The character played by Meryl Streep has doubts about her faith and the institution of the church...this man (who she feels is guilty) is only going to go on to a higher position and continue what he is doing...her character has no doubt that he is guilty..it is other things she has doubts about.
His sermon regarding "gossip" was him using his position to clearly manipulate the situation...(he must be innocent because look at what he is saying...) not that he could manipulate the Meryl Streep character...but maybe he could change the mind of the Amy Adams character....regarding the ending and Meryls admission of having "Doubt." She has NO doubt that he is guilty! Whether he is guilty or not is never known by the audience..its for you to decide. But .....
Very nice, emotional and sometime even sad movie. The acting was brilliant. I'm not a big Meryl Streep fan but she's very talented and looked stunning here. Amy Adams was no less imressive - she deserved the Oscar for this supporting role and finally Philip Seymour Hoffman and Viola Davis were amazing as well
As an Irish girl.. it freaks me out how many people have been found out as pedo's.. it kind of took my faith away in itself.. i can't stand religion anymore because it seems as an excuse to hide behind your immoral judgements.. blehh..
LOL, all this arguing about whether he did it or didn't do it, whether the nun was right or wrong, just shows that the movie is well-made. That's exactly the response the filmmakers wanted... for the viewers to have doubt! OMG, a movie that actually makes us think and form our own opinions? WTF? :D
wow can't even comment on the review as I went to the movies twice with different people and we all came out with different views on what happened...but that is exactly the brilliance of this movie, you never really know just what happened do you...it's all in the camera work the dialog and the body language.
I'm not even going to state what I think happened cuz every time I watch this movie I see a new layer and it's ever changing...though my initial verdict of the guilt stays the same...
I agree with the reviewer, the priest was innocent since there was NO evidence against him, only suspicion based on circumstantial evidence. That nun was paranoid because she feared his progressive stance and that it might change how she wanted the school. Why do think the movie included the sermon about gossip? He knew that his reputation would never be good there because of the nuns paranoid war against him, spreading gossip. He realized that and decided to leave in good interest of everyone.
In my opinion his guilt was still in doubt at the end of the movie. The nun herself at the end of the movie admitted that she had doubts. He left because he felt the deck was stacked against him, regardles if he was guilty or not.
This is really interesting... Clearly, the movie has taken a certain spin, which you're not really meant to do. I'm studying the original play, and you're not supposed to know whether the priest was guilty or not at all. The original play was written to make the audience doubt, some think he did, some think he didn't. But ultimately, there was never any proof to say whether he was innocent or not. Personally, I think he didn't, or, I'd /like/ to think he didn't. You don't know, hence, 'Doubt'.
Falsely accused? The brilliance of the film is that the Streep character is seen (at the beginning of film) as the villain...but as the film progresses, it is very clear that the priest is guilty of a sex crime against a child.
My only complaint is the casting of Philip Seymour Hoffman as the priest: this actor is so strange and pervy to begin with, that it really comes as no surprise that his character is the same.
Ok to those of you out there who say guilty not guilty I want to point something out this movie never actully states that the priest is guilty or not guilty and in fact is to suppose to make you wonder if he is or not that way you form your own oppion with what was givin in the movie.
Ok to those of you out there who say guilty not guilty I want to point something out this movie never actully states that the priest is guilty or not guilty and in fact is to suppose to make you wonder if he is or not that way you form your own oppion with what was givin in the movie.
DEFINITION OF THE WORD DOUBT verb (used with object) 1. to be uncertain about; consider questionable or unlikely; hesitate to believe. 2. to distrust. 3. Archaic . to fear; be apprehensive about. –verb (used without object) 4. to be uncertain about something; be undecided in opinion or belief. –noun 5. a feeling of uncertainty about the truth, reality, or nature of something. 6. distrust. 7. a state of affairs such as to occasion uncertainty. 8. Obsolete . fear; dread.
—Idioms 9. beyond the shadow of a doubt, with certainty; definitely. Also, beyond a doubt, beyond doubt. 10. in doubt, in a state of uncertainty or suspense: His appointment to the position is still in doubt. 11. no doubt, a. probably. b. certainly: There is no doubt an element of truth in what you say. 12. without doubt, unquestionably; certainly.
