Part 1 — My Introduction to Hayden Christensen and Critique of His Work

OK, folks, you heard it here… well, I don’t claim to be the first to say this BUT… Hayden Christensen is simply the most exciting actor of his generation. I believe his status will be legendary before he exits this stage. He’s that good. He relishes tackling any good story worth telling, but personally excels in playing the bad guy, the villain. Albeit villains that possess an element of the pathetic, vis-à-vis Stephen Glass in Shattered Glass and Anakin Skywalker in Star Wars – Episode III: Revenge of the Sith.

Higher Ground

My introduction to Hayden came via his stint in the short-lived Fox Family Channel drama Higher Ground (aired in 2000) in which he starred with my other favorite actor, Joe Lando. He portrayed a teenaged, superstar athlete (Scott Barringer) gone bad on drugs in response to a sexually abusive relationship with a manipulative stepmother. Hayden’s performances brimmed with raw emotion and real vulnerability, something rarely seen in an actor so young. His scenes with fellow Mt. Horizon camper Shelby Merrick (played by A.J. Cook), also a sexual abuse victim, were among the most powerful in the series. They played off each other so well that they nearly surpassed their adult costars. I was blown away.

It helped that the writing for the show was particularly strong. I especially enjoyed the witty banter between the characters. Daisy Lipenowski (portrayed by Jewel Staite) was my personal favorite because she and I share the same droll sense of humor (minus the predilection for Goth culture). The core group of teens, all hellions in their own way, espoused thoughts and observations that were not typical teen angst or superfluous drivel; on the contrary, they were often thought provoking and deep. Sure, there were a few corny moments, one of them being Scott’s timely conversation with God to intervene on Shelby’s behalf, but… gee, I really liked that scene! I have no clue what Hayden’s personal views are about God or religion, but he nailed that awkward desperation of someone seeking a higher power when events have spun out of control. I think we’ve all been there at one time or another.

As an aside, I’d like to make an observation that only a hard-core Lando/Christensen fan could catch. The last episode of Higher Ground was titled “Because I Love You,” words that Scott says to Shelby. At least I think he does. Much to my chagrin, I never got to see the final episode, so I can only go by the posted closed captioning, which is ambiguous as to who is actually talking to whom. Since Joe Lando was co-executive producer for this series, I’m convinced that it was due to his input that this particular line and episode title came to fruition. You see, Joe, as Sully, breathlessly uttered this same line to his beloved Michaela in my favorite episode of Dr. Quinn, Medicine Woman. Just prior to this same line being verbalized in Higher Ground, there is a scene where Sophie Becker (played by Anne Marie Loder) says to Peter Scarbrow (Joe Lando), “I’ve got a question for you, mountain man... will you marry me?” Joe’s character in DQMW was referred to as a mountain man type. Awwwwww.

A Galaxy Far, Far Away

Naturally, I was disappointed when Higher Ground was not renewed for a second season. However, when George Lucas tapped Hayden to portray Anakin Skywalker/Darth Vader in the final two Star Wars prequel episodes, I was both pleased and surprised. Lucas’ propensity for casting unknown talent should have been a tip-off, but I have to acknowledge his (and casting director Robin Gurland’s) prescient vision in trusting that a blond, sweet-smiling and polite Canadian lad had the chops to pull off the smoldering darkness of one of the nastiest villains to hit the silver screen in the past three decades.

Of course, I knew Hayden C. was more than capable, but could he convince the masses, especially the Star Wars junkies who live and breathe these characters? Casual fans of the space saga probably believed that Darth Vader had always been a bad seed Jedi — born that way, if you will, but that’s not how George Lucas saw him. He envisioned a fallen hero, a multi-layered character lurking behind that claustrophobic mask. Hayden brought his special gifts to the role, giving Anakin/Vader the humanity he sorely lacked in the original trilogy.

