Milk & Doubt

My obsession with Philip Seymour Hoffman knows no depths. Not only is he one of the greatest actors ever, he’s also stone-cold sexy. That strawberry-blond hair. Those searching, blazing eyes. The fact that he frequently appears in his underwear…

Okay, wait. I’ll get back to the point in a second. Hold on.

The POINT is that when I first saw ads for the upcoming film “Doubt,” I was all over it. A morally complex movie with religious overtones that may or may not have a gay subtext starring Meryl Streep and the sexiest man on the planet? I’m there!

Except then it was Christmas Day, and I realized (quite rationally, I think), that maybe “Doubt” wasn’t the best kind of film for that particular day off. We all remember last year’s “Sweeny Todd” debacle and how depressing that was. No, for this holiday, I would leave the choosing of the film up to my friend Mark, upon whom I forced the throat-slicing barber last Christmas. I knew he wouldn’t want to sit through a depressing period film that dealt, at least in part, with gay persecution.

He called me Christmas Day: “Let’s go see ‘Milk’!” So much for my theory.

Mark, his boyfriend Ben, and I all settled down in the back row of the theater to take in the story of Harvey Milk, the true story of California’s first openly gay elected official. I knew three things about the movie going into it: 1. I knew Harvey Milk was assassinated. 2. His killer used something called The Twinkie Defense – blaming his violent tendencies on junk food – to try to get off, and 3. That Sean Penn was likely to irritate me. I have liked Penn in the past, but my bafflement as to why people enjoyed “Mystic River” in general, and Penn’s hammy overacting in particular, has left a stain on my moviegoing psyche.

As such, I really had no interest in seeing this movie. It struck me as Important, and Necessary, and I usually delve into those waters when it’s Oscar season. As the credits began to roll, I wished for the relatively simple year when I went to go see the “King Kong” remake on Christmas.

And then … something changed. I was unprepared for the movie to explicate right at the beginning that Milk was shot. Having that information right up front should have bogged the film down, but instead it renders Milk’s assassination as a fact that we understand and absorb, so that we can better focus on the story.

It’s a terrific story, too, one with which I have only had a passing familiarity. I’ve never been a particularly political fellow, and growing up in the 90s with Barney Frank in Congress, it never really sunk in to me how important and revolutionary Harvey Milk was to gay rights. There’s a point early in the film when a gay man is killed and the cops, who seem to care, refer to the dead man’s companion as his “trick.” (Because cops know the lingo, see.) Milk explains that no, that was his lover of many years, not a trick. And the cops sort of shrug that off.

That resonated with me, as did the way Harvey Milk sort of stumbled into politics. He did it because to not do it was intolerable. Sometimes I forget what a damn struggle it has been – even in my lifetime – to simply be who you are if you happen to be gay. The movie takes on these issues but never gets lost in them. The story remains about the man more than the message, and as such never gets the chance to be preachy. Sean Penn, to my amazement and delight, disappears into his role. He’s so effective that at points it’s easy to forget his tragic end; the film is so oddly uplifting that the assassination seems almost beside the point. (The fact that it’s not comes crashing down in the final violent minutes of the movie, and by that point, you’re conditioned enough to be actually shocked.)

My friend Alonso has commanded that I now see the documentary, “The Life and Times of Harvey Milk,” which is now on my forefront of Things To Watch. I’ve never been all that into gay politics, but given the current state of political homophobia, maybe I should be.

Along the same lines of things you’re not supposed to discuss at dinner parties, we move from politics to religion. The Saturday after Christmas, I journeyed downtown, bought popcorn and a sodapop, and treated myself to “Doubt.” Based on the trailers, I was expecting a movie entirely centered around Philip Seymour Hoffman’s priest character and his inappropriate dealings with an altar boy under his tutelage. Instead, what I got was a morally complex story that may or may not have to do with the priest and the boy at all.

At the heart of the movie is Meryl Streep as the Mother Superior of a school she rules with an uncompromising hand. She is used to being right, or at least she is used to being considered right. Her students and the teachers under her watch follow her rule unquestioningly, which she likes just fine. She might never admit that – she would explain that she is simply following her faith – but being right is at the core of her character. She is unused to being wrong, and unfamiliar with changing her stance once she takes one.

This proves dangerous for Philip Seymour Hoffman’s priest character, whose entire being represents change. She doesn’t like him from the start, and as the film progresses, we wonder more and more whether Streep’s character is actually holding true to her convictions, or whether she simply cannot stand to be wrong.

The movie is full of strong performances. Meryl Streep and Philip Seymour Hoffman are at the top of their game – I would be stunned if both didn’t garner Oscar nominations. But maybe it’s because the movie is based on a play that they seem to KNOW they’re at the top of their game. The performances are never over the top or Oscar-grubbing, but it often seemed to me that these were Meryl Streep and Philip Seymour Hoffman delivering knockout performances. Whereas Amy Adams (in the role of a young nun who looks up to Streep’s character) and Viola Davis (playing the mother of the young boy in question, whose role is contained in a single, brilliant scene) never seem to be performing. They steal the movie with acting that never seems like acting, raising the movie up from An Oscar-Worthy Triumph to a watchable, engaging film that is still lingering with me. There’s some obvious stuff in it – light bulbs break and winds gust in at important moments, and the film’s final line seems awkward and too Broadway for a movie – but on a whole, “Doubt” impressed me almost as much as “Milk.”

If you’re a fan of quality films – or just seeing stuff before the Oscars are nominated so you can brag about being a Serious Film Buff – go see both of these movies. You won’t regret it.

Now, when’s that new “Wolverine” movie coming out?