@@yevgeniyaleshchenko849 If any adult, especially one entrusted with the welfare of children, believes that someone is a danger to children, they have a responsibility to report that to their higher-ups, and to go higher, outside their organization, if necessary. For some time now, teachers have been mandated reporters of abuse. It could be possible for a principal to be sued or even prosecuted for failing to report even a strong suspicion, and to ensure that it's investigated by child protective services. In these cases, it seems the Church has kept these cases within their own cloistered walls.
I wonder who first thought that transferring pedo from parish to parish was a good solution to the child molester priests. Probably who ever was first behind that arrangement probably was a pedo too
Him beginning to write a “letter of removal” would have normally scared the hell out of any fresh nun…notice how she isn’t one bit bothered and continues to interrogate him…beautiful scene
“YOU ANSWER TO US” I was yelled at by the head of our church while on a mission trip in South America when I had suspicions that a senior church member had been drinking and physically abusing his children and I yelled back “I ANSWER TO GOD” and I felt the sisters passion. Meryl Streep in such an incredible actress
@@rickandosca8262 Yeah, but unless I'm misunderstanding your reply it seems to indicate that you think he slighted the incredible Philip Seymour Hoffman. I'm just saying that I don't think there was any problem not mentioning him. But yeah, just to say it, that dude was amazing. What a terrible tragedy for art when he died. I hope he finds the peace in death he was seeking in life.
@@solamon77 He wrote something about her in the scene and nothing about him. It's not an earth-shattering deal and maybe you are correct about the writer's thoughts but this is my thoughts. Take care sir.
I watch this scene over and over. These actors just shine off each other. I love the juxtaposition of the priest confessing to the nun. I love how she cradles her shawl like protecting a child even though the sister is the perceived threat throughout the entire film. Her reference to compassion and 'the drunkard with his tot of rum', harking back to her marriage, gives a bit of a back story, but not too much. The attention to detail is incredible.
When he asks if she’s ever done anything wrong, you can see she’s starting to break. He almost gets her to let her guard down until he says “we are the same”, then she takes control of the situation again. Such great acting in this scene and it never fails to give me goosebumps.
They were on fire here, and the dialogue is fantastic. One of those times when film catches the electricity of live performance. Streep is a legend; RIP, PSH.
“Where is your compassion?” is how my abuser got me on the hook and how they repeatedly managed to reel me back in. “Nowhere YOU can get at it” is how I escaped.
That's not fair, Philip Seymour Hoffman was the male equivalent of, well, Meryl Streep, any given role he's in, he's the best. Any character in the Batman mythos he would've been perfect in. Including, but not limited to Barbara Gordon/Batgirl.
This movie is such a master class in acting. My gut feeling at the end of the movie was he was guilty, you just don’t want to believe it because he was a more likeable character and she wasn’t. But prickly as she was she was trying to protect the children.
I’m glad to see they put a box above these videos for victims of Catholic sex abuse to contact about lawsuits. If you are watching this and you’ve experienced abuse at their hands….reach out! Don’t let it stay hidden. Force these ghouls into the light!
Absolutely! Holy Mother Church is in desperate need of a cleansing; it only stands to reason that the Church Militant should be held to the highest moral and ethical standards and that failure should be swiftly punished.
@@JFK-ir7yz So everyone here is ''lost'' while you are the only one seeing the ''truth'' that you can't even explain or provide arguments for. People have different interpretations, some even agree with you. It's the place to have a rational discussion instead of making these passive-aggressive comments with the sole purpose of elevating oneself. Get off your high horse.
I don’t own a horse. I’m not passive aggressive. And I can explain any “argument” or point I make. Talk about hypocrisy. Triggered much? Yes. Most of the people in this comment section missed the mark, by a wide margin. Most don’t even mention Sister James and her view that Father Flynn is completely innocent. Sister Alysius admitted she lied and that her feeling alone is proof enough. That sadly is what most people here agree with, which is why the movie is so excellent. And exposes how everyone (including you it definitely seems) jumps to conclusions based on emotion alone. But the doubt is still there. Which as father Flynn states in his sermon about gossip, once cast, is impossible to retract.
I believe, after Sophie's Choice and maybe Cry in the Dark, this is Meryl Streep's finest and fullest performance. She is unbelievable here. Not only embodying the sternest of nuns, she is also showing vulnerability in scenes like this, but also the scant humor in others. This is a tour-de-force without any doubt(!). The whole film is an acting force: Adams, Hoffman, and, especially, Davis...all are great, but Streep, my god, what an actor, a role, and a performance.
Most of us have an opinion on whether he did it. But the story really shines if we have some room for doubt either way. Otherwise what’s the point? It just becomes a flat story about vengeance.
He left because he knew that she’d never stop going after him. That she would ruin his reputation with the her pursuit to be right. His leaving was not an admission of guilt it was for self preservation.
I disagree. At the beginning of the scene he was preparing to write a letter to have her removed. And even though she reported him, the monsignor didn't believe her. He had far more power than she and people liked him a lot more than they liked her. If he were truly wrongly accused, he would have no trouble taking her down.
