Intrigued by the amount of Oscar buzz circulating about Doubt , I was rather excited and hopeful for this film. Sadly, it did not deliver entirely. The acting and cinematography were amazing, and the build up was quite interesting and emotional, but it missed a key element to any good movie, a resolution.

The story opens with Father Brendan Flynn (Hoffman), a modern, kind-hearted priest, giving a sermon on doubt. At the same time, Sister Aloysius Beauvier (Streep), a traditional order-commanding nun and principal, is walking through the aisles silently “yelling” at the children to sit still and be quiet. Already we can see a huge contrast between both personalities. The main plotline begins when Sister James (Adams), a sweet, naïve nun and teacher, notices something rather strange about the relationship forming between Father Flynn and one of her students. The priest has taken a big interest in the boy and, among other strange instances, has called the boy into the rectory where both of them are alone. After being told of this odd meeting between the priest and the boy, Sister Beauvier goes on a quest to prove that Father Flynn was involved in inappropriate acts with the child. The priest is on a similar mission trying to show how he did nothing improper at all. All the while Sister James is trapped in the middle of it, unsure who to believe.

The acting was phenomenal. All three of the main actors were amazing, but Meryl Streep takes the gold by far. Her ability to be unchangeable and angry was absolutely stunning. Her facade was so powerful that when she got mad, my skin crawled a little. Phillip Seymour Hoffman, the seemingly compassionate and sympathetic priest, was great in his aptitude of throwing me from loving him to hating him – thinking that he is a great guy, to thinking that he is a child molester. I would say that I could most empathize with Amy Adams. What she was going through on screen, I was going through sitting in my seat. Uncertain on who to believe or what to think, her role fit perfectly as a way of emphasizing the uncertainty and doubt that this calamity was accumulating.

Alongside the acting, the cinematography was great. Reminiscent of Clint Eastwood style movies, the film was gritty and the colors were washed out. It fully complemented the setting in which the movie took place. As well, the concept behind the story was very interesting and had a lot of potential to emotionally and intellectually rattle my brain long after I left the theater. Unfortunately, that did not happen.

As I stated at the beginning, the movie had almost all the makings of an Oscar worthy picture, except for one crucial detail. It was lacking a solid conclusion. In fact, it seemed as though the whole movie was build up, only to reach the climax at the very last second. Meaning the film was missing the denouement, the part of the film that puts the pieces together and closes the gaps. One might argue that it had a resolution, but I would respond that the ending the movie put forth did not do the build up justice. As in, the point that the film was getting at was rather minuscule in comparison to the amount of effort they put into the rest of it. It is hard for me to accept the ending as it is, for there could have, and should have, been so much more to the story.

Doubt could have been one of my top films of the year. Superb acting, splendid cinematography and an interesting concept are a perfect formula for success. It just bothers me so much that they did not conclude the movie well, or at all for that matter. I would love to give this movie a ten for the acting and cinematography alone, but sadly, I have to take the fact that this film was lacking such a crucial point and knock down that number a few.