SPOTLIGHT

US, 2015, 128 minutes, Colour.
Mark Ruffalo, Michael Keaton, Rachel Mc Adams, Liev Schreiber, John Slattery, Brian d'Arcy James, Stanley Tucci, Jamey Sheridan, Billy Crudup, Paul Guilfoyle, Len Cariou.
Directed by Thomas Mc Carthy.


Spotlight is primarily a film about investigative journalism, the work of the Boston Globe in 2001. Memories of this kind of film go back to 1976 and the Watergate exposé in All the Presidents Men. At the same time as the release of Spotlight, there was a very powerful film on investigative journalism that is well worth seeing, Truth, about the NBC investigation of George W. Bush’s going into the National Guard to avoid service in Vietnam – showing the detail of investigation but also highlighting the need for consistent verification otherwise the investigation is not credible.

The Boston Globe’s investigation focused on sexual abuse, clergy and survivors. This means that it is a film of particular Catholic interest. Cardinal Sean O’ Malley, Archbishop of Boston and a member of the papal committee on sexual abuse, wrote a statement in October, acknowledging the realities of abuse in the church, acknowledging that the film treats an important subject. Again, see below.

There have been films on clerical sexual abuse since 1990, quite a number, documentaries and feature films. They have been serving as a contribution to an examination of conscience by the church, an acknowledgement of realities for victims and survivors, a critique of the behaviour of church authorities, the need for a recognition of sinfulness in the church. And, in their ways, they have contributed to a better, even wiser, understanding.

Reviews of Spotlight have been very favourable. The screenplay, co-written by Josh Singer and the director, Thomas Mc Carthy, is carefully and strongly written. Performances are quite powerful. The film keeps audience interest. The four journalists in the Spotlight investigative team are played by Michael Keaton, Mark Ruffalo, Rachel Mc Adams, Brian d’Arcy James. At one stage it emerges that each of the four was Catholic educated but no longer practising, some “pissed off” at the church and one of them, after reading the documents, saying that he had hoped to return to the church, but now… There is of course, a sad emotional impact, audiences identifying with the journalists in their quest, disgust at the stories that are revealed, compassion for those who have suffered.

One of the difficulties about the film is its setting in 2001. Because the film is focused on Boston and the Spotlight team who undertake the investigation, the film gives an impression, a kind of American triumphalism, that it was the Boston Globe which was the first to do this kind of investigation. In many ways, the American church was slow off the mark in acting (admitted by the journalists in the film), while investigations were under way, led by Canada, and making progress in such countries as the UK, Ireland, Australia, in the first half of the 1990s. Investigations in European countries came later. A government enquiry in Ireland was to be inaugurated not so many years after the work of the Boston Globe. In Australia, the documents Towards Healing (and the Melbourne Response) were launched at the end of 1996.

It is interesting to note that there is little or no reference to the police and their enquiries into complaints about sexual abuse. There is no discussion of reporting to the police. Investigations preceded the Spotlight investigations because Father Geoghan was arrested the same month as the first article appeared in the Boston Globe.

Reference is made in the screenplay of Spotlight to material being sent to the paper as early as 1993 and then in 1996 but the paper did not follow through at the time. The Boston story, according to the film, went into action with the appointment of the new editor, Marty Baron, who had noticed a column about offender Father John Geoghan and suggested to his team that it needed following up, asking about knowledge by the hierarchy, including Cardinal Bernard Law, and an investigation that would expose any systematic faults, rather than an attack on individual church hierarchy.

There had been a film, Our Fathers, 2005, where there was a focus on Boston victims of abuse, their telling their stories, the work of lawyers, encounters of some of the victims with the perpetrators, and meetings with Cardinal Law who was played by Christopher Plummer. Spotlight has very few images of priests themselves, concentrating on interviews with the survivors with their harrowing stories. There is a brief prologue in 1976, complaints against Father Geoghan, the child, parents, and a reassuring priest helping the family, suggestions that information was given to the hierarchy but not followed on up, highlighting the transfer of offending priests from one parish to another.

In fact, the main priest in this film is Cardinal Law himself, receiving Marty Baron in his house, offering to collaborate with the media, Baron assuring him of the independence of the press, and the Cardinal giving him a gift of the Catholic Catechism. He is also related glimpsed as a Catholic Charities function. But, there is a great deal of talk about him, what he knew and what he didn’t know about abusive priests, the considerable number, his working in-house on cases, working with various lawyers for settlements and their keeping all this information confidential. The documents were sealed and it is only when the Boston Globe intervenes that a judge allows them to be released. A letter written by one of the auxiliary bishops of Boston years earlier, maintaining secrecy and confidentiality, becomes part of the screenplay.