@@CreaticityIsLifeshe was going to fanatically persecute him by going all the way to looking for parents of an abused boy. This would have killed his career guilty or innocent. She was willing to sacrifice herself to destroy him on nothing more than a hunch. She lied to his face in telling him she spoke to a nun at his last parish. She would have done anything and would have felt righteous indignation in doing so. His hand was forced. He had to concede defeat because he wasn't willing to fight to a pyrrhic victory at best. If he was truly innocent (and the movie never makes it clear that he isn't), then I feel bad for him as he was just another victim of a dishonest, sanctimonious tyrannical old crone. And even if she's right and he really did something, she's still a sadist and a hypocrite. Awesome movie and first rate acting for sure...
I feel like most people assumes he's guilty of being a pedophile, but my first assumption is that he's simply gay, and to people at that time, that goes hand-in-hand with sex with young boys. That's one reason the film's called "Doubt": There are certainly points where he acts guilty, but is it because he's genuinely guilty, or he's "guilty" of an unfairly-synonymous "crime"? Perhaps he's panicking over being potentially exposed because he genuinely wants to help a kid who shares his "condition" but being exposed will force him to leave, isolating the boy in a situation he empathizes with. The Church helps him in the end, but is it because he's guilty, or because their policy of protecting the guilty is protecting an innocent man? Doubt doubt doubt. "Where's your compassion?" "Nowhere you can get at it." This is the exchange an innocent man would have with a zealous inquisitor prepared to burn him at the stake. "I have no sympathy for you." And this is not what a genuine Christian would say.
That's a good reading. I also suspect the priest might be gay and that's why he says "there are things I cannot say". Such a brilliantly written film to have the audience keep guessing about this character and leave you with questions about whether he is a pedophile, or just innocent and happens to be gay.
In the end, she confesses her deep doubts about her accusations. He appears to be a gay priest who has not acted sexually but understands the gay child and is helping him traverse a troubling time in his life and show him platonic love.
No it wasn’t that she doubted her accusations. It was that she doubted her faith. That’s the beauty of this film. It allows you to think and doesn’t completely show you his guilt.
@@rickandosca8262 yes there is. He later stated he was guilty but the film is supposed to be about the doubt of the sisters faith. So many people fall for the obvious, that because the film is called doubt it’s the question of his guilt. It’s all her faith or lack thereof at the end.
That's just one way to look at it. It was still heavily implied that he abused the blonde boy. He could have also used the excuse of ''helping out the fellow gay'' to groom and molest Donald.
@@jujubegold "He later stated he was guilty", he later stated he was guilty of going after the boy? Really? Unless your J.P.S.----it seems to me it`s about doubt in many ways not only the older nun's doubts.
The doubt in the title is NOT about her doubting the priest's nature.....it's about her doubting the church and her faith because of the institutionalized homosexuality and pedophilia
No, it's not. Doubt refers to the internalised doubt and conflict inherent in these relationships and interactions, and yes, to some extent, the doubt over whether he did the crime - but the movie's subtext is pretty clear. Moving abusive pedofile priests from parish to parish is something that - by the time of this movie's release - had been proven. The Catholic Church was responsible for covering up thousands and thousands of instances of child abuse. The movie is telling us that he did it.
I wish movies like these were more popular than The Avengers for example. Such amazing acting, superb dialogue, and real-life situations. Art helps humanity see itself.
Despite what the video title claims, we don't know whether her accusations are true or not, its the whole thesis of the movie. The movie never presents us any evidence for or against her claims and she is shown to lie and manipulate others into believing her accusations with out any evidence. Keep that in mind when watching the video as it's not about confronting a guilty man, but about the lengths she will go to enforce her beliefs whether or not they are unfounded. The priest may or may not have abused a minor, it is entirely up to the viewer to decide if they desire, but it is not the point of the movie.
Wow, what a moving, intense, and emotional scene from two amazing actors. Just watching this scene alone makes it seem like a real privilege to watch Meryl Streep and Phillip Seymour Hoffman together on the screen.
The whole point of the whole play (and film) is that we don't know the truth. We know the perspective of Sister Aloysius, and we know what Father Flynn says, and can certainly imagine the possibility that he is being unfairly accused. That's what makes this scene so powerful.
Flynn wasn't a sex abuser, he was gay or at least somewhere in the LGBT spectrum. It was obvious. They made a point of long, clean nails, his desire to modernise his church and his insistence on love being the most important thing, even if the rules sometimes don't allow it. He had been helping Donald Miller deal with his sexuality and the abuse he faced because of it.
