"You haven't the slightest proof of anything"...."But I have my certainty."
"Doubt," starring Philip Seymour Hoffman and Meryl Streep, was remarkable. Both actors brought stellar performances to the table in a highly charged drama about the search for truth, and standing up for that which you believe to be true. The story unfolds around the passing observation of a somewhat peculiar incident involving Father Flynn, fueling suspicion and rage within the headmistress Sister Beauvier, and ultimately doubt in his defense. Through volatile and impassioned dialogue, we come to understand how powerful a conviction can be, particularly in the absence of evidence. The beauty of this movie is that we never really know if Father Flynn committed a crime. This, in my view, is not the point of the movie, but rather, how we arrive at such an accusation. Is instinct enough, or is proof necessary? Does it matter if others believe you, or is your own personal persuasion enough?
The scenes develop amidst the backdrop of various issues that defined the 1960's Catholic church: gender inequality between the priesthood and sisterhood; the role of the church within the student's (and family's) life; and in general, conservative versus progressive values. Ideologically, Sister Beauvier and Father Flynn each want to lead the church in a different direction, and this is the foundation that allows a simple suspicion to quickly become a life-changing allegation. Ultimately we are forced to question whether Sister Beauvier is acting on her own behalf or on that of the church.
Both actors do a phenomenal job of delivering profound and convincing performances, with a tang of humor. Expect an Academy Award or two from this movie.
Posts
4 comments:
Does it matter if Flynn is abusing a prepubescent altar boy? Not from the film's point of view. But stepping back into reality, you can't help but be amazed at how unenlightening the analysis was.
"Doubt" is set in 1960s New York, but it may as well be post 2001 America. Replace a suspected clergyman pedophile with people who may have abetted terrorism, trade Meryl Streep's draconian nun for Dick Cheney and his cronies, and you've got the Guantanamo Bay issue.
The liberal media are clamoring for the administration to close Guantanamo - but what does one do with the inmates? Do you trust them enough to freely wander Americas streets?
Streep's character nails it when she says, "I care about actions." Well, there are two on offer: Wrongly imprison a few hundred, or unshackle them and risk the lives of several thousand. This movie doesn't presume to pick a side; its analysis runs short on insight and long on ambiguity.
If only Father Flynn's first sermon - about the films eponymous theme - wasn't so inscrutable.
Agreed: the movie is built on ambiguity, but rightfully so. It's an accurate representation our basic human struggle: reason vs. emotion; head and heart. The whole point is that, as you said, we don't know if Father Flynn committed the act in question. While the movie seeks not to answer this question, it attempts to shed light on the process by which we arrive at our respective opinion.
Was his sermon on "doubt" inscrutable? Absolutely. The same can be said for many other instances in the movie. Example: the confrontational scene in the Sister's office. His words produce a defense argument, but with the undertone of guilt, and he quickly stops short of admission. Streep storms out of her office to report Flynn, and right before the door closes he tells her to wait. She returns, and stumbling (emotionally), he explains that there are certain things that can't be spoken; not in this lifetime, and that God will be his judge. The intent is not to leave us with the answer, but rather a deeper understanding of our human nature, our psychology.
Which, I might add, comes full circle in the final scene when we see Streep herself break down and doubt her own intuition. Considering that's what she sustained herself on, it resurfaces the question of whether one's personal conviction is enough, or if hard proof is a requisite.
If you ask me if I think Father Flynn did it, I could answer the question. But I'm not sure that's relevant to the movie's underlying eponymous hook: doubt.
is it just me or does anyone else think that this devil wears a habit is well worn territory for streep?
Yes! I think the devil-evil headmaster role is perfect for Streep, and she clearly flourishes with it. I happen to see Mama Mia the movie-musical a few days ago, and she was cast in one of the lead roles. That was painful (and out of tune). Point being - she's got sick talent, but should stick to what she's good at. Namely, being a witch.
Post a Comment