There is one priest in the film, Father Richard Paquin, who lives with his sister in retirement, interviewed by a journalist – who admits to her the truth of his experience with the boys but emphasises several times that he got no gratification from the experiences. One of the journalists discovers to his horror that his house is not very far from one of the houses designated for treatment of priests. At the end he is seen delivering a big number of papers with the article at this house.

As has been mentioned, more vivid pictures of the priests emerge from the interviews with the survivors, with the head of the organisation, SNAP (Survivor’s Network of those Abused by Priests), Paul Saviano who had sent material to the paper in 1996 and felt frustrated at their lack of action. Listening to his description of his own experiences, his age, the grooming, the process of trust, leading to the physical, sexual and psychological abuse, makes the point very strongly. An interview with an awkward man, groomed by Father Shanley who was later arrested, highlights once again grooming, the use of pornography, nudity and sexual gratification for a young boy who is discovering his homosexual orientation. A third man, Patrick, explains the process of the priest singling him out, the affirmation felt, and then the touch and his freezing, and the abuse. The drug scars in his arm are quite evident.

The sequences of interviews are possibly stronger in their impact, the audience listening to the words and seeing the body language of the survivors, than if there were visuals of the abuse.

The work of the investigative team is meticulous, painstakingly followed through over a very long period, checking sources, persuading interviewees to speak and be recorded, checking clips from the vast archives of Globe, trolleys and folders of them, searching in the Catholic Directories of these years and discovering so many priests listed as sick or absent or on leave. The journalists were able to make a list of 87 clergy through this method of discovery. (In 2011, Cardinal O’Malley? made public the release of a list of offending clergy in Boston, their names, 159 of them.) Emotionally, the audience is invited to identify with the journalists. The targets of their research tend to be seen as villains, especially when the verification is clinched, the ‘Gotcha’ moments.

In the film, there are many sequences where the journalists make contact with lawyers handling victims cases, knowing that there was a great deal of confidentiality, but continually checking with them as more information became available. It is one of the Catholic lawyers who had been defending the Church’s silence who is finally overwhelmed by what has been uncovered and, emotionally reluctant, does indicate the truth about the list of abusive priests.

One of the experts over many decades is the former priest, Richard Sipe, who has written extensively on these issues. His book becomes one of the sources for information and for the journalists to try to understand the mentality of the abusers, issues of infantile sexuality, sexual orientation, issues of clerical celibacy. He becomes a character in the film, voiced by actor Richard Jenkins, in a number of phone interviews.

Cardinal Law was transferred to Rome at the end of 2002. The film also lists a number of places and countries where abuse has taken place. In 2002, the American Catholic Bishops Conference affirmed a policy of zero tolerance in abuse cases.

1. Acclaim, awards?

2. The title, the Boston Globe, the tone, investigations, their aims? The place in the paper? The research, targets, the work of verifying, following leads, making contacts, interviews, writing and editing the article?

3. Comparisons with other this journalist films? All the Presidents Men, Truth…?

4. Boston, 2001, the city, the familiar scenes, the streets, buildings, churches, homes, the Boston Globe, offices, archives? Authentic? The musical score?

5. The target of the investigation, the church, sexual abuse by the clergy? Cardinal Law? The church authorities? Their lawyers and legal advices? Issues of silence, deals, the victims and survivors, the consequences, the grants? Exposé?

6. The perspective of the United States, 2001 and the investigation, in comparison with previous investigations in other countries, impression from the film that the Americans were the first to uncover such abuse? Material sent to the Boston Globe and the journalists not following it up?

7. Little mention of the police, arrests? 2002, the end of the year, Cardinal Law transferred to Rome?

8. Marty Baron, the new editor, not from Boston, his experience, interest in the Spotlight team, on Father Geoghan? The meetings, learning the staffs and names, his suggestions, listening, wanting follow through, investigating the System of the church? The visit to Cardinal Law, politeness, the independence of the press? The gift of the Catechism?