He was gay for little boys totally inappropriate for him to be talking to a young drunk child alone about LGBT. You’re misinterpreting his nails as a stereotype for gay men. He is a control freak
The abuse he faced was at the hands of this charming and manipulative priest and because of his race. The priest capitalized on this and used his isolation for his own sexual gratification. Yes you are right to assume he was gay because he diddled a young boy, but you have been manipulated by a movie character predator as the script was intended to do was cause doubt
@@jamesrella763 FYI... I talked about the fingernails thing because it's a stereotype. There's a thing about film where every scene and every shot has a purpose. The fingernails thing is certainly a stereotype but my view is that it was part of the clues to lead you to the conclusion that he's gay. I have no love for religion and if I'm honest, I assume every priest is doing something with kids until I get proof to the contrary and that they only move to a new church when they've been caught. Maybe you're using the same bias I have to draw you to an expected conclusion, rather than the unexpected one.
@@Michelle_Schu-blacka do you assume every teacher is abusing their students? I think you are onto something that maybe he didn’t abuse the kid, but rather was worried about being outed. This movie is designed to create DOUBT of what’s really happening
@@djslybaconwell one, I don’t give a shit about you’re opinion, two, I watched it in 09 and three all the film did was in ambiguously like many many films have done before, except in this scenario it felt disappointing. Now piss off.
@@djslybacon well one, I don’t give a shitt about your opinion, two, I watched it in 09 and three all the film did was in ambiguously like many many films have done before, except in this scenario it felt disappointing.
I agree. I think he probably is gay-not a pedophile- and could be sympathetic to the boy's predicament (gay with a homophobic father). He may know this through confession which is supported by his statement, "you know there are many things I can't say", a reference to the seal of confession, a concept that the nun would have known. That fact may be the foundation of the doubt she expresses in the end of the film. I think it is unclear as to what his interaction with the boy was. But even the possibility of the priest being a pedophile pushes the viewer to assume he is, since his departure definitively protects the boy, and his staying puts the child at risk if there is doubt.
@@nicholasholiday941 I would agree with you if it wasn't for two scenes with William London. In one, he's the only one at a table of other boys drinking lemonade, who looks at Father Flynn without a smile or admiration. Then there's the unusual, stern incident Sister A mentions when he grabbed William's wrist, which shows Flynn has another side to him besides the kindness he showed Donald Miller in the hallway. The other scene is Flynn's goodbye sermon where we see Donald's sadness, juxtaposed with William's small smile, which to me confirms Flynn's guilt. Although, to nod to your theory, this movie is good that it could just be the boys' had surface-level, innocent encounters with Father Flynn and your theory is correct. (Also, you make a great point in your last line).
Great scene. Incomparable acting among Hoffman, Streep and Davis. Tragically, this is a reality for too many people. Compassion is perceived by too many as weakness and a cover for sinful acts.
The Priest isn't guilty, until proven guilty. The movie was about a power struggle, not SA. Some people will sabotage the system when they aren't in charge. In this case, that's the nun. When they lose a fight they started, they see themselves as the victim. When in reality, they are the opposite. Clearly, she'd made a better drill sergeant than a nun.
OK Spoilers if you care about this movie I don’t think the person who made this video actually read the book. In the book, he never actually did it. It is just heavily implied, and the whole point of the book is that this lady’s self righteousness got the better of her, and in the end, she experienced, guess what, doubt.
She despised him because he threatened the power she had. He wasn't a predator. He saw himself in this boy and showed compassion. This story took place at a time when it wasn't okay to gay.
She never actually called the church. Just said she did. And he flips out and quits. Confirming he did what he did. Or did SOMETHING. How can people say he’s not guilty? If he was innocent he would she had nothing to worry about when she claimed To have called the church.
Not all Catholics practice this but it’s a problem they (the church) have hid and not rid of. They just simply move the offending pastor to another church to prey on. If you’re a Catholic please pray for guidance and the strength to leave that false doctrine. Call no man on earth your father for you only have one who is in heaven.
For those of you saying you should be doubting if he was guilty at all...he's been to 3 parishes in 5 years. Sure they could be for other reasons but....let's be real...the catholic church knows what they are doing.
I'm a victim. I knew nuns like this. Few and far between. But they made all the difference. They were afraid of nothing, and they brought cowards and criminals in collars to heel. Shatter the fraternity. Women priests. Married priests. Crush the patriarchy before they crush the Church.
The dangers of assuming blind convictions in the face of uncertainty. That's what the play is all about. And the message flew right over you. You are now exhibiting what the play warned against!
WHAT??? That is NOT what the play is about. Take a psychology course, learn about signs of predatory behavior and watch it again. Also, there's NO PLACE in this film where anyone attests to having "blind convictions". The nun clearly expresses her crippling doubts in the final scene, hence the TITLE: "Doubt"....so....what movie did you watch?
Everybody commenting about the acting, and I agree they were great. But I'm commenting about the act. Will a nun turn in or have a priest investigated. How are they above the law?
