|
WSWS : Arts
Review : Film
Reviews
Facts, but no framework
Joanne Laurier
27 November 2003
Use
this version to print
| Send this
link by email | Email the
author
Shattered Glass, written and directed by Billy Ray;
Veronica Guerin, directed by Joel Schumacher; screenplay
by Carol Doyle and Mary Agnes Donoghue
Shattered Glass and Veronica Guerin are two films
set in the 1990s about real-life journalists, but with little
to say about either the period or the profession.
Shattered Glass
Shattered Glass concerns itself with the undoing of
Stephen Glass, a young writer for the once liberal New
Republic magazine who was discovered in 1998 to have fabricated,
in part or in whole, over two dozen articles. Many critics, as
well as the films production notes, point to the obvious
parallels between the Glass incident and the more recent New
York Times episode with Jayson Blair, the reporter who was
found last spring to have invented or plagiarized portions of
some three dozen articles.
Glass (Hayden Christensen) comes to the Clinton-era New
Republicwhich describes itself in the film as the in-flight
magazine of Air Force One (the presidential jet)as
its youngest writer. He is soon dominating editorial board meetings
with intriguing anecdotes about hot topicsscandalous activity
at the young Republicans convention, a Clinton-Lewinsky paraphernalia
trade fair, and a teenage hacker with an agent and a million-dollar
contract from one of his corporate victims.
After each story pitch, Glass says coyly: I probably
wont even do anything with it. His disarming approach
has the effect of throwing raw meat to a pack of wolves.
Whenever any question is raised about his work, he asks with
a wide-eyed flash of panic, Are you mad at me? His
overly solicitous and obsequious manner results in staff and editor
giving him the benefit of the doubt. Meanwhile, he is also moonlighting,
writing articles for Harpers, George and Rolling
Stone magazines.
While his youth, quick mind and emotional immaturity work in
his favor, Glass must work long and feverish hours to invent back-up
material for his fictitious stories, including false notes in
his journal and phony phone numbers for his sources; he goes so
far as to create a web site, albeit a primitive one, for the nonexistent
software company in his hacker story.
The journalist is a protégé of (the late) Michael
Kelly (Hank Azaria). After Kelly gets fired by publisher Martin
Peretz, Glasss magic world starts to unravel. A technical
writer from the now-defunct-online publication Forbes Digital
Tool begins investigating Glasss hacker story and finds
that it is one invention on top of another. Kellys successor,
the more discerning Charles Lane (Peter Sarsgaard), dismisses
Glass from the magazine after the extent of his duplicity comes
to light.
Shattered Glass is only partially successful in its
attempt to reveal Glasss psychological make-up. In the movies
production notes, Azaria describes the real Kellys impression
of Glass: [H]e is literally a pathological liar, a sociopath,
that he had no other motivation than being addicted to tricking
people and the thrill of doing that. And that combined with a
lot of ambition and of pressure that a lot of young bright people
feel today to achieve. Kelly thought Glass had kind of a con man
mentality. He became addicted to the con.
Kelly, who was an embedded reporter with US forces and died
during the invasion of Iraq, apparently did not explain to Azaria
how he was so taken in by the con.
Nor does the director ask the question: How was the entire
management of a prestigious publication buffaloed by an imaginative,
but essentially juvenile, ruse? That neither this nor any other
difficult issue is probed results in the movies extreme
blandness. It is an unwitting testimony to the debased cultural
and political level of the media, a fact fully accepted by the
creators of Shattered Glass.
Sounding naive to the point of insipidness, director Billy
Ray states: This is a cautionary talea story about
the difference between being a good reporter and being a hot one...
My hope is that people who see Shattered Glass will look
at the craft of journalism with a different perspective. The
New Republic, like the New York Times is not
an institution, it is a staff of people who are in charge of an
institution, and those people can have good or bad judgment. Stephen
Glass took advantage of their bad judgment as well as their good
nature. This trite description of both publications as well
as the media in general is misleading and false.
Even the films fleeting representation of the firing
of Kelly by Peretza mentor of former vice-president Al Goredemonstrates
that publications such as the New Republic are indeed institutions
embodying definite class and political ideologies. In an oblique
reference to the medias role in the right-wing campaign
against Clinton, the films production notes surmise that
Peretz sacked the editor because Kellys column in
the magazine became increasingly critical of Bill Clinton.
The actions of journalists like Stephen Glass and Jayson Blair,
while grossly inappropriate, are hardly unknown within the media.