@junmeskie down the road from my house in rl someone wrote a letter to everyone saying the person down the road from me said he was a pedo with no proof or nothing very distractive fi his innocent and no proof someone can get hurt if his innocent.
the word doubt doesn't mean she doubts that she was right. overall, she believes she was right, and she was, because the priest would not have left the school if he had not done the misdeed. she has doubts because she is in constant pursuit of the truth. people in constant pursuit of the truth have doubts about everything, because they never cease to analyze a problem such as the one she confronts in this movie.
@Masterthief66 I'm not sure that the Father's exit from that particular church is sufficient evidence of his misconduct. He may have felt it best to leave being as if he stayed it would be a continual battle with the nun that would remain and ugly and futile situation.
It doesnt matter. If for any reason there is doubt the priest must be removed. It doesnt matter if it upsets the priesthood. The child should always come 1st. He was not innocent or he wouldnt have given up so easy. But the nuns there was doubt because she got her confession with a lie.But he reacted to it. So he so what she thought him to be... He should have been sent where he couldnt come near a chiold again......
@wcacwa7679 The point of the movie is DOUBT fool. You along with the people who think he did it missed the entire point of the movie. The audience only get fed with assumptions. What you choose to believe is completely up to the viewer but no one can say without a doubt the priest was guilty or innocent. That was point of the movie.
anyhooo I wish there were more zealous judgmental nuns in the Catholic Church, maybe it would've saved more kids from rectal pain.
the play is cleverly constructed and left ambiguous deliberately to provoke thought and discussion... very cleverly done. The nun is a little too sure of her allegation and the priest does react strangely to the false claim that his old parish history has been discovered. The doubt is in the script. Any arguing about the ending is pointless really.
I find certain aspects of this inaccurate. In the old days if someone like that blond kid ever spoke to a nun or priest like that and touched her arm he would be beaten to near death. Also....back then children were marched in neat perfect, military-like rows when outside the school and absolutely no talking was allowed
she only lied about the call to see hes reaction, and that reaction pretty much proved that he had abused other children in the past, we cant be sure if he abused this child or not, then theres doubt, we can very strongly suspect he did,but cant be certain, just like Sister Aloysius Beauvier .this movie is brilliant, very well done.
Yes, there was doubt throughout the beginning of the movie... but pretty sure he was rightfully accused. He would have felt no reason to leave when she lied and said she had spoken to a nun at his previous church.
@MyPaperBleedsInk Yes, he would have. He could simply have been afraid of Aloysius' determination to bring him down. In simple words, he could've thought "If she can make proof to herself with such small details, she can easily find "proof" that can get me in trouble. She won't give up, so I must escape." He could've also had a bad reputation in his previous church, not necessarily concerning molesting children, and he could be afraid it would come to be known.
Meryl Streep's "doubts" at the end don't refer to whether she believes the priest is guilty or not - he is. Her doubts are about whether she did the right thing by revealing the priest is a paedophile, as even the boys mother had begged her not to - it would have been easier, and the boy would have had a much more comfortable time of life, if she had let the matter rest. As it is, now the boys father knows, and the boy had to leave the school and is probably in for hell at his new school.
I too was in "doubt" regarding his guilt or suspicion of guilt. But when Meryl told Amy Adams that she lied to the priest about calling his last parish and speaking with a nun about his previous "indiscretions" and he decided to leave immediately after that, it kind of confirmed it for me. In regards to Meryls "doubts", I believe she was talking about her faith. She said earlier to catch "a mouse", one must pull away from God. Since she did that by lying, she was doubting her faith.
it did not say it but in the part he talks to sister James he is trying to stop sister James beliven that it was him that kid who was talking in masses needs to go to confession
Your title suggest "doubt" has been removed from your thinking. The priest is steadfast in declaring his innocence as long as the focus is on Donald. He only caves when she bluffs about digging into his past. No scenes with him and the child suggest anything inappropriate. But something in his past is volatile enough to make him run. The story being about a catholic priest,you suspect it was pedophilia. But maybe he had a drinking problem. It does leave you in doubt! brilliantly done!
in the old days it was the custom for females to have their heads covered with a veil or hat.......but never men. I do not know how this custom came about but I remember as a child seeing all the women with veils or hats
the custom comes from Leviticus in which the LORD commands women to have their head covered in the temple. Levitical law is no longer, as we are now living in the age of grace.
@acdcluvr Allowed? It was REQUIRED that all females cover their heads (and that men remove their hats) in RC churches until the late 60's. Even the little girls wore miniature mantillas (they looked like doilies). I've even heard of fathers giving their daughters handkerchiefs to cover their heads.