His fingernail preferences is a hint towards the subtext of the movie: he is in all likelihood a homosexual, repressed (obviously), and the boy he (allegedly) abused was struggling with same sex attraction (which is the reason his father was physically abusing him) referred to as his "nature" Being a homosexual within 1960s Catholic culture was very shameful. Especially as a member of the clergy, which the boy had shown interest it. It's very likely that the boy confided with the Priest and the Priest explained that he, too, could overcome his attraction and become a priest despite his homosexuality (as the priest had done). He says this in the gym when he explains that having long fingernails or short fingernails isn't the issue. It's whether or not their dirty. He has his long, but he keeps them clean, "that makes it okay". When the Sister confronts him about this, she doesn't realize that he's hiding this secret, she believes he's hiding that he's attracted and abusing children. Thus when she says "cut your nails" he takes it as the lesson that homosexuals were given by traditional catholic teaching at the time: your nature is wrong, you have to conform to how I say so. Hope that helps broaden your perspective on the movie & life. God Bless
![Tee Grizzley - Blow for Blow (feat. J. Cole) [Official Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/wNLN5xsx5dc/mqdefault.jpg)
Transferring offenders has been an unfortunate "solution" all too often. It only endangers more children.
True but she alone could not have banished him from everywhere. She did what she could at her level.
@@yevgeniyaleshchenko849 If any adult, especially one entrusted with the welfare of children, believes that someone is a danger to children, they have a responsibility to report that to their higher-ups, and to go higher, outside their organization, if necessary. For some time now, teachers have been mandated reporters of abuse. It could be possible for a principal to be sued or even prosecuted for failing to report even a strong suspicion, and to ensure that it's investigated by child protective services. In these cases, it seems the Church has kept these cases within their own cloistered walls.
I wonder who first thought that transferring pedo from parish to parish was a good solution to the child molester priests. Probably who ever was first behind that arrangement probably was a pedo too
Also, from what I remember, it is never certain in the film that he was guilty.
Him beginning to write a “letter of removal” would have normally scared the hell out of any fresh nun…notice how she isn’t one bit bothered and continues to interrogate him…beautiful scene
"I can fight you"
"You will lose"
Goddamn that line struck me
Blessed be the holy name of God
Abstinence of offense language offends NO ONE.....
@@rudyferrellBut weakness offends all.
make the difficult (yet necessary) decision to wrap up your stay here on Earth
“YOU ANSWER TO US” I was yelled at by the head of our church while on a mission trip in South America when I had suspicions that a senior church member had been drinking and physically abusing his children and I yelled back “I ANSWER TO GOD” and I felt the sisters passion. Meryl Streep in such an incredible actress
And he isn`t an incredible actor?
@@rickandosca8262 I don't think that's what he's trying to say when he highlights a specific scene and character that has relevance to his past.
@@solamon77Yes I see your point but he highlights the actress, not the character.
@@rickandosca8262 Yeah, but unless I'm misunderstanding your reply it seems to indicate that you think he slighted the incredible Philip Seymour Hoffman. I'm just saying that I don't think there was any problem not mentioning him.
But yeah, just to say it, that dude was amazing. What a terrible tragedy for art when he died. I hope he finds the peace in death he was seeking in life.
@@solamon77 He wrote something about her in the scene and nothing about him. It's not an earth-shattering deal and maybe you are correct about the writer's thoughts but this is my thoughts. Take care sir.
I watch this scene over and over. These actors just shine off each other. I love the juxtaposition of the priest confessing to the nun. I love how she cradles her shawl like protecting a child even though the sister is the perceived threat throughout the entire film. Her reference to compassion and 'the drunkard with his tot of rum', harking back to her marriage, gives a bit of a back story, but not too much. The attention to detail is incredible.
"where's your compassion?"
"nowhere you can get at it"
BOOM
I always thought the way she cradle her shawl like a baby it was to tell us she aborted a baby-her mortal sin-or gave it always either or.
I believe she is Elizabeth Ann Seton, who was married with a past...
So wish I could have seen that production of "The Seagull". The two of them as mother and son.
When he asks if she’s ever done anything wrong, you can see she’s starting to break. He almost gets her to let her guard down until he says “we are the same”, then she takes control of the situation again. Such great acting in this scene and it never fails to give me goosebumps.
You're so right, incredible acting.
He’s gaslighting her.
Outstanding Meryl Streep ❤
They were on fire here, and the dialogue is fantastic. One of those times when film catches the electricity of live performance. Streep is a legend; RIP, PSH.
The movie is called "doubt" for a reason.
Meryl is NOT overrated - she is just THAT amazing.
And can't ignore Mr. Hoffman........ what a scene!
Not a breath of over acting makes this so believable. Loved watching their eyes- how they study each others faces.
Masters of the craft.
“Where is your compassion?” is how my abuser got me on the hook and how they repeatedly managed to reel me back in. “Nowhere YOU can get at it” is how I escaped.
"My compassion is with your victims"
Phillip Seymour Hoffman would've been a perfect penguin for the Batman.
Collin Farrell was pretty great
That's not fair, Philip Seymour Hoffman was the male equivalent of, well, Meryl Streep, any given role he's in, he's the best. Any character in the Batman mythos he would've been perfect in. Including, but not limited to Barbara Gordon/Batgirl.
Ffs leave your wee obsession with superhero films out of it for once 🙄
Paul Giamatti
@@Rkid1999Christopher Nolan’s ‘Batman’ series are the only superhero movies I rate as decent .
