This is what's called well made Oscar bait.

>>64367079
No it doesn't. They actually tried to build tension by making Mark Ruffalo late all the time. And Ruffalo was so utterly terrible. What kind of accent was he even doing? God damn... I liked Michael Keaton but nothing else. If this wins Best Picture over The Big Short I will be pissed and I don't even care about The Big Short; I just know it's gonna be between those two movies.

>Serious Issue
>recent enough that everyone remembers it, but enough time has passed that it isn't controversial
>tell the story from an outsider's perspective - we get to see journalists being outraged by outrageous events, but we're at a safe, inoffensive distance from the real outrage and horror of child abuse
>Serious Performances by award-winning actors
>clean, tasteful, unambitious filmmaking

Oscar-bait 101

it's decent but felt like an hbo special rather than a movie

>>64367433
this desu, also all the scenes where they would ask each other "no whats that" or "can you explain it" felt really forced to make the audience privy to the details.

>whats the big deal? it's only sex

>>64367079
only if they show rachel mcadams' phat ass

do they?
haven't seen it

>>64367707
no, and she looks fairly emaciated these days honestly.

>>64367707
her role is basically
>i'm a reporter
>i go to church with my nana
>find out the church is corrupt
>now i don't go to church with nana
she is barely a character, in fact there aren't really any characters in this movie apart from stanley tucci

>>64367813
I liked that scene where she stumbled upon the priest who is completely comfortable with saying he molested boys.
>but I didn't get any satisfaction from it!

>>64367796
damn

>>64367079
Yes, but only since the year was so weak.

>>64367079

Anti-Catholic bullshit, the Jews in Hollywood would eat it all up.

Something about Mark Ruffalo's accent and mannerisms in this movie made him seem like an 11 year old boy. Like he just walked straight off of the Sandlot or something.