I'm just going to take the author's word on what happened. According to John Patrick Shanley, the playwright, the ending is intentionally left vague so that the viewer can draw their own conclusion. He wanted the viewers to examine why they are so certain as to what happened in since situations such as this. There is no right or wrong answer here, just the viewer's belief on what makes them feel so strongly about their answer.
yea i dont think you guys watched the movie... the priest did do it i mean its not openly stated but from all the information they put in the last scences we all know...pay attention
The problem in the church was that it held the reins too tight and then dropped them altogether after vatican 2. The people obeyed mostly out of fear than faith and when disipline was loosed the people started to abandon the church teachings. Faith born out of love of the Lord is what suptains people.
wrong. sex abuse claims have happened for centuries, way before vatican II.
the problem in the church is that it's a power and money hungry patriarchal misogynistic corporation run by pigs. also, it's built on lies and fraud because god doesn't exist, and the pigs that run the corporation know they can exploit people's fears to tell them what to do and to give them money.
Karlsmith00 is a typical religion bashing atheist: all opinion based on hateful emotion and not a shred of logic. Like all atheists, he or she is bitter about something in their past life, does not have the guts to blame themselves, and thus takes it out on God and religion. Nice to take the easy way out, is it not?
@ligreekguy You don't know anything about atheists whom you don't know personally. So stop with your stupid assumption and generalization of atheists with a line like "Like all atheists...blah, blah". I could say all believers are close-minded, uneducated, judgmental,etc but only some are. People like you give religion bad names.
@junmeskie note that he he is steadfast in his declaration of innocence as long as the focus is on the child in question. He only caves after the Sr bluffs him. Seems there was something in his past he was afraid of. So,he may have been innocent of any indiscretion with Donald,indeed every encounter with the child reflects a genuine priestly interaction. But something in his past seemed intimidating enough that he did not want it to come to light. "Doubt" is the appropriate title.......I think
@junmeskie Your own title removes the question of "doubt". There was never an indication in the interaction between the priest and the boy that anything inappropriate was happening. However,his response to the sister's bluff insinuates that there was something in his past that he did not want to come to light. The fact that the story is of a Catholic priest suggest pedophilia but its left in "Doubt". Brilliantly done! Note the pan to the smirking "fidgety" boy at the end????
@gudfh where does it prove he did it? I watched it and there seems to me to be some doubt as to whether he did or didn't. Since Meryl's character lied based on her own Certainty, I don't see the evidence him leaving proves nothing but Doubts. I like the Orwellian line when he argues with her in their 1st scene and says "you answer to us!" that seems like he wants no one to make that judgement but other Priests. I don't like Catholicism anyway, it reeks of Jesus flippin over tables
I think you are mistaken. Yes, she trapped him by saying she had made a call when she had not. He thought she had been told the truth about him by a nun and that was why he moved on. The doubt she confessed to at the end was doubt in God because the priest was moved to another church where he was made pastor and had more power and no one to stop him. Her doubt was in God and the church. She never doubted his guilt.
@junmeskie No, in the end she admits she lied, but if it weren't true the lie would not have work. She was upset that he was promoted for what he had done and had doubt in her faith in God. How could he not punish such a crude man?
@junmeskie don't be so defensive, everyone has their own interpretations, and the other of the original play meant to leave it open to the viewer's discretion. In my opinion, the final scene where Meryl Streep says "I have such doubts" means that she doubts her relationship with God because she lied. But it can, however, be interpreted the way you interpreted it, which is fine. I also think the priest is guilty, since he behaved so defensively.
I can't believe it! The film is very clear, he did NOT do it at ALL, the film is about malicious paranoia in the ecclesiastic church fuelled by inhibition and narrow mindness, so much so that GUILT takes over the senior nun. Watch it again this time carefully!
Did the Priest molest the boy or not???
Maloperverso 2 months ago
Nuns sometimes are the biggest bitches on the planet.
Encom7 3 months ago
wow i feel bad because im not intelectuly talking about it and just watching it to write a rivew instead of readting the playwright
zafisher 5 months ago
the point of the movie is not about whether he actually did it or not.
richie616799 5 months ago
The point of the movie is that you never find out. Wow. Whoever named this video needs help.
Dancolehawk 5 months ago
The character played by Meryl Streep has doubts about her faith and the institution of the church...this man (who she feels is guilty) is only going to go on to a higher position and continue what he is doing...her character has no doubt that he is guilty..it is other things she has doubts about.