This movie is such a master class in acting.
My gut feeling at the end of the movie was he was guilty, you just don’t want to believe it because he was a more likeable character and she wasn’t. But prickly as she was she was trying to protect the children.
True.
Very true also we have no idea of the extent of his wrong doings
Right!
Your gut feeling is exactly what the movie is about: Feelings over facts.
@@LTrotsky21stCentury I think it was also about the need for certainty.
I’m glad to see they put a box above these videos for victims of Catholic sex abuse to contact about lawsuits. If you are watching this and you’ve experienced abuse at their hands….reach out! Don’t let it stay hidden. Force these ghouls into the light!
Absolutely! Holy Mother Church is in desperate need of a cleansing; it only stands to reason that the Church Militant should be held to the highest moral and ethical standards and that failure should be swiftly punished.
Yet Rabbis commit more SA despite being smaller in # .. 😂
When Streep asks the priest if he gave Donald Miller the wine, he says no. However, his body language says otherwise. He nods yes
The non verbal communication tells us way more than the dialogue….always.
@@albertmarnell9976 oh please, you don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows.
He didn’t give home the wine. How is every person in this comment section so lost ?
@@JFK-ir7yz So everyone here is ''lost'' while you are the only one seeing the ''truth'' that you can't even explain or provide arguments for. People have different interpretations, some even agree with you. It's the place to have a rational discussion instead of making these passive-aggressive comments with the sole purpose of elevating oneself. Get off your high horse.
I don’t own a horse. I’m not passive aggressive. And I can explain any “argument” or point I make. Talk about hypocrisy. Triggered much?
Yes. Most of the people in this comment section missed the mark, by a wide margin. Most don’t even mention Sister James and her view that Father Flynn is completely innocent. Sister Alysius admitted she lied and that her feeling alone is proof enough. That sadly is what most people here agree with, which is why the movie is so excellent. And exposes how everyone (including you it definitely seems) jumps to conclusions based on emotion alone. But the doubt is still there. Which as father Flynn states in his sermon about gossip, once cast, is impossible to retract.
I believe, after Sophie's Choice and maybe Cry in the Dark, this is Meryl Streep's finest and fullest performance. She is unbelievable here. Not only embodying the sternest of nuns, she is also showing vulnerability in scenes like this, but also the scant humor in others. This is a tour-de-force without any doubt(!). The whole film is an acting force: Adams, Hoffman, and, especially, Davis...all are great, but Streep, my god, what an actor, a role, and a performance.
I just watched Out of Africa again, and she was ethereal.
I can't believe she didn't win the academy award for this role.
Extremely intense scene! Not many movies as intense as 'Doubt'!
Delores Claiborne...when Delores confesses to Vera about her husband abusing their daughter....intense scene!
Just placed an order for the dvd.
This movie was traumatizing to watch
The bleakness of reality
There are few actors who can hold serve in a scene with Streep when she's this on point. We lost you too soon PSH
Just thinking the same. They compliment each other so well.
It's both clever and bold how Sister Aloysius takes control by showing a strong willingness to risk excommunication to pursue her goals.
Never been confirmed he was an abuser. That’s the whole point of the movie…the audience doesn’t know for sure, and neither does the nun.
Yes, there was a larger point being made about the old conservative way of thinking - certainty about things you don't actually know.
@@ChildrensRightsFirst947 dunno what your dopey shot was intended to mean there. I was questioning the title of the clip.
Wrong. She knows, and those in the audience with eyes to see and life experience know as well. Maybe you should pipe down since you obv have neither.
@@ChildrensRightsFirst947 not really
@@meganbeckman8827 perhaps I have far more experience than you think, but that’s ok.
He's guilty as sin
Most of us have an opinion on whether he did it. But the story really shines if we have some room for doubt either way. Otherwise what’s the point? It just becomes a flat story about vengeance.
The acting is stunning and the writing is extraordinary. All great films have great scripts.
I have to say that this film has had a great impact on my life. It's really unbelievable how biased we can get to be in some circumstances.
He left because he knew that she’d never stop going after him. That she would ruin his reputation with the her pursuit to be right. His leaving was not an admission of guilt it was for self preservation.
I disagree. At the beginning of the scene he was preparing to write a letter to have her removed. And even though she reported him, the monsignor didn't believe her. He had far more power than she and people liked him a lot more than they liked her. If he were truly wrongly accused, he would have no trouble taking her down.
@@CreaticityIsLifeshe was going to fanatically persecute him by going all the way to looking for parents of an abused boy. This would have killed his career guilty or innocent. She was willing to sacrifice herself to destroy him on nothing more than a hunch. She lied to his face in telling him she spoke to a nun at his last parish. She would have done anything and would have felt righteous indignation in doing so. His hand was forced. He had to concede defeat because he wasn't willing to fight to a pyrrhic victory at best. If he was truly innocent (and the movie never makes it clear that he isn't), then I feel bad for him as he was just another victim of a dishonest, sanctimonious tyrannical old crone. And even if she's right and he really did something, she's still a sadist and a hypocrite.
