This is not a movie for movie lovers—well, not exactly. On a technical level, it is at best an average film. While the acting is prime, its story-within-a-story-within-a-story construction is confusing, underdeveloped, and in some ways unnecessary. This process, combined with several other factors, meant regular critics could not appreciate it properly (through no fault of their own). This movie pleases a more specific audience—not just movie-lovers, but movie lovers who write. In The Words, writers will be provided with a realistic and relatable account of a writer’s world, which they should not dismiss due to poor reviews (regardless of their validity).
As a writer myself, I identified very strongly with the situations presented in this film. In it, I encountered many of my fears and experiences with writing and life in general. It centers on a struggling writer, who knows he is destined to write but cannot tap into that pure flow of genius, which we all long for. It details the life of another writer, too—one that experiences terrible tragedy in his life, with a complicated love and unbearable loss. I also have a deep fondness for film, so the combination of these two areas of my interest—in a visual representation of the world of a writer, which is not usually portrayed on the screen—led me to The Words. My intrigue was increased when I discovered the storyline’s basis in the familiar story of Ernest Hemingway’s lost works. While it’s not explicitly stated, this historical allusion serves to further enhance the literary value and emphasis of this film.
To be clear, there are positive aspects of this film that even the major critics cannot dismiss. Roger Ebert said in his review, “What does work are the performances, especially Jeremy Irons as The Old Man,” addi
ng that he enjoyed the settings and periods shown in the movie, as well. Reviewer Phil Villarreal (from Ok! Magazine) acknowledged Cooper’s moving performance, saying, “His performance in this film is an overlooked gem.” Cooper pulls off his character in a clearly convincing manner. I was able to connect with him because he was visibly connected with the story, invested in it. Maybe that’s more of a testament to him as an actor, but it is a key reason that this movie is so compelling. Another main reason the movie is so intriguing is that it effectively and beautifully incorporates the different time periods, especially the World War II era during the Old Man’s stories—even down to such a small detail as the style of the ice cream cones.
Now, there are undeniable flaws in the construction and execution of
this movie. The basis of these flaws is the story-within-a-story-within-a-story structure. Dennis Quaid’s character, Clay Hammond, serves as the narrator of this story, as he gives a public reading of his new novel, entitled The Words. This is the first level of this film’s complex plot configuration. He tells the story of Rory Jansen (played by Bradley Cooper), who finds an old, marvelous manuscript by an unnamed author. In this novel, he is “confronted by the embodiment of everything he aspired to be, and the reality of what he would never become,” as Quaid’s character says. He eventually publishes the book as his own, and it is an immense success. Jansen’s experiences are the second level. Then, Jansen meets an old man in the park (Jeremy Irons), who relates the true story behind those words—his words, not Jansen’s. His past supplies the third level of this movie.
The ultimate issue with this plot construction is that it is somewhat difficult to follow, as the viewer is not totally sure which story is the main focus. It also leaves a lot of ends open because there simply isn’t time to fully explore each individual story (nor was that the intention). This plot structure also makes the movie appear scatter-brained and perhaps over-dramatized. If I were to judge The Words purely based on its execution as a movie, I would have to agree largely with the 22% it was given on Rotten Tomatoes.
However, the entirety of the movie—both content and structure—contributes to its message and makes it a powerful, relatable film for writers. As said in Chris Pandolfi’s review of The Words, “the film’s ambiguity is unlikely to be appreciated by everyone… [it] deserves to be structurally, emotionally, and thematically analyzed.” While it is difficult to follow the complex plot structure at times, this scatter-brained appearance correlates with the general scatter-brained process of many writers, including myself. When I write, I don’t generally go straight from the beginning to the middle to the end. Rather, I tend to write pieces out-of-order and then combine them into the finished product. It’s important to note that in this way The Words also provides a more realistic view of life than many other movies because it doesn’t lay everything out neat and flat. Life is complicated and people’s stories do intermingle in ways that sometimes don’t seem possible—too coincidental.
The movie also serves as a giant metaphor for an author’s life in that it doesn’t provide all the answers. Hammond, in a quick interview after his reading, says, “What I think is great about art and artists is that we get to ask the questions, even though we may never know the answers.” The Words opens up questions for the audience but does not provide pointed solutions, as writers don’t always provide or receive solutions to their many questions. The lack of concrete answers also provides us with the opportunity to draw our own conclusions, to create our own ending to the story, which is of course what writers do—create.
During the Old Man’s flashbacks, the movie may seem a bit over-dramatized. The cinematography romanticizes these scenes, and there’s a powerful musical score to enhance it. Some would argue that this makes the film unrealistic—too picturesque at first and then overly emotional as his story builds—and I can’t deny that. However, this part of the movie is a part of the Man’s memory, more than an exact depiction of reality, so it’s perfectly reasonable for it to be this way.
Another illustration of the different perspectives on this film can be found in the different movie posters (located at the beginning of this review). The most popular (and the eventual DVD cover) is shown on the far right, with the less popular ones on the left. I found it interesting that the design picked to represent the movie involved the least words. It’s the poster most focused on The Words being a movie, when in reality it is so much more. It is about a deeper message of the challenges faced by writers and the power behind words, which can embody a person so completely that they become a part of him—so that stealing his words kills a part of him, as shown in the movie’s tagline: “There’s more than one way to take a life.” As such, both of the other posters offer a more accurate, literary illustration, especially the leftmost.
The Words unfortunately did not become as much of a raging success as either of the books in the movie, but it does leave its mark on writers for its relatability and sincerity. It was not destined to be understood by the world, but to offer a glimpse into the hectic world of a writer under pressure to succeed and answer a moral question. Flicks.co.nz reviewer Liam Maguren said, “This isn’t an Oscar-contending powerhouse drama; it’s a film dedicated to expressing its message. On that level, The Words succeeds.”
Inspirare Aliquis (Inspire Someone) 