Rypm25 7 months ago
His sermon regarding "gossip" was him using his position to clearly manipulate the situation...(he must be innocent because look at what he is saying...) not that he could manipulate the Meryl Streep character...but maybe he could change the mind of the Amy Adams character....regarding the ending and Meryls admission of having "Doubt." She has NO doubt that he is guilty! Whether he is guilty or not is never known by the audience..its for you to decide. But .....
Rypm25 7 months ago
Very nice, emotional and sometime even sad movie. The acting was brilliant. I'm not a big Meryl Streep fan but she's very talented and looked stunning here. Amy Adams was no less imressive - she deserved the Oscar for this supporting role and finally Philip Seymour Hoffman and Viola Davis were amazing as well
Magnolia296 8 months ago
As an Irish girl.. it freaks me out how many people have been found out as pedo's.. it kind of took my faith away in itself.. i can't stand religion anymore because it seems as an excuse to hide behind your immoral judgements.. blehh..
AthloneTramp 8 months ago
I have not watched the movie, but I honestly want to know - did he really molest the young boy, or was it just doubt on the nun's part?
missmuggledetector 8 months ago
LOL, all this arguing about whether he did it or didn't do it, whether the nun was right or wrong, just shows that the movie is well-made. That's exactly the response the filmmakers wanted... for the viewers to have doubt! OMG, a movie that actually makes us think and form our own opinions? WTF? :D
superbu1 9 months ago
wow can't even comment on the review as I went to the movies twice with different people and we all came out with different views on what happened...but that is exactly the brilliance of this movie, you never really know just what happened do you...it's all in the camera work the dialog and the body language.
I'm not even going to state what I think happened cuz every time I watch this movie I see a new layer and it's ever changing...though my initial verdict of the guilt stays the same...
ElfJet 9 months ago
I agree with the reviewer, the priest was innocent since there was NO evidence against him, only suspicion based on circumstantial evidence. That nun was paranoid because she feared his progressive stance and that it might change how she wanted the school. Why do think the movie included the sermon about gossip? He knew that his reputation would never be good there because of the nuns paranoid war against him, spreading gossip. He realized that and decided to leave in good interest of everyone.
alphaman03 9 months ago
In my opinion his guilt was still in doubt at the end of the movie. The nun herself at the end of the movie admitted that she had doubts. He left because he felt the deck was stacked against him, regardles if he was guilty or not.
jpr422 9 months ago
There seldom is evidence in these types of cases. That is, until the kid grows up, returns to the offender and attacks him.
I certainly wouldn't need more than a modicum of suspicion to remove my kid from a 'questionable situation.'
coltononline 1 year ago
This is really interesting... Clearly, the movie has taken a certain spin, which you're not really meant to do. I'm studying the original play, and you're not supposed to know whether the priest was guilty or not at all. The original play was written to make the audience doubt, some think he did, some think he didn't. But ultimately, there was never any proof to say whether he was innocent or not. Personally, I think he didn't, or, I'd /like/ to think he didn't. You don't know, hence, 'Doubt'.
moel13 1 year ago
Falsely accused? The brilliance of the film is that the Streep character is seen (at the beginning of film) as the villain...but as the film progresses, it is very clear that the priest is guilty of a sex crime against a child.
My only complaint is the casting of Philip Seymour Hoffman as the priest: this actor is so strange and pervy to begin with, that it really comes as no surprise that his character is the same.
KellyGreen5555 1 year ago
The movie should be called guilt and not doubt because they make him seem to guilty in my opinion not that anyone cares or anything.
cherrybee365 1 year ago
This woman scares the hell outta me! ...It's strangely tantilizing...
PuppetMask 1 year ago
DO NOT SCROLL THROUGH COMMENTS! IT WILL RUIN THE MOVIE FOR YOU!!
koreytd 1 year ago
Ok to those of you out there who say guilty not guilty I want to point something out this movie never actully states that the priest is guilty or not guilty and in fact is to suppose to make you wonder if he is or not that way you form your own oppion with what was givin in the movie.
nassico1 1 year ago
Ok to those of you out there who say guilty not guilty I want to point something out this movie never actully states that the priest is guilty or not guilty and in fact is to suppose to make you wonder if he is or not that way you form your own oppion with what was givin in the movie.