Awesome movie and first rate acting for sure...
I feel like most people assumes he's guilty of being a pedophile, but my first assumption is that he's simply gay, and to people at that time, that goes hand-in-hand with sex with young boys. That's one reason the film's called "Doubt": There are certainly points where he acts guilty, but is it because he's genuinely guilty, or he's "guilty" of an unfairly-synonymous "crime"? Perhaps he's panicking over being potentially exposed because he genuinely wants to help a kid who shares his "condition" but being exposed will force him to leave, isolating the boy in a situation he empathizes with. The Church helps him in the end, but is it because he's guilty, or because their policy of protecting the guilty is protecting an innocent man? Doubt doubt doubt.
"Where's your compassion?"
"Nowhere you can get at it."
This is the exchange an innocent man would have with a zealous inquisitor prepared to burn him at the stake.
"I have no sympathy for you."
And this is not what a genuine Christian would say.
That's a good reading. I also suspect the priest might be gay and that's why he says "there are things I cannot say". Such a brilliantly written film to have the audience keep guessing about this character and leave you with questions about whether he is a pedophile, or just innocent and happens to be gay.
In the end, she confesses her deep doubts about her accusations. He appears to be a gay priest who has not acted sexually but understands the gay child and is helping him traverse a troubling time in his life and show him platonic love.
No it wasn’t that she doubted her accusations. It was that she doubted her faith. That’s the beauty of this film. It allows you to think and doesn’t completely show you his guilt.
Maybe----maybe this----maybe that---it tells more about our wants/hopes/fears/etc. There is no answer in this tale and that is what the writer wrote.
@@rickandosca8262 yes there is. He later stated he was guilty but the film is supposed to be about the doubt of the sisters faith. So many people fall for the obvious, that because the film is called doubt it’s the question of his guilt. It’s all her faith or lack thereof at the end.
That's just one way to look at it. It was still heavily implied that he abused the blonde boy. He could have also used the excuse of ''helping out the fellow gay'' to groom and molest Donald.
@@jujubegold "He later stated he was guilty", he later stated he was guilty of going after the boy? Really? Unless your J.P.S.----it seems to me it`s about doubt in many ways not only the older nun's doubts.
The only reason he didn’t win the Oscar for this is that he was nominated the same year as Heath Ledger.
"you shouldve spoken to the pastor"= guilty. But William London was the real victim.
Who’s William London?
2 amazing actors
The play is called Doubt. It's never clear if he abused or not.
The doubt in the title is NOT about her doubting the priest's nature.....it's about her doubting the church and her faith because of the institutionalized homosexuality and pedophilia
This is not the play this is the film.
Pretty much as good as acting gets
The point of the movie "Doubt" is that we don't know if he did it. The video title is misleading
100%
No, it's not. Doubt refers to the internalised doubt and conflict inherent in these relationships and interactions, and yes, to some extent, the doubt over whether he did the crime - but the movie's subtext is pretty clear.
Moving abusive pedofile priests from parish to parish is something that - by the time of this movie's release - had been proven. The Catholic Church was responsible for covering up thousands and thousands of instances of child abuse.
The movie is telling us that he did it.
What? The priest acknowledged his sin and said he confessed and asked for compassion. Are you catholic?
I wish movies like these were more popular than The Avengers for example. Such amazing acting, superb dialogue, and real-life situations. Art helps humanity see itself.
To see these two giants rally back and forth is a wonder to see
Despite what the video title claims, we don't know whether her accusations are true or not, its the whole thesis of the movie.
The movie never presents us any evidence for or against her claims and she is shown to lie and manipulate others into believing her accusations with out any evidence.
Keep that in mind when watching the video as it's not about confronting a guilty man, but about the lengths she will go to enforce her beliefs whether or not they are unfounded.
The priest may or may not have abused a minor, it is entirely up to the viewer to decide if they desire, but it is not the point of the movie.
Wow, what a moving, intense, and emotional scene from two amazing actors. Just watching this scene alone makes it seem like a real privilege to watch Meryl Streep and Phillip Seymour Hoffman together on the screen.
The most savage scene ever
He nods yes while saying no 3:11
Lol good catch. Although I think he was supposed to be innocent in this movie (He was guilty in the play).
@@swampsprite9ummm no. He essentially admits what he did. They wouldn’t change that for the movie.
Who’s here after watching The Kominskey Method season 2
Meee!!!!
It is an absolute privilege to watch these two in the same scene...
These are two superb actors and the movie is amazing. RIP PSH.
0:54 Hah I like how they slam the phone at each other.
They both acted the CRAP out of these roles! I remember when "Doubt" was in theaters. It was groundbreaking.
She never spoke to a nun, but a hit dog will holla.
'You must go to the pasta!'
The spaghetti of hypocrisy with cheese on top!
Unnervingly brilliant performances.
The title of this video is misleading. We never really find out if the priest is a sex abusing priest or not. That is why the film is called "Doubt".