The pressure to produce sensationalist articles by juicing up
a story at whatever price is a commonplace occurrence. Though
Glass and Blair invented or plagiarized stories, neither one set
out deliberately to malign anyone or advance some hidden political
agenda.
The same cannot be said about the majority of prestigious hacks
who write for leading publications in the US, including the New
Republic and the New York Times, whose writings have
more pernicious and far-reaching consequences. Both publications,
for example, have supported and encouragedwith whatever
qualificationsthe Bush administrations illegal invasion
and occupation of Iraq, already responsible for the deaths of
tens of thousands. Where is the film exposing that scandal?
Far more serious than the sins of Glass and Blair against the
basic rules of journalism is the corporate stranglehold over the
major print and broadcast outlets. Increasingly, the media serves
as the unabashed promoter of the undemocratic thrust of the government
and corporations. Ignoring this context condemns Shattered
Glass to be a sterile biopic.
Veronica Guerin
Veronica Guerin recounts two years in the fevered life
of the Irish journalist of the same name, leading up to her assassination
in 1996. Guerins articles in the Sunday Independent
focused on the growing heroin problem in Dublin.
Guerin (Cate Blanchett) is relentless in her pursuit of the
drug lords, making her way through the bowels of the Irish capital,
seemingly unaffected by gunshot wounds, severe beatings and threats
against her husband and young son.
She is portrayed, rather unconvincingly, as a being
from the realm of the superhuman or the super-reckless. The films
production notes begin by breathlessly observing: In the
mid-1990s, Dublin was nothing short of a war zone, with a few
powerful drug lords battling for control. Their most fearsome
opponent was not the police but the courageous journalist Veronica
Guerin.
She is the Lone Ranger apparently, single-handedly marching
through a war zone and taking on the drug mafia! Scenes
depicting Guerin stomping over bodies of drug-addicted teenagers,
stalking dangerous killers in an in-your-face manner or threatening
her enemies when she is entirely vulnerable to retaliation, border
on the ridiculous.
Veronica Guerin is the product of the collaborative
effort of director Joel Schumacher (responsible for the misanthropic
Falling Down and the morbid 8MM, among other discreditable
works) and producer Jerry Bruckheimerthe reigning king of
empty Hollywood blockbusters.
By all accounts, the real-life Guerin was a courageous woman.
Even if the films catalogue of her lifes activities
were accurate, there is a palpably unhealthy element brought to
the equation by the Schumacher/Bruckheimer team.
Though possessed of certain technical abilitiesthe film
has an art-house lookSchumacher seems to relish
any opportunity to represent what he sees as the underbelly of
humanity. The Guerin story in the directors hands comes
perilously close to nothing more than an opportunity to degrade
audiences with scenes of toddlers trying to inject themselves
with discarded needles, pushers-cum-snitches hanging out in brothels
with dehumanized hookers, and mafia thugs mutilating their former
cronies. As one reviewer puts it: The movie seems as confident
as its heroine only when it slips underground to the brothels
and strip clubs. Seediness and violence are what really turn the
movie on.
The films script consists of a series of variations on
the same theme, beginning and ending with the Guerin murder sequence.
The finale shows the journalists bullet-riddled corpse in
close-up, from the side and most gratuitously from the air. There
is an element of morbid fascination, rather than sympathy, contained
in these lingering shots, resembling tabloid crime-scene photography.
This is followed by a predictable funeral scene during which an
intertitle awards Guerin immortal status in the anti-drug crusade.
Sloppy and conformist portrayals abound. Blanchetts Guerin
bends everyone to her willthe police are helpful, the newspapers
management her biggest cheerleader. Even the drug kingpins
key operative gets seduced by her charms at the risk of meeting
a bloody end.
The drug war is global and any story with a hero or heroine
is universal, declares Schumacher in the films production
information. For the director, the issue of drugs is more a demonized
(or romanticized) thing-in-itself than a major
social problem. His film makes no attempt to connect the business
of drugsblithely passing over the inhuman co-optation of
young people into the drug underworldwith poverty and unemployment
in Ireland. Veronica Guerin is too caught up in having
its heroine vogue her way through minefields and human debris
than in illuminating anything meaningful about Guerins accomplishments,
whatever they really might be.
See Also:
Jayson Blair and Judith Miller:
Journalistic ethics, hypocrisy and war at the New York Times
[13 May 2003]
The battlefield deaths of
American journalists Michael Kelly and David Bloom: some hard
truths
[12 April 2003]
Top of page
The WSWS invites your comments.
Copyright 1998-2008
World Socialist Web Site
All rights reserved |