nassico1 1 year ago
this movie left me so damn confused
i had doubts n suspisions
LosxAngelesxAngel15 1 year ago
junmeskie 1 year ago 4
junmeskie 1 year ago
@junmeskie where did part 3 go to wheres the part 3
jellybean2423 2 months ago
@junmeskie down the road from my house in rl someone wrote a letter to everyone saying the person down the road from me said he was a pedo with no proof or nothing very distractive fi his innocent and no proof someone can get hurt if his innocent.
jellybean2423 2 months ago
can someone tell me where to download the whole movie
jellybean2423 2 months ago
the word doubt doesn't mean she doubts that she was right. overall, she believes she was right, and she was, because the priest would not have left the school if he had not done the misdeed. she has doubts because she is in constant pursuit of the truth. people in constant pursuit of the truth have doubts about everything, because they never cease to analyze a problem such as the one she confronts in this movie.
Masterthief66 1 year ago
@Masterthief66 I'm not sure that the Father's exit from that particular church is sufficient evidence of his misconduct. He may have felt it best to leave being as if he stayed it would be a continual battle with the nun that would remain and ugly and futile situation.
TheLMack 11 months ago
It doesnt matter. If for any reason there is doubt the priest must be removed. It doesnt matter if it upsets the priesthood. The child should always come 1st. He was not innocent or he wouldnt have given up so easy. But the nuns there was doubt because she got her confession with a lie.But he reacted to it. So he so what she thought him to be... He should have been sent where he couldnt come near a chiold again......
babyycat 1 year ago
@babyycat Anyone can create doubt about anyone over anything. Doubt doesn't prove an accusation.
effingya 1 year ago
He didn't do it you fools. That's the entire point. I pity the ones who miss the entire point of the movie.
wcacwa7679 1 year ago
@wcacwa7679 The point of the movie is DOUBT fool. You along with the people who think he did it missed the entire point of the movie. The audience only get fed with assumptions. What you choose to believe is completely up to the viewer but no one can say without a doubt the priest was guilty or innocent. That was point of the movie.
anyhooo I wish there were more zealous judgmental nuns in the Catholic Church, maybe it would've saved more kids from rectal pain.
leobsessed 1 year ago
the play is cleverly constructed and left ambiguous deliberately to provoke thought and discussion... very cleverly done. The nun is a little too sure of her allegation and the priest does react strangely to the false claim that his old parish history has been discovered. The doubt is in the script. Any arguing about the ending is pointless really.
KINGROOSTER45 1 year ago 4
I find certain aspects of this inaccurate. In the old days if someone like that blond kid ever spoke to a nun or priest like that and touched her arm he would be beaten to near death. Also....back then children were marched in neat perfect, military-like rows when outside the school and absolutely no talking was allowed
inkey2 1 year ago
she only lied about the call to see hes reaction, and that reaction pretty much proved that he had abused other children in the past, we cant be sure if he abused this child or not, then theres doubt, we can very strongly suspect he did,but cant be certain, just like Sister Aloysius Beauvier .this movie is brilliant, very well done.
carolin988 1 year ago 2
At 5:50 did the movie skip a scene?
SandoTrini 1 year ago
@SandoTrini Yes I have to edit em cus YouTube limits it's upload to only 10 minutes.
junmeskie 1 year ago
The girls uniforms look EXACTLY like my scools....gosh were so stuck in the past it's not even funny
queschons 1 year ago
i do think that the priest molested the boy
when it comes to doubt and the ending.....one can argue that
sister a had her doubts about her religion.
it is certainly up for debate, but I believe that she had doubts in her religion, not about her doubts concerning father flynn
Italia1214 1 year ago
Yes, there was doubt throughout the beginning of the movie... but pretty sure he was rightfully accused. He would have felt no reason to leave when she lied and said she had spoken to a nun at his previous church.
