From a technical point of view, I am amazed by the wonderful cinematography and performances of The Revenant, and it is an enjoyment of virtuosity from start to finish. By contrast, Spotlight is technically much simpler. It's basically a movie propped up by dialogue. Most of the scenes are limited indoor spaces, the language of the shots is not complicated, and a lot of forward and reverse shots and slow push and pull are used. Relying on the scene scheduling skills such as the dialogue between the marches, as well as the tension of the plot itself, the whole film does not appear monotonous. But all this, technically speaking, is not much more difficult than making a TV series. Similar techniques are used in some excellent TV series, such as the American TV series "The White House" and "The Newsroom". The color of the film is deliberately biased towards gray-yellow tones, which has a feeling of being old, but it makes it more like a TV series.
But if I were to pick Best Picture, I would, like the Oscar judges, choose Spotlight without hesitation. Because this is a movie that can penetrate deep into my heart, move me, and make me think.
this is life?
Light always shoots out of darkness, and the movie starts with a gray scene. The film begins in 1976. A long shot follows officers into the Boston Police Department's 11th Precinct, where officers are handling cases of priests sexually abusing children. Both the police officer and the assistant district attorney have stressed the need to remove the media. The officer casually stated that the priest was "helping" at the victim's house at the time. The camera enters the reception room, where the bishop of the diocese is reassuring the victims that they will not pursue it any further. The victim's mother was anxious and anxious, and the four children were busy painting without noticing. Prosecutors are at the mercy of the bishop. Immediately afterwards, the camera came to the door of the police station, and the bishop and the prosecutor got into the same car. Although the video omits the victim's final reaction, it is clear that the bishop has achieved his purpose. In the process, we see the entire bureaucracy lose its neutrality, uniting with religious authorities to oppress ordinary victims. In this situation, the victim's family had to accept the bishop's conditions.
But all I can say is that it's a gray scene, and it's hard to describe it in more derogatory terms. Because we have seen too much of the bureaucracy succumbing to power, abandoning justice, and seeking peace of mind. The bureaucracy also often plausibly tells us one reason: maintaining authority is good for social stability. So after watching this scene, we just feel uneasy in our hearts, but it is really difficult to arouse righteous indignation. Many people even think that this is life and it will never be so perfect.
this is life? The story behind the movie counters this grey scene.
Passion for Professionalism The
sexual abuse of children by priests is back in the spotlight, for a very fortuitous reason. The former editor-in-chief of The Boston Globe has retired. The new editor-in-chief is Mr. Barron, who was sent by the parent company The New York Times Group. But when this Mr. Barron came out, I was very worried.
We see Barron and Spotlight editor Robbie meet at a restaurant. Robbie told Barron about the Focus Edition: a four-person investigative reporting team that often takes months to identify a topic and a year to complete an investigative report. This is a fairly costly news operation that only the big media can afford. We also know that many heavyweight reports in traditional big media are produced by such in-depth and solid in-depth investigations. But today's status quo is that with the rise of emerging media such as the Internet and TV, the media industry pursues more short-term and fast-paced, and there are not many media who are willing to dive in and do in-depth investigations. So when Barron's editor-in-chief talked about the challenges that newspapers have to deal with emerging media, I literally broke a cold sweat and wondered whether the tradition of in-depth investigations in the Focus Edition could continue.
But editor-in-chief Barron quickly reassured me. At the pre-editing meeting on the first day of his tenure, he proposed to reopen the investigation into the priest's sexual abuse of children and designated the focus team to be responsible. There is one detail. When he heard that the tradition of focusing on the team is to choose topics independently, Barron asked Robbie calmly: "Can you consider this topic?" It is enough to see the editor-in-chief's leadership style and his professionalism. respect.
Here, Mr. Barron embodies his keen sense as a veteran journalist. He is an outsider and doesn't know much about the local community structure and sophistication, but with the insight of a journalist, he can immediately perceive from the newspaper's previous reports that there are more truths about the priest's sexual abuse case. More meaning can be discovered. At this time, the judgment made by Barron was actually a judgment based on the journalism profession, and had little to do with morality, because he did not have a direct understanding of the people involved in the case and their situation.
But just the literacy and persistence of this journalistic professionalism is already quite commendable. From the editors’ introductions, Editor-in-Chief Barron has learned about the difficulties of this investigation: key files are sealed by the church; the local religious atmosphere is strong, and the public is reluctant to cooperate with the investigation; . But Barron still asked the Focus team to open an investigation. It can be seen that under the passion of journalism professionalism, the truth is above all else. After the focus team took over the task of investigating, the reporters were also very excited, devoted themselves and spared no effort. The professionalism of the editor-in-chief and the reporter collided and hit it off.
