The Daily Gamecock

Movies

Trending Now

Send a Tip Get Our Email Editions

More from Movies

'The Words:' Confusing plot, bad casting choices plague Bradley Cooper's latest film

By Tyler Simpson | Sep. 12, 2012

There are plenty of words to describe "The Words," Bradley Cooper's latest attempt to get his name on the Oscar ballot. Unfortunately, not many of them are positive. Here are a few.  Contrived. The entire movie is one contrived "story within a story within a story" narrative that often tests our patience and does too much in too little time. It comes right at you like a set of those Russian nesting dolls, piling one plot onto another while refusing to get to the point. Convoluted. The book tells the story of Rory Jansen (Bradley Cooper), an aspiring writer who fails to get his first book published. While on vacation with his wife Dora (Zoe Saldana), he finds an satchel with an old, brilliantly written manuscript that's unfinished. So Rory decides to take it and publish it as his own work, and predictably enough, it becomes a best-seller. We are then introduced to "The Old Man" (Jeremy Irons), the actual author of the manuscript. He tells Rory about how that work of fiction was inspired by his troubling past told through post–World War II flashback, a story that makes Rory feel guilty about plagiarizing his work. If you think this is already too much, there's actually a third story in which author Clayton Hammond (Dennis Quaid), who provides the film's voice-over narration, holds a public hearing of his latest book "The Words," the book within the story that tells the actual story of the movie. Confusing. If not about the story, then maybe about why co-directors and co-writers Brian Klugman and Lee Sternthal felt the need to use this framing device since it does nothing but add the voice-over narration. Is the book "The Words" supposed to be a semi-autobiographical work about the events in the movie? If so, then somebody please explain it to me. Pretentious. As I kept watching the movie, I found myself waiting for it to finally make a point other than to say how these characters are nothing but a bunch of pretentious jerks — just about as pretentious as this movie is, trying to be more emotionally convincing than it really is. Miscast. The only performance here that is the smallest bit enjoyable is Quaid's. While his character is little more than a plot device, he actually sounds convincing as a man haunted by his past. Everyone else in the cast drags the movie down along with the writing. Cooper doesn't do anything aside from furrow his brow to show any sign of emotion in his funniest performance since "The Hangover" (unintentional, of course). Irons also leaves a weak impression, but that's not really his fault since his character is also a plot device. Damned. The biggest problem with this movie is that it's so preoccupied with stringing out its "reality versus fiction" theme that it refuses to tell us why we should give a damn. It's great that the movie takes its story seriously, but there really isn't much worth telling here aside from a lecture about not stealing another person's work. Do you really need to pay the price of a ticket just for that? Disappointing. For a movie that comments on the writing life in a serious tone, "The Words" makes plenty of errors when it comes to storytelling. With its plot holes and questionable approach to storytelling, most of the problems with the movie fall under the questions of "How?" and "Why?" So, let's break it down: contrived, convoluted, confusing, pretentious, damned and disappointing. Oh yeah, I forgot to mention tedious.