MyPaperBleedsInk 1 year ago
@MyPaperBleedsInk Yes, he would have. He could simply have been afraid of Aloysius' determination to bring him down. In simple words, he could've thought "If she can make proof to herself with such small details, she can easily find "proof" that can get me in trouble. She won't give up, so I must escape." He could've also had a bad reputation in his previous church, not necessarily concerning molesting children, and he could be afraid it would come to be known.
aReLi777 10 months ago
Meryl Streep's "doubts" at the end don't refer to whether she believes the priest is guilty or not - he is. Her doubts are about whether she did the right thing by revealing the priest is a paedophile, as even the boys mother had begged her not to - it would have been easier, and the boy would have had a much more comfortable time of life, if she had let the matter rest. As it is, now the boys father knows, and the boy had to leave the school and is probably in for hell at his new school.
jackk2786 1 year ago
I too was in "doubt" regarding his guilt or suspicion of guilt. But when Meryl told Amy Adams that she lied to the priest about calling his last parish and speaking with a nun about his previous "indiscretions" and he decided to leave immediately after that, it kind of confirmed it for me. In regards to Meryls "doubts", I believe she was talking about her faith. She said earlier to catch "a mouse", one must pull away from God. Since she did that by lying, she was doubting her faith.
basktcatch17 1 year ago
it did not say it but in the part he talks to sister James he is trying to stop sister James beliven that it was him that kid who was talking in masses needs to go to confession
HauntedMask24 1 year ago
Your title suggest "doubt" has been removed from your thinking. The priest is steadfast in declaring his innocence as long as the focus is on Donald. He only caves when she bluffs about digging into his past. No scenes with him and the child suggest anything inappropriate. But something in his past is volatile enough to make him run. The story being about a catholic priest,you suspect it was pedophilia. But maybe he had a drinking problem. It does leave you in doubt! brilliantly done!
drfittt 1 year ago 2
I don't think he as falsey accused, lol.
LolCaramelz 2 years ago
since when is wearing hats in church allowed??????
acdcluvr 2 years ago
in the old days it was the custom for females to have their heads covered with a veil or hat.......but never men. I do not know how this custom came about but I remember as a child seeing all the women with veils or hats
inkey2 2 years ago
the custom comes from Leviticus in which the LORD commands women to have their head covered in the temple. Levitical law is no longer, as we are now living in the age of grace.
cmzamilpa 2 years ago
@cmzamilpa : St. Paul commands that women cover their heads at Mass/Liturgy. So it is still in effect.
east02west 1 year ago
@cmzamilpa Christ didnt come to abolish the laws of the past he cam eto filfill therefore all the old customs still apply. Including more!!!
MaestroInfernus 1 year ago
woman are aloud
KeaneUndertheIronSea 2 years ago
@acdcluvr Allowed? It was REQUIRED that all females cover their heads (and that men remove their hats) in RC churches until the late 60's. Even the little girls wore miniature mantillas (they looked like doilies). I've even heard of fathers giving their daughters handkerchiefs to cover their heads.
nauort23 1 year ago
still the best movie ever..
romelbv 2 years ago
I'm just going to take the author's word on what happened. According to John Patrick Shanley, the playwright, the ending is intentionally left vague so that the viewer can draw their own conclusion. He wanted the viewers to examine why they are so certain as to what happened in since situations such as this. There is no right or wrong answer here, just the viewer's belief on what makes them feel so strongly about their answer.
raymesquite 2 years ago
i agree, open ended, so the viewer can determine his own outcome..I always assumed he was guilty..
cincinnatikate 2 years ago
I wanna see this film and rate my OWN opinions on it..
Jill4ChrisRedfeild 2 years ago
its fourty minutes? :o
99range70def 2 years ago
Philip Seymour Hoffman....WOW!! Just saw it last night.
229095 2 years ago
yea i dont think you guys watched the movie... the priest did do it i mean its not openly stated but from all the information they put in the last scences we all know...pay attention
mansonlove3 2 years ago
The problem in the church was that it held the reins too tight and then dropped them altogether after vatican 2. The people obeyed mostly out of fear than faith and when disipline was loosed the people started to abandon the church teachings. Faith born out of love of the Lord is what suptains people.
jimmyhd1969 2 years ago
wrong. sex abuse claims have happened for centuries, way before vatican II.
the problem in the church is that it's a power and money hungry patriarchal misogynistic corporation run by pigs. also, it's built on lies and fraud because god doesn't exist, and the pigs that run the corporation know they can exploit people's fears to tell them what to do and to give them money.
and that's it.
karlsmith00 2 years ago
i agree with most of what you said.....but none of us will really know if there is a god till we die. So I always keep an open mind
inkey2 2 years ago
Karlsmith00 is a typical religion bashing atheist: all opinion based on hateful emotion and not a shred of logic. Like all atheists, he or she is bitter about something in their past life, does not have the guts to blame themselves, and thus takes it out on God and religion. Nice to take the easy way out, is it not?
ligreekguy 2 years ago 2
@ligreekguy You couldnt be more correct God Bless you.
