I don't know why people are so convinced that Hoffman's playing shows his guilt. And would be interested in learning more why some so confidently come to that conclusion.
Those who see in his portrayal of Flynn an attraction for Donald are perhaps confusing that with Flynn and Donald having an inappropriate relationship, i.e. with Flynn actually acting on that attraction. Those who see in his response to being told it is known he was kicked out of other parishes, an actual acknowledgment of child abuse, are perhaps confusing his exposure to a past which got him into trouble with his having gotten into trouble for child abuse; there are many other reasons that he could have been let go, including his being discovered as having had a sexual relationship with adult males, or perhaps even females (perhaps whose families - parents, wives, etc., - had discovered the relationship and demanded he be let go).
Part of the craft of the play is that there is doubt about the precise accusation even given Flynn's having transgressed in the past (but in what way?) and given his possible desire for Donald (but not all people with desire for children act on that desire).
So many people who see Doubt seem to want an answer to the question did Flynn abuse Donald. But the value of the work rests on uncertainty. I don't see how the movie - no matter how successful it was on other accounts - gives us a clear answer whether Flynn abused Donald.
Updated On: 10/22/13 at 12:14 PM