My fiancée and I were at Blockbuster one night, looking for a movie, and he pointed to a bunch of titles that held absolutely no interest for me. I didn't want to look rude, so I picked the least offensive-looking one, a movie about journalism that looked like something I might be able to at least sit through. The movie's cast screamed 'Hip! Independent!' but I figured if I could browse the Internet at the same time, I wouldn't die watching "Shattered Glass." It started out not-so-promising. I remained on the Internet, and glanced up every now and then to see Hayden Christenson (as reporter Stephen Glass) acting whiny (and delivering his lines in a rather flat voice) and Melanie Lynskey acting the way she always does in movies. Still, something made me keep glancing up, and soon I became engaged in the story of the rather-unlikable Stephen and his adventures at the New Republic magazine.
In case viewers weren't aware, we find out fairly soon into the film that Stephen's popular news stories aren't quite what they seem. In fact, he's blatantly making them up ... and the movie really begins to PICK up when a geeky hacker at a rival, smaller (online) magazine notices the inaccuracies in Stephen's latest piece. That hacker and his co-horts make it their mission to set things straight... and it's not long before Stephen has turned from a young, hip reporting Superstar, popular with his staff, to a pathetic, crybaby, excuses-making mess.
The actors in this film aren't typically my favorites, but I don't really hate them, either -- and they're in top form here. Surprisingly, the actor I tend to dislike the most (Steve Zahn) is the one responsible for getting the movie going (as the hacker who outs Stephen) and thankfully, he's much less flamboyant than in other roles. Melanie Lynskey and Chloe Sevigny, both reporters and staunch defenders of Stephen, don't show us anything they haven't before, but they're decent and believable. Hayden Christenson, despite his oft-monotone voice, felt whiny and prissy throughout most of the film... but in the end it worked for his loser-ish character. And Hank Azaria manages not to offend as a well-liked editor who gets fired by the New Republic boss in favor of a guy who's not so beloved by the staff.
The new editor, Chuck, is played by Peter Sarsgaard -- and he's the actor who impressed me the most in this film. I've read a lot of gushing reviews of his performance since watching it, and I'm actually glad I watched before reading (since sometimes gushing reviews tend to turn me off). But Sarsgaard is excellent here as the stuffy, square Chuck. He, Chuck, knows the staff members resent him; he also strongly suspects that Zahn & co. are right about his star reporter, and Sarsgaard perfectly captures that awkward circumstance of knowing you're unpopular and knowing you have to make the right decision even if that decision will be as unpopular as you are. I doubt if I'll go out and rent all of Sarsgaard's films, but he actually made me wonder more than once "who is that actor?" which is rare. I give him props for a job well done! Other than the somewhat-slow beginning, the movie's most noteworthy flaw is that some of Stephen's fantasy sequences seem a bit overdone. However, there's one ongoing fantasy of sorts that might not make much sense at first yet makes perfect sense at the film's close (and nicely coincides with Chuck's status in the workplace).
I thank my fiancée for pointing to this movie.
In case viewers weren't aware, we find out fairly soon into the film that Stephen's popular news stories aren't quite what they seem. In fact, he's blatantly making them up ... and the movie really begins to PICK up when a geeky hacker at a rival, smaller (online) magazine notices the inaccuracies in Stephen's latest piece. That hacker and his co-horts make it their mission to set things straight... and it's not long before Stephen has turned from a young, hip reporting Superstar, popular with his staff, to a pathetic, crybaby, excuses-making mess.
The actors in this film aren't typically my favorites, but I don't really hate them, either -- and they're in top form here. Surprisingly, the actor I tend to dislike the most (Steve Zahn) is the one responsible for getting the movie going (as the hacker who outs Stephen) and thankfully, he's much less flamboyant than in other roles. Melanie Lynskey and Chloe Sevigny, both reporters and staunch defenders of Stephen, don't show us anything they haven't before, but they're decent and believable. Hayden Christenson, despite his oft-monotone voice, felt whiny and prissy throughout most of the film... but in the end it worked for his loser-ish character. And Hank Azaria manages not to offend as a well-liked editor who gets fired by the New Republic boss in favor of a guy who's not so beloved by the staff.
The new editor, Chuck, is played by Peter Sarsgaard -- and he's the actor who impressed me the most in this film. I've read a lot of gushing reviews of his performance since watching it, and I'm actually glad I watched before reading (since sometimes gushing reviews tend to turn me off). But Sarsgaard is excellent here as the stuffy, square Chuck. He, Chuck, knows the staff members resent him; he also strongly suspects that Zahn & co. are right about his star reporter, and Sarsgaard perfectly captures that awkward circumstance of knowing you're unpopular and knowing you have to make the right decision even if that decision will be as unpopular as you are. I doubt if I'll go out and rent all of Sarsgaard's films, but he actually made me wonder more than once "who is that actor?" which is rare. I give him props for a job well done! Other than the somewhat-slow beginning, the movie's most noteworthy flaw is that some of Stephen's fantasy sequences seem a bit overdone. However, there's one ongoing fantasy of sorts that might not make much sense at first yet makes perfect sense at the film's close (and nicely coincides with Chuck's status in the workplace).
I thank my fiancée for pointing to this movie.