The film has a strong sense of drama, even a little too strong... The director's experience is more in the drama, which makes the film seem to be unfolding scene by scene, but the plot is strung together, but it does not feel like a movie with an investment of 20 million US dollars. The strong cast has become the reason for many viewers to watch the film, but it is likely to become the only reason to watch the film.
But after all, this is a big drama completed by an Oscar-winning producer, Oscar-winning director, and Oscar-winning actors, and the highlights are enough to make up for the shortcomings. For example, Viola Davis, who has been widely admired since the film was released. Some say she devoured Streep, others say she stole the entire film. The confrontation between the black mother played by Davis and the principal played by Streep is indeed one of the most brilliant parts of the whole film. It can be said that the focus of the whole film is concentrated on this scene, and the depth is concentrated on this scene, wonderful Most concentrated on this scene. But her appearance time is only this scene. If she can be nominated for the best supporting actress for this scene, then Amy Adams, who has maintained a high level in many appearances, is also fully worthy of a place in my eyes.
As for the message of the film, I personally think that Hoffman's character is broadly defined as "negative" and Streep's character is "stern and righteous", which is what the film "asks" from the beginning of the film. consensus.
But the film puts the headmistress character in a conflict that arises from too much self-acknowledgement, even with the little boy's mother and the little boy himself.
Although the priest has done some "suspicious" things, he has admitted to making mistakes, and has shown sincere protection and care for the little boy, which can be seen from the boy's final reluctance. Coupled with the serious racial discrimination at that time, and the background of the little boy's father who often beat the child, the neutral side of the priest was magnified at this time, and the whole film was not defeated by anyone, the truth was not revealed, and it seemed that there was no Cross the bottom line, and finally leave quietly and naturally in a "promotion" and "dignified" way. The headmaster's stubbornness puts her in a position of hostility from the little boy, the little boy's mother, and the nun, and ends with "I have doubts!"
The priest did not admit what he had done wrong, because some things "can't be said even if killed", but he repented and left after all. The so-called "just" principal finally achieved the purpose of driving out the priest by lying, which was originally considered "correct". The purpose itself is to protect the little boy, but as the film develops, with the presence of the black mother, as the background of the story unfolds, it gets more and more off track. In a wrong way, the principal exchanged for the continued entanglement in his heart.
About good and evil, about love and hate, about right and wrong, I think the "Doubt" between them is the core of the contradiction that the film wants to express, and it is also the mystery that the characters and the audience cannot solve. And what the priest did, this "Doubt" has become less important in the face of the larger theme.
View more about Doubt reviews
