People seem to be misunderstanding the scope of the word "atonement."

Rating: 9/10 (26 April 2016)

I have never reviewed a movie but I had to put in my two cents to defend this film. I feel it needs to be said that the theme of atonement is so prolific that it is easy to almost miss most of the symbolism. The sister, Cecelia was placed in a physical cross position two times in the film. Once in the library and once floating in the water in the subway after she died. It isn't so far fetched to conclude that she was the one atoning for her sister's sins. Along with Robbie. (he was atoning for the sins of Mr. Sleezy chocolate factory.) France was frankly atoning for the sins of Germany- and so was Robbie as he was forced to fight in the war- and eventually die for the sins of Hitler. As did Celia.
There is no reason to assume that the atonement referred to by the title of the movie is in reference to Briony's attempt at righting a wrong. But that also fits neatly in with the theme. This film shows, in many ways, people paying the price for other people sins. And it also poses the question, can a person atone for their own sins? Is it even possible? Even Lola and her brothers were paying the price of their parents wrong decisions in a way.
I watched this film having no expectations. And I do agree with some of the other reviews. Did people even know "that awful word" in the 30's? And certainly the library scene was just too much too soon to be believable. But I loved the movie because of the questions it asks and the way it approaches the very many sides of "atoning."
When looked at from a traditional Christian perspective, a person most definitely can not atone for their own sins. It must be done by another. I wonder if Briony was a victim of someone else's sins as well? (Sleezy chocolate factory man.)
I gave the film a 9 because it was slow at times and because I can't remember the name of chocolate man.