Attack of the Clones

In Attack of the Clones, some thought George Lucas had misstepped horribly in choosing Hayden to portray Anakin Skywalker. Not only was he an unknown quantity, his Anakin was arrogant, petulant, impetuous, and ultimately hard to embrace as “The Chosen One.” Unbeknownst to us denser mortals, this was purposeful on Lucas’ part. Such qualities were essential to his flawed hero. Hints of turbulence signaled the turmoil ahead. I only had two major complaints regarding ATOC. One, the fireplace scene in Padmé’s apartment was excruciatingly painful to watch. Just horrible, horrible dialogue. How Hayden managed a straight face throughout it, I’ll never know. Both he and Natalie Portman deserved a medal or something. Secondly, the new digital format ofttimes gave it an animated feel that was unsettling and overdone (but, thankfully, vastly improved in Sith). For both problems I fault the writer/director. Yet, all was not lost. Padmé Amidala’s wardrobe was stunning and, as soon as the house lights came up, I headed straight for Borders to purchase John Williams’ soundtrack (one day Lucas will figure out a way to have the theaters exit into a Star Wars gift shop).

Life As A House

Before Attack of the Clones had a chance to hit theaters, Hayden made a much smaller, more conventional film, called Life As a House, holding his own opposite costars Kevin Kline and Kristin Scott Thomas. Although a great showcase of Hayden’s nascent talent — garnering him a Golden Globes nomination for Actor In A Supporting Role — Life As a House registered hardly a blip at the box office, having debuted only weeks after the terrorist attacks of 11 September 2001. The country wasn’t really in the mood for movies — I know I wasn’t.

In House, Hayden played yet another troubled teen (Sam Monroe) of divorced parents. All three characters start out angry and generally unlikable. As the film progresses, the underlying pain that forms the basis for their anger and resentment becomes evident. Sam feels abandoned by both parents and acts out negatively to get their attention. George Monroe (Kline) was taught to feel small and has lived his whole life doing things he neither liked nor enjoyed. Ex-wife Robin (Scott Thomas) thinks she is a bad mother and wife because she doesn’t have the perfect little family. George, the philospher of the troubled trio, tells his son Sam:

Change can be so constant that you don’t even feel the difference until there is one. It can be so slow that you don’t know that your life is better, or worse, until it is. Or it can just blow you away… make you something different in an instant.

So true. Plus, it’s the underlying theme of the film. You begin to like these people as they outgrow their pettiness and reform the family ties that were broken.

My favorite moments in this movie were two scenes where Sam witnesses his parents reconnecting after years of mutual antagonism. In the first scene the couple is dancing in the house they are building together. The second scene involved Sam inadvertently barging in on a romantic interlude. Knowing how divorce affects the psyche of a child, I feel he perfectly portrayed the yearning and joy Sam felt in seeing his parents happy together. Nearly every child of divorce hopes his parents will get back together. Stepfamilies rarely satisfy the soul to the same degree that a procreated one does. I know others will say the excellent scenes between Sam and his father were truly the best examples of Hayden’s craft, and I wouldn’t argue with them. I just think Hayden is a master at subtlety. His reactions in the aforementioned scenes made it obvious that absolutely nothing Sam’s parents did or said escaped his attention. While this subtlety might be a result of a skillful director and/or editor, I prefer to think it’s all purely Hayden’s genius.

Of course, as much as I enjoyed Life As A House, it wasn’t perfect. The interplay between the generations was both a strength and a weakness. The sexual interplay, in particular, didn’t ring true for me. I guess L.A. is just a strange place where mothers always sleep with their daughter’s boyfriends and said daughters experiment with kissing men old enough to be… well, their fathers. Even the hormonal urges between the teens were a bit over the top. When I was hot for a guy, naturally I barged into the bathroom, stripped off my clothes, and jumped into the shower with him — uninvited. Right. That’s not the way we do it in Flyover Country. Whatever happened to being coy?

While I’m on the subject… did anyone else notice how Hayden flubbed his lines in the shower scene? I never saw the script, but it’s pretty obvious when Sam says to Alyssa, “No, you’re off, you know? You’re way off,” that he’s ad-libbing and director Irwin Winkler decided to keep it in. Sam was supposed to be uncomfortable and Hayden admitted to feeling just that way during the filming of that scene, but my gut tells me those weren’t the words Sam was supposed to say.

