I have sort of suspected the movie was cheesy in the way you make it sound.

... indicted into the R'n'R Hall of Fame...

That's funny.

I suggest the screenwriter might want to avoid the pathetic fallacy. You do not need the wind blowing to suggest change. You do not need lightbulbs shorting out at convenient moments. You do not need torrential rain to add atmosphere to crucial conflicts. He does it five or six times during Doubt, and soon it becomes laughable.

Yo, Syd! You might want to inch that SPOILER Alert up a few paragraphs. I had to go into serious skim mode and still learned more than I wanted to know.

On the flip side, the music, the period cars, and Muddy Waters' mustaches were vintage....

I had the same problem...but I don't think it was Syd's fault.

It might _not_ have been the screenwriter's idea to do any of this. It _could_ have been the producer's or director's idea.
In any case, the producer (and director) are supposed to be the last word. If this is as bad as you make it sound, it was their responsibility not to shoot it this way.

In the case of Doubt, the screenplay writer and the director are the same guy, John Patrick Shanley, who also wrote the play.

Gary--I understand your objection, but as someone who has seen and loved the play, I have to stress that the thing you're objecting to is precisely what makes the script memorable.

...I never liked Nixon.....but I love Frank Langella's Nixon......how many shades can he wear? Did Nixon really shine in the first 3 interviews? I can't remember. But how many guilty men of power ever admit to any wrongdoing? Can you see Cheney/Frost?
...