Ok, please hear me out. Having seen the film, I really felt like there was a religious or conservative tone to it.First of all, the Catholic orphanage portrayed in the film was never casted in a critical or negative light. On the contrary, it seemed much like a healthy, respectible institution. All of the nuns were casted as honest, hard-working individuals and the children were portrayed as healthy, joyful, and energetic. But secondly, and much more importnatly, the character who most represented the orphanage, Sister Abigail, was actually one of the most helpful characters in the film. She was the FIRST character who suspected that there was something wrong with Esther. She was also the only character Esther really feared, as she could not be manipulated as easily as the others.This Sister Abigail, a Roman Catholic and the main representative of the orphanage portrayed in the film, stands as one of Esther's greatest obstacles, to the point where Esther is too afraid to speak to and recognizes her as a serious threat. You know who Esther 'isn't' afraid of? Introduce the secular shrink, Dr. Browning. Esther actually manages to talk circles around this character. She manipulates her, and eventually turn her against the mother. The doctor becomes little more than a tool who Esther plays. The main point: Sister Abigail of the orphanage is very helpful as she is quick to suspect what the family is really dealing with, encourages them to do some research into Esther's past, and actually assists them in this endeavour. Despite her early demise, Sister Abigail is the one who starts the ball rolling, getting the mother to research more and more into Esther's background as the film rolls on, eventually leading to the mother saving the day as a result of what she learns. In contrast, the skeptical secular doctor, Dr. Browning, is very damaging as she is simply used by Esther to turn the other characters, most noteably the husband, against the mother and tear the family further apart.So I really did feel like the film casted Christianity, and certaintly the orphanage itself, in a rather positive light. At the very least, Orphan did not portray these things negatively. It wasn't like the nuns of the orphanage were trying to 'hide' anything about Esther from the family or were apathetic in helping them. On the contrary, they were quite active in helping the mother track down Esther's past. In fact, it was Sister Abigail's idea, originally, to learn more about Esther so that they all, "really knew what they were dealing with".It is difficult to say that the film is anti-adoption when it was the characters who made up the orphanage, espicially Sister Abigail herself, who were so active in helping the family deal with their new adoptee. If anything, the film is a criticism on confidentiality laws. At the end of the day, what 'really went wrong', was that the catholic orphanage was simply not allowed to know the details of Esther's past. The fault, as the film would have the audience beileve, was not upon the shoulders of the orphanage.As for the point of parents being less likely to adopt as they are now afraid that something like this 'could happen to them', I say - thats life. Everything we DO involves risk. If an action movie depicts a scene of a commercial plane crashing, should flight companies be upset? Would such a movie somehow be against people taking flights? Of course not. And neither is Orphan somehow against adopting. In both scenarios, the risk is simply being made aware of. The idea that nothing could ever go wrong, in both cases, is itself a lie.
