I'm curious about your take on the character of Ben Bradlee, Jr, played by John Slattery. Early in the film (starting with the scene at the Red Sox game) I began to suspect that he had been purposely obstructing the discovery of the extent of the abuse and cover-up. At a few points he would threaten to remove the team from the case and he seemed to almost enjoy pulling them off it when the 9/11 attacks occurred. Additionally, both Saviano and the lawyer played by Billy Crudup said that they had sent info to the Boston Globe to no effect. It seemed to me that the filmmakers were setting it up to be revealed that it was him who stifled the story at the paper. In the end, that story line did not materialize. Did anyone else get the same impression?

That's a good question, Adam. One does have the impression Bradlee's character is not hot to trot to support the investigation, at first. And there are times during the middle of the story in which his intentions or attitudes are not entirely clear. Perhaps that could have been cleared up a bit. My take is that his antipathy toward the investigation was more based on concern about a drop in ad revenues if the Globe took on the Church, but I may be remembering that wrong from the movie (I know somebody mentioned that fear). It would be interesting to read the script and just track his character because frankly, I can't even remember his last scene, and where his subplot ended.

Hi, Scott. thanks for the response. I plan to do just what you suggest and read the script. If I come up with anything insightful about the character I will share it here.

Adam, I had a slightly different take on the Ben Bradlee Jr character. I felt like because Marty was a [Jewish] outsider who put the Spotlight team on the story in the first place, they needed someone to be the voice of caution / Boston insider. Robby is head of the Spotlight team so he's going to champion the team's cause once they take the story on. Ben as Assistant Managing Editor needs to take a wider perspective on what is good for the paper as a whole, not just what's good for Spotlight. So Ben voices more global concerns and worries about the financial and other consequences of taking on such a powerful institution as the Church. He maintains this caution throughout, including at the end with that whole sequence where Ben worries about the potential blowback on the phones--blowback that never materializes. I don't know how true to life it is to put BB Jr in the role of skeptic but it seems true to his position at the paper. But also, the writers needed an internal counterbalance to the supporters of Spotlight. Ben provides that. I don't think it was ever the intention to make Ben part of any cover-up. He wasn't a nemesis, he was more of a "foil." Ben's true arc is made clear at one of the script's main turning points. In a major victory, the court unseals the docs. The team COULD write about that. It's a "major first amendment story." But the team wants to hold off because they've figured out the abuse goes beyond Law. There's been decades of abuse. It's the "whole story" Marty asked for. Ben has to help make the call: should they publish this story or wait for everything to come together? Ben suggests to Marty that he give Robby six weeks. Afterwards, Robby tells Ben, he wasn't sure Ben would back him on it. But Ben did. Ben's support for Spotlight at this critical juncture brings Ben full arc from skeptic to believer. I think that was always the intent. The phone bit at the end is just Ben being Ben and worrying about the city's reaction. My two cents anyway!

Okay, screenstudent, I think you're onto something I didn't quite pick up on. But yes, even Ben has his own arc. I just read another analysis of Spotlight critiquing the movie as being merely a "procedural" in which the journalists don't go through any substantive change. I hope people like that watch the movie again and PAY ATTENTION to the characters, look for the nuance and subtlety of things going on. Thanks for your observations, SS. Solid analysis.

Hi screenstudent, thanks for your reply. I tend to agree with you now that I've seen the film. As I watched it in the theater, I did believe that I was being set-up to learn that Bradlee played a large role in the paper not going after the story. It even seemed that Robby began to (uncharacteristically) keep things about the investigation from Bradlee. I think I might be traumatized by too many bad films and therefore was expecting that "Scooby-Do" moment when they pull the mask off the villain and it turns out it was the nice old man they knew all along. I'm going to read the script over the next few days and see how it reads a second time. BTW, I really enjoy your comments - keep 'em coming!

Okay, not to beat a dead horse here...BUT... I've been reading the Spotlight script and came across a moment that I wanted to share. [By this point in the film, in the theater, I was already wondering if Ben Bradlee, Jr. was going to be revealed as, if not a villain, at least a willing obstacle to the investigation. When this happened on screen I sort of said "aha". (btw, my girlfriend often complains that I'm 'always trying to figure out the movie' and tells me to stop and just enjoy it. But I can't help it, that IS HOW I enjoy them!)] From page 82 of the script: Mike, in his apartment, is on the phone with Sipe... SIPE (ON SPEAKERPHONE) It is. Especially since the Church continues to go after me. It takes a toll, Mike. They’ll try to silence anyone who speaks out. I’m sure they’ll come after you and your team soon enough. MIKE And how do you think they’ll do that? Hello? ...Richard? Mike checks his phone. Disconnected. Huh. Suddenly, there’s a loud KNOCK on the door. Mike JUMPS. MIKE (CONT’D) Who is it? BEN (O.C.) The Archbishop of Canterbury. Mike opens the door. Ben’s there with a PIZZA BOX. _________ I thought this was interesting. "They'll come after you soon enough..." then: Knock on the door - it's Ben. I wondered if there was any significance to referencing the Archbishop of Canterbury. From Wikipedia: "From the time of Augustine in the 6th until the 16th century, the Archbishops of Canterbury were in full communion with the See of Rome and they usually received the pallium. During the English Reformation the Church of England broke away from the authority of the Pope and the Roman Catholic Church." Perhaps this was a way of indicating that now even Ben was breaking away from the Catholic Church? A few moments later, as Ben is leaving, Mike asks him about the info that Saviano had sent years earlier. Ben gets bent out of shape and says "We didn't miss anything. This story needed Spotlight."

In general, I thought the characters worked because they each had an arc, even if it was a simple one. At the end, they resolved their independent issues. Sacha deals with potentially injuring her grandmother's faith; Mike discovers a new kind of faith; Matt feels this story hit close to home when he discovers the priests in his neighborhood; Robby deals with the "bad guys" he thought he knew, only to find out (and struggle with the fact) that he was inadvertently one of those guys. The only character that I thought was slighted was Marty who, considering he was the one who instigated the whole thing, sort of disappears at the end. Characters suggest a couple of times at the beginning that he's only interested in the story because he's Jewish or because he's ambitious. While I think it's recognized at the end that the story was central to the community, I don't think that effectively ties back to Marty's character to validate his original push. It's there, but not really connected to him, IMO. I also did think that Ben Bradlee was the secret nemesis. I appreciate screenstudent's comment on him being instead a foil...an interesting, convincing take.