MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland poland@moviecitynews.com

Hot Button – Doubt: Review Part I – Spoiler Free

Reviewing Doubt really requires two different bits of discussion. First, there is the movie and its overall structure, skill level, etc. Then there is the question of what the movie is actually telling the audience

Be Sociable, Share!

7 Responses to “Hot Button – Doubt: Review Part I – Spoiler Free”

  1. chris says:

    I’m not sure which thread to put this in, but I’m intrigued by your analysis. I have not seen the movie, but I loved the play and I have a hard time imagining a performance to match Cherry Jones’. When I saw the play, the Iraq war was pretty new and I could only see the play as a metaphor for that war. For me, the nun was Bush, the accusation was the search for WMD and her certainty was wrong.

  2. LexG says:

    Is this two hours of hambone Streep making stupid faces in that goddamn bonnet?
    When it comes to Streep and everyone just HAVING to kiss her mannered ass, I know how women feel when they sit around acting all skeeved out and annoyed by aged male stars like Douglas, Nolte and Beatty.

  3. jeffmcm says:

    No you don’t.

  4. LexG says:

    Uh… OK.
    (Eh?)

  5. jeffmcm says:

    That was easy.

  6. Chris. Did you just spoil the ending? Not everyone has seen the play (SHOCKING!) and don’t actually know how it ends.

  7. chris says:

    Nope, I didn’t spoil the ending (in that I don’t think what I wrote reveals it). On the other hand, virtually every interview John Patrick Shanley gave about the play — in which he talked about his unique relationship with the actor who plays the priest — DID “spoil” the ending, so I think the thinking must be that it wouldn’t matter if you did know the ending.

The Hot Blog

Quote Unquotesee all »

It shows how out of it I was in trying to be in it, acknowledging that I was out of it to myself, and then thinking, “Okay, how do I stop being out of it? Well, I get some legitimate illogical narrative ideas” — some novel, you know?

So I decided on three writers that I might be able to option their material and get some producer, or myself as producer, and then get some writer to do a screenplay on it, and maybe make a movie.

And so the three projects were “Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep,” “Naked Lunch” and a collection of Bukowski. Which, in 1975, forget it — I mean, that was nuts. Hollywood would not touch any of that, but I was looking for something commercial, and I thought that all of these things were coming.

There would be no Blade Runner if there was no Ray Bradbury. I couldn’t find Philip K. Dick. His agent didn’t even know where he was. And so I gave up.

I was walking down the street and I ran into Bradbury — he directed a play that I was going to do as an actor, so we know each other, but he yelled “hi” — and I’d forgot who he was.

So at my girlfriend Barbara Hershey’s urging — I was with her at that moment — she said, “Talk to him! That guy really wants to talk to you,” and I said “No, fuck him,” and keep walking.

But then I did, and then I realized who it was, and I thought, “Wait, he’s in that realm, maybe he knows Philip K. Dick.” I said, “You know a guy named—” “Yeah, sure — you want his phone number?”

My friend paid my rent for a year while I wrote, because it turned out we couldn’t get a writer. My friends kept on me about, well, if you can’t get a writer, then you write.”
~ Hampton Fancher

“That was the most disappointing thing to me in how this thing was played. Is that I’m on the phone with you now, after all that’s been said, and the fundamental distinction between what James is dealing with in these other cases is not actually brought to the fore. The fundamental difference is that James Franco didn’t seek to use his position to have sex with anyone. There’s not a case of that. He wasn’t using his position or status to try to solicit a sexual favor from anyone. If he had — if that were what the accusation involved — the show would not have gone on. We would have folded up shop and we would have not completed the show. Because then it would have been the same as Harvey Weinstein, or Les Moonves, or any of these cases that are fundamental to this new paradigm. Did you not notice that? Why did you not notice that? Is that not something notable to say, journalistically? Because nobody could find the voice to say it. I’m not just being rhetorical. Why is it that you and the other critics, none of you could find the voice to say, “You know, it’s not this, it’s that”? Because — let me go on and speak further to this. If you go back to the L.A. Times piece, that’s what it lacked. That’s what they were not able to deliver. The one example in the five that involved an issue of a sexual act was between James and a woman he was dating, who he was not working with. There was no professional dynamic in any capacity.

~ David Simon