The whole point of the whole play (and film) is that we don't know the truth. We know the perspective of Sister Aloysius, and we know what Father Flynn says, and can certainly imagine the possibility that he is being unfairly accused. That's what makes this scene so powerful.
The whole point of the movie is that we don't actually know if he's guilty or not, isn't it?
Flynn wasn't a sex abuser, he was gay or at least somewhere in the LGBT spectrum.
It was obvious. They made a point of long, clean nails, his desire to modernise his church and his insistence on love being the most important thing, even if the rules sometimes don't allow it.
He had been helping Donald Miller deal with his sexuality and the abuse he faced because of it.
He was gay for little boys totally inappropriate for him to be talking to a young drunk child alone about LGBT. You’re misinterpreting his nails as a stereotype for gay men. He is a control freak
The abuse he faced was at the hands of this charming and manipulative priest and because of his race. The priest capitalized on this and used his isolation for his own sexual gratification. Yes you are right to assume he was gay because he diddled a young boy, but you have been manipulated by a movie character predator as the script was intended to do was cause doubt
@@jamesrella763 FYI...
I talked about the fingernails thing because it's a stereotype. There's a thing about film where every scene and every shot has a purpose.
The fingernails thing is certainly a stereotype but my view is that it was part of the clues to lead you to the conclusion that he's gay.
I have no love for religion and if I'm honest, I assume every priest is doing something with kids until I get proof to the contrary and that they only move to a new church when they've been caught. Maybe you're using the same bias I have to draw you to an expected conclusion, rather than the unexpected one.
oh he helped him alright. initiated him you could say. 🤣🤣🤣
@@Michelle_Schu-blacka do you assume every teacher is abusing their students? I think you are onto something that maybe he didn’t abuse the kid, but rather was worried about being outed. This movie is designed to create DOUBT of what’s really happening
People always mistake me...
at their peril...
Liked because of abs
The title is wrong...he's not ever proven to be a sexual assault priest....that's why the movie was called "doubt"
Christ, she’s so good.
I mean, he was great, too, but she’s just… otherworldly.
Her powers of transformation are sublime.
I remember watching this in 09 and being pretty impressed by the acting but mostly remembering it for the non-explanation at the end.
That’s the whole point - we have doubt at the end just like our characters
that’s not that clever
@@latenightlogic you don’t sound very clever my friend. If you didn’t get the point of the movie I think you’ve validated my point.
@@djslybaconwell one, I don’t give a shit about you’re opinion, two, I watched it in 09 and three all the film did was in ambiguously like many many films have done before, except in this scenario it felt disappointing. Now piss off.
@@djslybacon well one, I don’t give a shitt about your opinion, two, I watched it in 09 and three all the film did was in ambiguously like many many films have done before, except in this scenario it felt disappointing.
The title is wrong. The entire point of the movie(and the play it is based on) is that we don’t know that abuse took place.
I'm not so sure he's guilty.
I agree. I think he probably is gay-not a pedophile- and could be sympathetic to the boy's predicament (gay with a homophobic father). He may know this through confession which is supported by his statement, "you know there are many things I can't say", a reference to the seal of confession, a concept that the nun would have known. That fact may be the foundation of the doubt she expresses in the end of the film. I think it is unclear as to what his interaction with the boy was. But even the possibility of the priest being a pedophile pushes the viewer to assume he is, since his departure definitively protects the boy, and his staying puts the child at risk if there is doubt.
@@nicholasholiday941 An excellent analysis.
@@nicholasholiday941 I would agree with you if it wasn't for two scenes with William London. In one, he's the only one at a table of other boys drinking lemonade, who looks at Father Flynn without a smile or admiration. Then there's the unusual, stern incident Sister A mentions when he grabbed William's wrist, which shows Flynn has another side to him besides the kindness he showed Donald Miller in the hallway. The other scene is Flynn's goodbye sermon where we see Donald's sadness, juxtaposed with William's small smile, which to me confirms Flynn's guilt. Although, to nod to your theory, this movie is good that it could just be the boys' had surface-level, innocent encounters with Father Flynn and your theory is correct. (Also, you make a great point in your last line).
That poor actor gets all the narcissistic jerk roles
You have missed the point of the movie.
one of the best movies and acting you will see !!!!!!! BRAVO!!!!!!!
"Where is your compassion"? "No where you can get at it" brilliant!!! ;-)
I don't recall the entire backstory to this scene, but I think the priest is right, she is completely out of line.
Both should hv won the award
Great scene. Incomparable acting among Hoffman, Streep and Davis. Tragically, this is a reality for too many people. Compassion is perceived by too many as weakness and a cover for sinful acts.
The Priest isn't guilty, until proven guilty. The movie was about a power struggle, not SA. Some people will sabotage the system when they aren't in charge. In this case, that's the nun. When they lose a fight they started, they see themselves as the victim. When in reality, they are the opposite. Clearly, she'd made a better drill sergeant than a nun.