Before starting to challenge the church, the editor-in-chief also went to meet the publisher. In American print media, the publisher is the boss's representative and is responsible for the commercial operation of the media. Of course, publishers and editorial teams in large media should maintain a certain degree of independence to avoid commercial interests affecting the impartiality of media reports. When Barron proposed to the publisher that he wanted to sue the church to get the files public, the publisher reminded him that 53 percent of the newspaper's subscribers were Catholics, and they would be aware of the conflict between the newspaper and the church. Barron simply responded, "They'd be interested in our coverage." Seeing this, I got nervous again. Will the publisher's commercial considerations affect the editorial team's upcoming investigation? As a result, the issuer simply said OK. Independent editing and respect for professional media traditions have triumphed once again.
It is precisely because of the strong independent tradition of the media and the passion for professionalism in the hearts of journalists that the Boston Globe's investigation into the priest's child sexual abuse case was successfully launched.
The flame of morality The
reporters persisted despite the difficulties encountered during the investigation. Gradually, there was more than just professionalism surging in their hearts.
The first is the increase in the number of priests who have abused children. The number of priests known to have committed misdeeds increased from 1 to 13, to a possible 87, and finally to a confirmed 70. Of course the number of victims is also increasing. The massive, systematic misdeeds have shaken journalists' hearts. Of course, to the individual victim, the numbers have no meaning. However, for the third party, the scale of the atrocity and the psychological impact caused are different.
Then there is the contact with the victim. The reporters started with the victim lawyer Garabedian and the victim mutual aid organization SNAP, and interviewed a number of victims. Journalists spoke to victims and listened to their trauma face-to-face. The consequences of the priest's sexual abuse of children are concretely presented.
The last is emotional extrapolation.
When reporter Matt was combing through the list of priests who had sexual abuse of children, he found that one of the priests happened to live near his house. He posted a reminder on his refrigerator, telling the children not to approach the house. He realized that the danger was on his side.
Reporter Sasha went to a priest who had a history of sexually abusing children. She saw boys passing by on bicycles outside the priest's house. She realized that every child is a potential victim.
When Robbie visited the principal of his alma mater, he wanted to know about a priest who sexually abused students when he was the ice hockey coach at the school. He said to the school principal: "We are just lucky, you and I are both." Because alumni have participated in Sports teams, so he directly appealed to personal experience to let the other side know that the case was relevant to everyone.
After reporter Mike got the key evidence that the bishop knew about the priest's sexual abuse of children, Robbie decided to suspend the report and conduct a more in-depth investigation. Mike was so excited, he said: "They knew it for a long time and they allowed these things to happen to children. It could happen to you, to me, to anyone! We're going to expose them and let people know that no one can get away with it, no matter what. A priest, a bishop, or a pope!" At this time, journalists are not just doing a job, they already have a strong sense of moral responsibility, and they know that they are striving for universal justice.
It is a process in which clear, moral emotions are built: from abstract numbers, to concrete people, to general morality and justice.
And this strong sense of moral responsibility begins with the pursuit of professional achievement. They started out just to report the truth, but eventually took on the mission of pursuing justice. It can be seen that although we often distinguish the passion of professionalism from the passion of moralism, the two are not binary oppositions. The profession of journalists is to report the truth, and the purpose of reporting the truth is to protect the public interest, so it is natural that the passion of professionalism and the moral emotion are linked.
Justice unites people
The reporters' investigation into the priest's sexual abuse of children began with Garabedian, a lawyer for the victims, and Phil Saviano, the head of SNAP, a mutual aid group for victims. Neither man had a good reputation before: hot-tempered, bravado, bigoted. But the final result proved that the clues provided by the two men were real and helpful to the reporters' investigation.
Reporter Mike went to great lengths to get in touch with Garabedian. He visited Garabedian several times, but was rejected by the other party as "too busy". The reason is that Garabedian had been in contact with the media, but he did not get the desired results, and he was suppressed by the church in various ways, which naturally made him feel defensive. When Mike met Garabedian for the first time, two people were sitting on both sides of the desk. Most of the shots were single shots. Garabedian's expression and tone were very impatient, which shows his inner vigilance towards Mike. . But as the investigation deepened, Garabedian gradually believed that the Boston Globe was seriously investigating the priest's sexual abuse of children. Later, when Mike and Garabedian met in the restaurant and outside the courtroom, the distance between the two was much closer. Most of the shots were double shots. It can be seen that the common goal made the relationship between the two gradually closer and mutual. Trust it.