MaestroInfernus 1 year ago
@ligreekguy You don't know anything about atheists whom you don't know personally. So stop with your stupid assumption and generalization of atheists with a line like "Like all atheists...blah, blah". I could say all believers are close-minded, uneducated, judgmental,etc but only some are. People like you give religion bad names.
MetallicIronDeth 1 year ago
True they never said if he did it.. but I think we can all agree on what was not said. He did it!
omorado 2 years ago 2
What word in "Doubt" don't you understand?
Even the accuser has doubt for she lied making the call to another nun.
junmeskie 2 years ago
@junmeskie note that he he is steadfast in his declaration of innocence as long as the focus is on the child in question. He only caves after the Sr bluffs him. Seems there was something in his past he was afraid of. So,he may have been innocent of any indiscretion with Donald,indeed every encounter with the child reflects a genuine priestly interaction. But something in his past seemed intimidating enough that he did not want it to come to light. "Doubt" is the appropriate title.......I think
drfittt 1 year ago
@junmeskie Your own title removes the question of "doubt". There was never an indication in the interaction between the priest and the boy that anything inappropriate was happening. However,his response to the sister's bluff insinuates that there was something in his past that he did not want to come to light. The fact that the story is of a Catholic priest suggest pedophilia but its left in "Doubt". Brilliantly done! Note the pan to the smirking "fidgety" boy at the end????
drfittt 1 year ago
ummmm he did do it dude.... it wasnt a false accusation... he molested the kid.... didnt you watch the movie lol
gudfh 2 years ago 25
ACTUALLY, "dude" it's never said if he molested the boy or not.
LiberalDemocrat83 2 years ago
hmm
Maybe I missed the scene where he actually molested the kid?
Do you even know the definition of the word "Doubt"?
junmeskie 2 years ago
@junmeskie it means you do not belive what is going on
HauntedMask24 1 year ago
@gudfh where does it prove he did it? I watched it and there seems to me to be some doubt as to whether he did or didn't. Since Meryl's character lied based on her own Certainty, I don't see the evidence him leaving proves nothing but Doubts. I like the Orwellian line when he argues with her in their 1st scene and says "you answer to us!" that seems like he wants no one to make that judgement but other Priests. I don't like Catholicism anyway, it reeks of Jesus flippin over tables
daxeboy9 1 year ago
I'm confused by this review. The priest is guilty. The nun was right. Brilliant movie.
FynFlyte 2 years ago 26
The nun LIED all the way, until the last scene where he confided to the younger nun that she never made such call and that she has doubt.
What word in "Doubt" don't you understand?
junmeskie 2 years ago
I think you are mistaken. Yes, she trapped him by saying she had made a call when she had not. He thought she had been told the truth about him by a nun and that was why he moved on. The doubt she confessed to at the end was doubt in God because the priest was moved to another church where he was made pastor and had more power and no one to stop him. Her doubt was in God and the church. She never doubted his guilt.
FynFlyte 2 years ago
@FynFlyte You have cleverly misinterpreted and rearranged the plot to suit your wrong judgement. Watch it again.
TheChicaboo 2 years ago
@junmeskie doubt means you are not Beliven what is going on
HauntedMask24 1 year ago
@junmeskie doubt means you are not Beliven what is going on
HauntedMask24 1 year ago
@junmeskie No, in the end she admits she lied, but if it weren't true the lie would not have work. She was upset that he was promoted for what he had done and had doubt in her faith in God. How could he not punish such a crude man?
ShonPhoenix 1 year ago
@junmeskie don't be so defensive, everyone has their own interpretations, and the other of the original play meant to leave it open to the viewer's discretion. In my opinion, the final scene where Meryl Streep says "I have such doubts" means that she doubts her relationship with God because she lied. But it can, however, be interpreted the way you interpreted it, which is fine. I also think the priest is guilty, since he behaved so defensively.
insomniatic505 1 year ago
I can't believe it! The film is very clear, he did NOT do it at ALL, the film is about malicious paranoia in the ecclesiastic church fuelled by inhibition and narrow mindness, so much so that GUILT takes over the senior nun. Watch it again this time carefully!
Papiprah 2 years ago
LOVE THIS MOVIE...Meryl Streep and Amy Adams are Fantastic together and Philip Seymour Hoffman is Great too
Cinderaly001 2 years ago 2