UNITED STATES
The New Yorker
BY RICHARD BRODY
The fine points of journalistic investigation are often thrilling to observe in the new movie “Spotlight,” nowhere more so than in the document-centered work by which reporters coax information from the government. Set mainly in 2001, the movie unfolds the work done by a quartet of reporters at the Boston Globe (called the Spotlight team) who revealed that many local priests had been sexually preying on minors, that the church had been doing its best to cover up their crimes, and that the local government was also complicit in that cover-up.
Yet, despite the movie’s stirring depiction of the vital societal role played by fearlessly independent newspapers, and despite its vision of horrific but essential truths revealed by deeply committed journalists, “Spotlight” ultimately leaves behind the numbing satisfaction of familiar emotions and the dull thud of familiar gratifications. What the movie needed to do was to spark curiosity and fascination about the psychology of the people involved in the investigation (including those involved against their will).
That investigation involves personal sources and academic research, and it gets its emotional fury from the testimonies of victims. But the movie’s McGuffin, the very pivot of the story, is a court motion made by the newspaper seeking the release of hitherto-sealed documents related to suits brought by victims against the Archdiocese. The moment of triumph involves a judge whose ruling frees up another batch of documents and a court clerk who controls access to a photocopy machine.
The judge before whom the newspaper and the Archdiocese plead, Constance Sweeney (who is played in the film by Laurie Heineman), is a former Catholic-school student who is believed to be favorable to the Church. As it turns out (no spoiler here), Sweeney rules in the Globe’s favor, which helps the Spotlight team push their investigation forward. As I watched the movie, I was utterly frustrated—I wanted the camera to be a fly on the wall in Judge Sweeney’s chambers as she discussed the case with her law clerk, or perhaps with a colleague, so that her reasoning would become part of the film. No such luck; the ruling is delivered, and the journalists get back to work.
Note: This is an Abuse Tracker excerpt. Click the title to view the full text of the original article. If the original article is no longer available, see our News Archive.