Although Phil cooperated with the reporters' investigation from the very beginning, he was impatient and criticized the indifference of the media fiercely at the first meeting. In the middle of the investigation, he and the reporters also had a crisis of confidence. Because of the "9.11" incident, the reporters suspended the investigation of the priest's sexual abuse of children, but Phil thought that they had given up halfway and proposed to terminate the cooperation. In the end, the reporters proved their perseverance to the end, and Phil's recommended victims and experts also played an important role.
The two didn't get along well at first. There are great differences in personality between people, but in general, personality differences will not form a barrier to communication. However, once a person is obsessed with engaging in actions that are not welcome in mainstream society, such as exposing the truth of the church and becoming an enemy of authority, then the mainstream society will magnify his character shortcomings and classify him as a lunatic, paranoid, and other social marginalized people. ranks. And this marginalized person, in order to get the attention of the mainstream society, has to use more violent words and means, so that he appears more and more paranoid in the eyes of the mainstream society. This is a mutually causal, mutually stimulating spiral. Cynicism and indifference divide people and make them mistrust and communicate with each other.
But once someone in the mainstream society wakes up from numbness, no longer indifference, and begins to sympathize with the demands of these marginalized people, and work with them to pursue justice, then people can re-establish trust and unite under the banner of justice. Down. That's why, in the eyes of others, Garabedian and Phil, who are unreasonable in the eyes of others, have become important partners of the reporters of the focus team. Justice unites people.
Justice is never too late
Robbie visits his old friend Jim, the church attorney, and asks Jim to confirm the list of priests who have abused children. After an ideological struggle, Jim complied with Robbie's request, but asked Robbie a pointed question: "We all know what happened, where were you at the time? Why did it take so long to act?"
Before the report was published, At the editorial meeting, Robbie also posed the question to colleagues: "We have all kinds of clues, why didn't we act sooner?"
It was an embarrassing question. Things are happening quietly under our noses, and we all think it's not worth paying attention to, until it slowly develops and leads to serious consequences.
Why was there no action at that time? This happens a lot, but not everyone tortures themselves with this question.
There can be many reasons for no action. Like fear - I'm terrified that the behemoth I'm fighting against will kill me. Such as laziness - I don't want to cause trouble to my otherwise stable life by pursuing a little "nothing to do with myself" justice. Another example is selfishness - not having the ability to empathize, not feeling that the suffering of others has nothing to do with me. etc. The indifference of everyone in the whole society gathers together to form a wall of indifference, which separates people from each other, allows everyone to hide behind the wall, enjoy a little space of their own, and keep justice outside the wall.
But this movie tells us two things.
One is that maybe the wall of indifference isn't that hard, it's just a layer of window paper. Although the Catholic Church in Boston is very powerful and has a strong religious atmosphere, no one is willing to provoke the church easily, but under the sincere visits of reporters, there are still some victims and insiders who are willing to come forward and tell the truth. Some victims were initially reluctant to recall the details of the year, but later were even willing to let reporters reveal their names. After the report was published, countless victims called the newspaper to tell their stories. After the window paper was pierced, fear and laziness were dispelled, and people quickly rebuilt their view of right and wrong and their sense of justice.
Second, it is never too late to pursue justice. Although more than 20 years have passed since the gray scene at the beginning of the film, justice can still be done through people's efforts. The reports of journalists have received worldwide repercussions, putting enormous pressure on the Holy See to face and deal with cases of priests' sexual abuse of children and prevent more children from being victimized. While there is an adage that says "justice delayed is not justice," it's better than justice never being served.
From the professional passion to the mission of justice, the film "Focus" calmly and rationally tells the story of journalists who expose the truth and pursue justice, which has touched countless audiences. The title of the film is "Focus", which not only focuses on a real case, but also focuses on the beam of people's hearts. It is the light of morality in people's hearts that gathers, pierces the darkness of history, and leads the wheel of social progress rolling forward.
But let’s be honest, the Boston Globe reporters were lucky to work in a place with a strong tradition of press freedom. In other places, driving social progress is far from easy. For example, in the Brazilian film "Elite Force", the tragic death of a female reporter is the most horrific scene in the film. According to Reporters Without Borders, 110 journalists were killed and 54 imprisoned worldwide in 2015. So in many places, the pursuit of justice requires greater moral courage. The more this is the case, the more we need the moral light in our hearts. Only this light within can make people overcome their fears, dispel their selfishness, unite, act bravely, and meet the arrival of light with confidence.
View more about Spotlight reviews
