In 1964 the winds of change are sweeping through Sister Aloysius' (Meryl Streep) St. Nicholas school. Father Flynn (Philip Seymour Hoffman), a charismatic priest, is advocating reform of the school's strict customs, and the first black student has just been accepted. When a fellow nun (Amy Adams) tells Sister Aloysius that Father Flynn may be paying too much personal attention to the student, Sister Aloysius begins a personal crusade against the priest -- despite her lack of evidence.
A Catholic grade school could seem like a hermetically sealed world in 1964. That's the case with St. Nicholas in the Bronx, ruled by the pathologically severe principal Sister Aloysius, who keeps the students and nuns under her thumb and is engaged in an undeclared war with the new parish priest. Their issues may seem to center around the reforms of Vatican II, then still under way, with Father Flynn (Philip Seymour Hoffman) as the progressive, but for the nun I believe it's more of a power struggle. The pope's infallibility seems, in her case, to have descended to the parish level.
Some will say the character of Sister Aloysius, played without a hint of humor .
Sister Aloysius of "Doubt" hates all inroads of the modern world, including ballpoint pens. This is accurate. We practiced our penmanship with fountain pens, carefully heading every page "JMJ" -- for Jesus, Mary and Joseph, of course. Under Aloysius' command is the sweet young Sister James, whose experience in the world seems limited to what she sees out the convent window. Gradually during the autumn semester, the situation develops.
There is one African-American student at St. Nicholas, Donald Miller, and Father Flynn encourages him in sports and appoints him as an altar boy. This is all proper. Then Sister James notes that the priest summons the boy to the rectory alone. She decides this is improper behavior, and informs Aloysius, whose eyes narrow like a beast of prey. Father Flynn's fate is sealed.
But "Doubt" is not intended as a docudrama about possible sexual abuse. It is about the title word, doubt, in a world of certainty. For Aloysius, Flynn is certainly guilty. That the priest seems innocent, that Sister James comes to believe she was mistaken in her suspicions, means nothing. Flynn knows a breath of scandal would destroy his career. And that is the three-way standoff we watch unfolding with precision and tension.
Something else happens. Donald's mother fears her son will be expelled from the school. He has been accused of drinking the altar wine. Worse, of being given it by Father Flynn. She appeals directly to Sister Aloysius. It lasts about 10 minutes, but it is the emotional heart and soul of "Doubt".
Doubt. It is the subject of the sermon Father Flynn opens the film with. Doubt was coming into the church and the United States in 1964. After the assassination of Kennedy and the beginnings of Vietnam, doubt had undermined American certainty in general. What could you be sure of? What were the circumstances? The motives? The conflict between Aloysius and Flynn is the conflict between old and new, between status and change, between infallibility and uncertainty. And Shanley leaves us doubting. "Doubt" has exact and merciless writing, powerful performances and timeless relevance. It causes us to start thinking with the first shot, and we never stop. Think how rare that is in a film.
I came to a different conclusion seeing this film. The entitled "doubt" was not about Father Flynn's guilt (which I believe becomes apparent toward the end of the film). The "doubt" is manifested in Sister Aloysius as she comes to doubt the institution of the Catholic Church she has devoted her life to. Instead of getting rid of the priest, the church covers up the crime. I think that would be enough to cause anyone to have "doubts". This was the last straw that caused this nun to have an emotional break down, reducing a once rigid woman certain in her beliefs to a sobbing and lost wreck of a human being.
To answer the obvious mystery in the film - whether Father had some sinful (or criminal) relationship with a twelve year boy? The one word answer on the platter is 'Yes'. I don't think the plot of this movie made a lot of sense for its 1964 setting. Would a nun in 1964 really suspect a priest of sexual abuse based on nothing more than a shirt being placed in a locker? In 2018, after two decades of priest abuse stories in the media, sure; however, in 1964, at a time when no one would dare criticize a man of the cloth, I have my doubts. Either way, I did enjoy the film and thought it was well-acted.
