Derived from a true story, “Shattered Glass” is based on a conniving political writer, Stephen Glass. His character shows audiences a world of journalistic dishonesty where articles can be completely falsified and based on little fact, but often times whole-heartedly believed.
In the mid 1920s the Washington, D.C. writer began his career writing small pieces for the political magazine New Republic. By sensationalizing his work, he quickly became one of the most sought after feature writers. It is unclear to the audience what drives the young Glass to begin his intense fabrication and lying, but it may be an attempt to take the stress-free route while working and attending graduate school. Perhaps it was the thrill of getting away with it, or the desire for scandal or simply a skill he is extremely good at it.
Glass seems to become pathological with his lying: he uses such brilliance when deriving the important information that makes up his articles. For three years he fabricates stories – Glass leads readers to believe that 27 of his articles are true. He writes these fictitious articles containing error right down to the sources, quotes and entire dialect of the story.
At first, one might ask, how could a conniving barely out-of-teen-hood student get away with such journalistic murder? Possibly because Stephen Glass was a damn good liar, and, in terms of the film itself, because Hayden Christensen does a remarkable job of playing the geek-turned-infamously popular Glass.
“Shattered Glass” examines more than the journalistic fiction that Glass created. The film grants the viewer a look into the personal life of this intriguing man. The audience is given the chance to see Glass’ slippery relationships with women and co-workers. He uses his skill to compliment women and tell people just exactly what they wanted to hear. He is not only convincing, but also likeable and popular amongst his peers. At one point, Glass even speaks to a journalism class to discuss his rising popularity and instant fame. It seems as though the entire magazine staff of 20-something aged adults are so vulnerable, they allow to Glass entice them and the rest of the country with his colorful deception.
The published article that shattered Glass’ career came when he reported and wrote about a conference about hackers, and then went on to discuss the meeting time and place of the convention even to the restaurant where the journalists gathered prior to the meeting. Adam Peneburg, played by Steve Zahn, a fellow editor, and presently a renowned online journalist followed up on Glass’ article and found that the convention of hackers was non-existent. The hall that Glass supposedly visited on Sunday at 3 p.m. was not even open on Sunday, nor was the restaurant where he supposedly met with fellow journalists. The career of the big-time writer came to a screeching halt after Peneburg uncovered Glass’ secret; over half of the 41 articles he had written for the political magazine were falsified.
Perhaps the most stunning performance in the film is delivered by Peter Sarsgaard, who plays The New Republic’s new editor, Charles Lane. Lane was informed of his likeliness to lie in stories when the ‘Hack Heaven’ story was published. He was a bit weary and skeptical that the young professional was capable of such dishonesty, but quickly found that this was not the first time that Glass fabricated articles. The audience watched as Glass’ career shattered quicker than it started and it was mesmerizing to see.
The film, although full of lies, tells it like it is; there were no special effects needed, no fancy scenery and no elaborate sets, perhaps that is why it is so vivid and real to watch. Christensen does a remarkable job at playing the sly and slick Glass and director Billy Ray brilliantly scripts the antithesis of seeing his career shatter.