9. The team, their work, the editor of the paper, Ben Bradlee and his family tradition, his work on the paper? The older journalists on the staff, the reactions to the Spotlight team? The details of work, digging up leads, interviews with the victims and victim groups, the boards of documents, their being under seal, going before the judge, their being released? Going through the Catholic Directories to find the locations of priests? Their following the lawyers, interviews and the lawyers, collaboration, brick walls? Checking information, making lists, the release of the documents enabling them to write the article?

10. Each member of the Spotlight team, the personal background, at work, relationships, the boss? The enquiries, the past achievement, the targets?

11. Robby, age, experience, the meeting with the editors, with Ben Bradlee, his work with his staff, the journalists, an indication of risk with the new enquiry? Interactions with lawyers, with the Catholic lawyers? The confrontation with Eric Macleish, explaining the writing of two stories, church or lawyers - and his decision? The work on the Catholic Directories, the list of offending priests? The release of the documents? The clinching of the investigation?

12. Mike Rezendes, his zest, personal life, subjugated to his work? Workaholic, Portuguese background? His church background, – and his later wishing he could have returned to the church? Enthusiasm, the focus on Cardinal Law, on the system, his visit to lawyers, hounding Mitch, waiting, intruding, developing a contact, friendship, receiving the information? The importance of the sealed documents? The lawyers’ clients? Confidentiality? His following leads, his interviews, insistence, wanting everything done immediately? With the fellow workers, individualistic, teamwork? The court, sitting in the court, the judge and the unsealing of the documents, his finding documents that were available, going to the archives, his haste, clinching the investigation?

13. Matt, Catholic, serious, his detailed work, home, near the institution for wayward priests? The interviews, the effect, his research? Throwing the paper in the yard of the priests’ house?

14. Sacha, the female on the team, the work as a journalist, Catholic background, taking her grandmother to Mass, her grandmother’s reaction to the investigation? Her interviewing the survivors? The importance of tracking down Saviano, his information, the gay man and his story, especially with Father Shanley? Patrick, his experience and the effect on his life? Sacha going to visit Father Paquin, his protests, told off by his sister? The effect of the research, her ideas, leads?

15. Marty Baron, not a Boston man, the new editor, Jewish background, unmarried? His interest in the column about Father Geoghan? Urging the follow-up, the discussions with Robby? Wanting an investigation of the System rather than Cardinal Law, the courtesy visit, his being wary, the independence of the press, the gift of the Catholic Catechism? Later seeing him at the Catholic Charity social? The documents released?

16. Eric Macleish, the law, his clients, friendly, confidentiality, the number of cases settled? His being silent, Robby confronting him about the story of lawyers exploiting the situations? His admissions?

17. Mitch, his background, in himself, at his office, Mike and his visit, hounding him, his concern about victims, giving information?

18. The representatives from the Archdiocese, the Catholic Charities, issues of confidentiality, the church? Being upset, Robby and the friendship, playing
golf, refusal to tell, Robby’s visit to the house, the list, agreeing that it was an accurate list?

19. The representatives of Catholic charities, the interviews, discussions, smooth talking – wanting everybody to be on the same page?

20. Cardinal Law, the visit from the editor, discussions, at the Catholic charities? Discussions about him, the past, dealing with the priests, revelations, blame, covering, documents going to Rome? The release of the documents? His subsequent transfer to Rome?

21. The prologue with Father Geoghan, 1976, the priest, the abused child, the family, the lawyers, the official priest? Information later about Father Geoghan’s arrest? The stories of Father Shanley and his arrest?

22. Very few priests being seen, as such, on-screen? The impact coming from the verbal descriptions?

23. Saviano, his organisation for Survivors, his pessimism about the press, having sent documents in the past and their not being followed up, Robby blaming himself? The explanations about the activities of the priests, the descriptions, Saviano and his feelings?

24. The gay man, talking with Sacha, his self-image, treatment by Father Shanley, flattered with the attention from a priest, Father Shanley’s behaviour, alcohol, touch, humiliation of the boy? His problems with his sexual orientation, Father Shanley’s reactions? The consequences?

25. Patrick, the Catholic family, the attention from the priest, the issue with the ice cream, touch, the effect, long-range, not discussing it with his wife and family?

26. The establishing of the list, the range of offending priests?

27. The importance of the documents, the release?

28. The consequences in 2002, the arrests, Cardinal Law to Rome, and the US Catholic Bishops conference and declaration of zero tolerance?