Please indulge me one brief rant regarding this film. Operating power tools without safety glasses?! C’mon, where was OSHA during filming? Hayden could have lost an eye. Boo hiss. As for Hayden’s opening scene, I will only say that it took a lot of… courage *cough* to do that. You thought I was going to use an anatomically appropriate euphemism, didn’t ya? Sorry. Crude, I am not.

What is it they say about art imitating real life? This film eerily reminded me of an event in my own life when I helped my parents reshingle the roof on their house. Concurrently, my grandmother was in the hospital with terminal cancer, so our hearts were heavy as we worked. She died before we completed the job.

Shattered Glass

Shattered Glass intrigued me for personal reasons: I know a Stephen Glass (the main character of this film). Or maybe I should say that I know a Stephanie Glass. But that’s an issue I’ll return to later. Before I sat down to write this review I decided to do my own research, reading some of Glass’ articles as published in The New Republic. I also found the two letters the magazine wrote to its readers to explain and apologize for their unwitting role in aiding and abetting Stephen in his massive deception.

Warning: multiple spoilers ahead.

Writer/director Billy Ray did a marvelous job, I thought, in capturing the essence of, if not quoting verbatim, Glass’ writings. I don’t recall the Stephen Glass incident at the time it was reported, but I became familiar with it during the Jayson Blair/New York Times plagiarism scandal. The Blair reporting often referenced Stephen Glass as one of his predecessors in journalistic infamy. I also remember reading that Glass’ story had been made into a well-received film, but it wasn’t until after Sith that I put two and two together and realized that Hayden was the actor who portrayed Glass. It’s a great character study, which Hayden must have also realized since he chose it as his production company’s inaugural project.

The film prefaces its story with some intertitle background, informing viewers that, in 1998, The New Republic magazine consisted of several young writers and editors whose median age was just 26; Stephen Glass was the youngest. The opening scene shows Stephen at a memorabilia convention, talking into a handheld tape recorder, as all good reporters are wont to do. In voiceover, Hayden narrates Stephen’s thoughts:

"…you have to know who you’re writing for and you have to know what you’re good at. I record what people do. I find out what moves them, what scares them, and I write that down. That way they’re the ones telling the story. And, you know what? Those kinds of pieces can win Pulitzer’s, too."

Director Billy Ray revisits this scene and Stephen’s words near the end of the film. By then we know that, in Stephen Glass’ world, his writing is largely fiction, not a reporting of facts. Hayden’s narration is frequently, but effectively, used throughout the film to give us background about Stephen’s quirks and how TNR operates, and as a vehicle for telling the fantastical stories behind his infamous articles. Stephen is viewed as a bright and promising writer with a reputation for high journalistic standards and meticulously detailed and colorful story telling. A brown-noser who flirts with female coworkers, “yes, dear”-ing them and calling them “Sweetie.” He cloyingly compliments colleagues and authority figures while denigrating his own work and playing down his perceived fame, thus collecting envious fans along the way.

Stephen Glass worked under two editors while employed at The New Republic, Michael Kelly and Charles Lane, ably played by Hank Azaria and Peter Sarsgaard, respectively. When Kelly is alerted to an inconsistency in one of Glass’ articles, Stephen feints by making a big deal over the minor gaffe in order to successfully dissuade his editor from digging further. Likewise, Glass wrote 14 articles under Chuck Lane, who might have continued to rubber stamp his protégé’s work had it not been for Adam Penenberg, Stephen’s nemesis at the online magazine Forbes Digital Tool. Stephen masterfully snows these men over with clever tactics. When both editors try to fact check his work, Stephen defers the matter by claiming the desired information is in his notes, which are conveniently located elsewhere.

But Stephen’s house of cards is brought down by Penenberg (portrayed by the delightful Steve Zahn) and his cohorts at Forbes Digital. “Read between the lies” is the film’s tagline and Penenberg’s bunch does just that. With the harsh glare of reality setting in, TNR’s Lane also gets into the act, scrupulously questioning his now suspect subordinate. Yet, Glass can’t stop the prevarications and Lane slowly realizes the horrible truth: this one article may actually be the tip of the iceberg. Meanwhile, TNR’s staff is in denial and has its own soul-searching to do. They have failed to scrutinize one of their own with the same standards they normally apply to outsiders.

