Rijndri Load of rubbish!!

Moustroll Good movie but grossly overrated

PiraBit if their story seems completely bonkers, almost like a feverish work of fiction, you ain't heard nothing yet.

Nicole I enjoyed watching this film and would recommend other to give it a try , (as I am) but this movie, although enjoyable to watch due to the better than average acting fails to add anything new to its storyline that is all too familiar to these types of movies.

Kirpianuscus the media. the price of success. the need to impose your name to the others. and the chosen way to become famous. Hayden Christensen does a great job. his character remains the same. but the perception about him knows profound change. and this is the most provocative detail. because the viewer is implicated in the definition of verdict about Glass. not an easy thing in contemporary fight for rating, online/outline media who impose different versions of success for rating, in the time of superficiality and hungry of success with reduced effort. more than a good film, its virtue is to be useful support for reflection about near reality. the story of Glass could be remind of old myth of Faust. in same measure, it is interesting introspection in the circle of news makers who risk to becoming makers of truths. so, more than useful analysis about the fall of a star, remember of talent of Christensen or fatal error. a clear portrait of reality perception with the help of media.

valleycapfan Coming in at a mere 93 minutes, this hidden little gem of a movie seems to take a bit longer to watch, but for all the right reasons. Watching a young, bright, but terribly flawed young man commit slow-motion career suicide that both betrays his friends and endangers their own reputations and livelihood is indeed uncomfortable, but is also what makes this film mesmerizing knowing that it is mostly real.Hayden Christensen's portrayal of Stephen Glass is that of a rather pathetic character whose willingness to not only deceive his readers and colleagues in pursuit of instant fame but also to continue to dig his professional grave ever deeper rather than cop to his fraud. Christensen's performance is convincing and workmanlike but not particularly memorable.The performance that IS memorable - so much that his character becomes the moral center of the film and steals the show - is that by Peter Sarsgaard of editor Charles Lane. Anyone who has been unwillingly thrust into a seemingly premature promotion under unfavorable circumstances (in this case replacing a much-loved editor who's been fired for sticking up for his writers) can immediately appreciate Lane's discomfort. That discomfort, expertly exuded by Sarsgaard, becomes interlaced with panic and eventually anger as he slowly realizes the magnitude of Glass' fraud and his ever-more-desperate attempts to maintain it. While his anger grows, so does his confidence in his own abilities, which is demonstrated with expert subtlety.The film's ability to end on an upbeat note, as the writing staff finally comes to appreciate Lane's predicament and concern for their feelings and reputations, both of which have been damaged by the colleague they've wrongfully defended most of the film, is welcome.The only criticism of this film is that it never really explains what was unique about Glass that made him fabricate stories, sources, and characters on such a scale. Most professional writers seek the approval of their peers, readers, and editors and the success that comes with getting great stories printed, but don't normally go to Glass' lengths to reach those goals. What drove Glass to go in such a misguided direction is never laid out.

jazzfi Now that they've been re-running this movie quite often lately, I finally settled down to watch it and learn about this true story for the very first time.Of course, as with all Hollywood "true" accounts, I am careful not to accept every little detail as fact. Nevertheless, the result is a very suspenseful, thrilling, drama that keeps you on the edge of your seat, and the way they combine the present, his heroic lecture to the students and their fawning professor, and the events leading to the writers downfall is intriguing.One might think that Glass would have succumbed to the admission of the truth much earlier, rather than continuing ad nauseum to layer one fib over another until they develop into all out lies, attempting to cover his tracks with fake websites and purely fictitious, cheesily made business cards. Really, it gets to the point where we feel sympathy for him and start believing he is truly in need of psychological therapy. Better to come clean as soon as possible than to drag your boss and friends into the muck of your deception.Excellent performances by Hayden Christensen and Peter Sarsgaard, make this a very fine and enjoyable film considering I knew nothing about the actual story or the events when they originally took place.

William Lucas My review of this movie is that it really did not have the meat & potatoes that I look for in a good movie,I mean yes it shows you a good example of a liar and a spineless,whiny tailed creep, yet it missed what makes a movie a good movie or a seat clincher.So if I had to give this movie a letter grade it would be a 'D' and that is being very generous.I am glad I did not have to pay to see this movie, I believe the only reason that I watched it was for it was a class assignment and I needed to.So go head and check it out what's good to me might not be the same for you and visa versa. (Are you MAD @ me)..... lol. Waste of an hour and a half could've got a well needed nap in at least.