OK Spoilers if you care about this movie
I don’t think the person who made this video actually read the book. In the book, he never actually did it. It is just heavily implied, and the whole point of the book is that this lady’s self righteousness got the better of her, and in the end, she experienced, guess what, doubt.
Thank you!!! The only correct comment in this entire comment section! Everyone here missed the entire point of the movie!!’
Your title is misleading the basis of the story is "WHETHER" he did this or not. It was the entire point of the movie.
Oh the acting… PSH is missed. Such beautiful and powerful work those two did together
She despised him because he threatened the power she had. He wasn't a predator. He saw himself in this boy and showed compassion. This story took place at a time when it wasn't okay to gay.
This is an amazing scene 2 Great actors sadly Phillip passed on
WOW! Meryl!
I cant decide if he is a ped or if she broke him with threats if a ruined career
She never actually called the church. Just said she did. And he flips out and quits. Confirming he did what he did. Or did SOMETHING. How can people say he’s not guilty? If he was innocent he would she had nothing to worry about when she claimed
To have called the church.
Some of the best acting in any movie of all time
Wow, I haven't seen this movie but this is incredible acting.
YOU HAVE 😮 wow - I’m crying with her
Meryl should have won an Oscar for this … phenomenal… this isn’t acting … this is reenactment
Not all Catholics practice this but it’s a problem they (the church) have hid and not rid of. They just simply move the offending pastor to another church to prey on.
If you’re a Catholic please pray for guidance and the strength to leave that false doctrine.
Call no man on earth your father for you only have one who is in heaven.
They were so good up against each other. The talent.
Two actors on their A game
Truth is the church got away with abuse for a long time because the parents were ashamed to accept it or just didn’t believe their kids.
For those of you saying you should be doubting if he was guilty at all...he's been to 3 parishes in 5 years. Sure they could be for other reasons but....let's be real...the catholic church knows what they are doing.
Rest in peace, Philip.
Misleading title, if anyone here is interested in the film or play go ahead and indulge to come to your own conclusion
I'm a victim. I knew nuns like this. Few and far between. But they made all the difference. They were afraid of nothing, and they brought cowards and criminals in collars to heel. Shatter the fraternity. Women priests. Married priests. Crush the patriarchy before they crush the Church.
Confessing a mortal sin and then continuing to do it after means absolutely nothing
"I'm a good priest!" What a laugh. WTH does that mean?
Beginner mistake, all he needed to tell Streep is that hes good friends with Polanski and she would have helped him.
That is how to act in a role.
Cut your nails is ice cold.
The dangers of assuming blind convictions in the face of uncertainty. That's what the play is all about. And the message flew right over you. You are now exhibiting what the play warned against!
WHAT??? That is NOT what the play is about. Take a psychology course, learn about signs of predatory behavior and watch it again. Also, there's NO PLACE in this film where anyone attests to having "blind convictions". The nun clearly expresses her crippling doubts in the final scene, hence the TITLE: "Doubt"....so....what movie did you watch?
@@mesalouis8976 except the movie is called "Doubt", so...
This is a dumb title because the whole point of the film is doubt. We don't know if he's guilty or not.
I think he may well have been innocent. The former pastor who suspected he was guilty could have been mistaken as well.
don't you have a pizza party to attend
I think he was innocent.
I do think Meryl Streep is massively overrated but this is an excellent performance. And PSH is obviously the GOAT.
Everybody commenting about the acting, and I agree they were great. But I'm commenting about the act. Will a nun turn in or have a priest investigated. How are they above the law?
Actually, it's not revealed/ known what the Priest did ( or didn't do).
A work of art; superb.
Isn't the point of the movie that we don't know for certain that he abused a child
Cut your nails😅 this is how you handle evil. Without a doubt.
His fingernail preferences is a hint towards the subtext of the movie: he is in all likelihood a homosexual, repressed (obviously), and the boy he (allegedly) abused was struggling with same sex attraction (which is the reason his father was physically abusing him) referred to as his "nature"
Being a homosexual within 1960s Catholic culture was very shameful. Especially as a member of the clergy, which the boy had shown interest it. It's very likely that the boy confided with the Priest and the Priest explained that he, too, could overcome his attraction and become a priest despite his homosexuality (as the priest had done).
He says this in the gym when he explains that having long fingernails or short fingernails isn't the issue. It's whether or not their dirty. He has his long, but he keeps them clean, "that makes it okay".
When the Sister confronts him about this, she doesn't realize that he's hiding this secret, she believes he's hiding that he's attracted and abusing children. Thus when she says "cut your nails" he takes it as the lesson that homosexuals were given by traditional catholic teaching at the time: your nature is wrong, you have to conform to how I say so.
Hope that helps broaden your perspective on the movie & life. God Bless
Besides the act seems like, “what do I continue to do”🙏😎
Movie that proves not all accused priests are actually guilty.
its fiction...
Such a good movie and of course it leaves "doubt" frustrating as it is. So many bad priest's yet I root for this one. Too bad I leave with....doubt.
Was the "cut your nails" improvised?
No it's in the play