Hayden apparently nailed Glass, although Billy Ray’s well-researched script should also be given some credit. In Stephen Glass we see an obsequious go-getter who, underneath it all, was an insecure schemer and (probably) a pathological liar. Hayden’s portrayal of Glass elicits a mixture of empathy and contempt. One moment he’s the talented writer with a penchant for details who seemingly cares about and heaps praises on others. The next moment he’s smugly smiling when backs are turned, holding his friends up to higher standards, whining whenever he is caught or held to account, and unable to bring himself to fully confess his wrongdoings. Like I said, this was one terrific character study and Hayden handled such complex transitions beautifully. In interviews he claimed that the toughest part about playing Stephen Glass was lying through his teeth everyday. He does, however, cry convincingly: his face actually got red and blotchy. That level of distress — that realism — really impressed me.

The scenes between Hayden and Peter Sarsgaard were fun to watch. Chuck Lane (Sarsgaard) never quite believes what Glass is telling him, but he just can’t get him to come clean. While Stephen backtracks or skirts around the truth, he refuses to confess all. In one scene, Glass shows Lane the building where the events in his article allegedly took place and it becomes evident that nothing is adding up. When Stephen realizes that Lane isn’t buying his lies, he has a junior Darth Vader moment — looking daggers at his boss. If looks could kill, Lane would have been a dead man. Yet, as they return to the office, Stephen gets emotional (weepy) and tells Chuck that he’ll admit guilt “…if it will help (Lane),” insinuating that he is willing to fall on his sword for the good of the magazine. Be the martyr. The final scene where Lane, Glass, and their respective lawyers meet is particularly poignant. A list of partially or fully fabricated articles is read out loud and Stephen is asked to speak out if he feels an article was mistakenly put on the list (i.e., an indirect admission of guilt). He is silent throughout, but Hayden’s facial expressions speak volumes. Initially he looks smug, then he becomes livid as the list grows longer. That gives way to embarrassment, defeat, and, finally, he seems to tune out altogether.

Billy Ray’s script and directing were excellent. The juxtaposition of scenes was sometimes interesting. For instance, Adam Penenberg rips a Glass article to shreds whilst Stephen badgers a coworker regarding journalistic integrity. TNR staff members applaud Editor Lane for admitting that mistakes were made as Stephen accepts accolades from high school students for his lofty, but dishonest, accomplishments. Ray also demonstrated Stephen’s manipulative side by showing how he used similar tactics with multiple people. A coworker tells Chuck Lane that Stephen asked to be driven to the airport after Lane fired him, hinting at Stephen’s possible suicidal tendencies. Later, when Stephen uses the same tactic on Lane (in one of my favorite scenes), you wonder if he’ll fall for it. Glass’ influence on coworkers is also revealed through composite character David Bach (Chad Donella) who portrays a Stephen Glass wannabe — working late, bringing Stephen coffee, soliciting his help with articles. Near the end of the film the director revisits scenes, such as the previously mentioned memorabilia convention and a high school classroom, to show how Stephen Glass lives in a world of his own making.

Mychael Danna’s score was often subtle yet perfect. Nice use of marimba, flute, xylophone and myriad percussive instruments. In the scene where Adam Penenberg types in the URL for Jukt Micronics’ (company) website, the URL (http://members.aol.juktm.html) isn’t a real URL — any self-respecting techno geek would know that. I suppose it was done that way to avoid legal hassles. In the DVD commentary, Billy Ray mentions that location exteriors were filmed around the District of Columbia and Bethesda, Maryland, on the same day the D.C. Beltway snipers began targeting their victims. Budget constraints forced the film crew to keep shooting… er, filming when prudence told them they should head back home. For me, there was a risible moment on the DVD when the voiceover announcer for the trailer mispronounces Hayden’s name. Sheesh, you’d think that if Hayden helped finance this gig they could at least get his name right. He was the lead actor, for goodness sake!

Almost forgot... what about “Stephanie Glass”? Ah, that would be one of my cousins who stole a family member’s identity, embezzled funds from her employer, and told lie after lie to cover it up. Yep, my very own kin. Naturally, she pleaded “no contest.” Just like Stephen Glass, she couldn’t admit her guilt.

To Be Continued...