investment in understanding individual cardinals’ positions and philosophies, which can make some later revelations feel less earned.
THE CENTRAL MYSTERY AND ITS REVELATION
The secret at the heart of the mystery remains fundamentally unchanged—the hidden information that reshapes the conclave—but how characters discover and deploy this information differs substantially. In Harris’s novel, the revelation emerges through meticulous research and accumulated evidence; in the film, the discovery comes more suddenly and through different narrative pathways. The buildup to the final revelation in the book involves multiple false leads and misdirection that create a sense of mounting complexity, while the film opts for a more direct investigative trajectory.
Lomeli’s role as detective—already present in the novel—becomes even more pronounced in the film. His apartment, his private research, his careful questioning of other cardinals: these elements remain but take on greater narrative importance relative to the broader Conclave proceedings. The film essentially reframes the story as a Vatican-set mystery thriller in which an aging cardinal must uncover dangerous truths.
PACING AND NARRATIVE STRUCTURE
The novel unfolds across multiple perspectives and time periods, with Harris frequently shifting between Lomeli’s investigation and broader historical context about the Church’s evolution. The film commits entirely to a present-tense account of the Conclave itself, creating what amounts to a real-time thriller across the few days of papal selection. This structural difference accounts for much of the tonal divergence between the two versions.
Harris’s novel allows readers to sit with uncertainty and moral ambiguity for extended passages; the film cannot afford such luxurious pacing and instead maintains constant forward momentum. A practical consequence: book readers expecting the meandering theological contemplation of Harris’s prose will find the film considerably more action-oriented and event-driven. The movie functions almost as a heist-style thriller, with information as the currency being pursued and protected.
RELIGIOUS AND POLITICAL CONTEXT
The novel embeds itself deeply in contemporary Catholic theology and Church politics, with Harris’s familiarity with these worlds evident on nearly every page. References to recent papal history, theological movements within the Church, and Vatican power structures provide texture that adds layers to the reading experience but would bog down a film audience. The movie streamlines this context, assuming viewers need less orientation to Vatican systems and instead focusing on emotional and dramatic stakes.
A significant limitation of the film’s approach: viewers unfamiliar with Catholic Church politics may miss certain nuances of why particular character revelations matter so profoundly. The book’s slower pace allows for exposition and explanation; the film trusts that its dramatic presentation will carry emotional weight regardless of viewers’ background knowledge. This represents a legitimate trade-off between accessibility and depth.
SUPPORTING CHARACTERS AND SUBPLOTS
Several characters prominent in Harris’s novel receive considerably reduced screen time in the film. A secretary or minor cardinal who occupies significant narrative space in the book might appear in only a scene or two on screen.
Some romantic or personal subplots that Harris uses to develop characters beyond their institutional roles get eliminated entirely, making certain film characters feel more one-dimensional than their literary counterparts. The novel’s exploration of older age, mortality, and the physical toll of leadership provides emotional grounding for Lomeli that the film addresses less thoroughly. Harris lingered on the weariness of aging churchmen; the film moves past such moments more quickly.
THE ENDING AND MORAL RECKONING
Both versions reach similar destinations, but the emotional and moral terrain they traverse differs. The novel’s ending carries weight partly through the accumulated complexity of reaching that point; the film’s ending arrives with more dramatic suddenness.
Harris devotes considerable space to the aftermath and what the revelation means for the Church’s future, while the film concludes on the dramatic moment itself, leaving interpretive space for viewers to draw their own conclusions about institutional consequences. The novel’s final pages wrestle with the question of how revelation and reform actually function within entrenched institutions—a more philosophical and less cinematic concern. The film prioritizes the revelation as a moment of dramatic reckoning rather than the beginning of a longer process of institutional change.
- —
