IMDb RATING
7.4/10
3.8K
YOUR RATING
An in-depth look at The New York Times' long-time crossword puzzle editor Will Shortz and his loyal fan base.An in-depth look at The New York Times' long-time crossword puzzle editor Will Shortz and his loyal fan base.An in-depth look at The New York Times' long-time crossword puzzle editor Will Shortz and his loyal fan base.
- Awards
- 1 win & 7 nominations total
Bill Clinton
- Self
- (as William Jefferson Clinton)
- Director
- Writers
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
Featured reviews
You would never imagine that the evolution and story behind the New York Times crossword puzzle and the people who both create them and ferociously try to solve them, would be so darn interesting. This movie proves that a good theme, a sincere effort and some interesting, quirky characters can make even the most remote of subjects, a fascinating, moving documentary. Watching Jon Stewart, Bill Clinton and other famous people work at the crossword somehow humanizes them in a way that I have honestly never seen before. Everyone who attacks the puzzle is now on the same page, and the movie somehow made me feel a lot better about the human race. If there is anything that unites us all, it is the need to solve something - to go through the process of cracking it and to ultimately own it. By watching this movie, you almost have the same amount of respect for the people who are simply the best in the country at this particular thing, as you do for the Stewarts and the Clintons of this world.
Saw a preview screening last week at the Museum of the Moving Image in New York. Overall I thought it was decent but I didn't think it was compelling enough to warrant being distributed as a theatrically-released feature film. The subject matter is better suited for an hour-long doc on PBS or The Learning Channel. Being a something of a crossword puzzle fan myself, I'd prefer seeing a shorter, tighter version of this piece.
Movie is most interesting when it gives us glimpses of brilliant minds at work but even that wasn't enough to sustain my interest for a full ninety minutes. It lacks the momentum of similar docs like "Spellbound."
Movie is most interesting when it gives us glimpses of brilliant minds at work but even that wasn't enough to sustain my interest for a full ninety minutes. It lacks the momentum of similar docs like "Spellbound."
Crossword puzzles, and the many people who make them popular, are the focus in Wordplay, including the editor of the NY Times puzzle (the most notorious of them in the USA), celebrities and politicians, and the general public obsessed with them. As a documentary Wordplay is good, not great, film-making about its subject with a couple of montages and interlocking scenes that are weak. But the subject matter, and usually how its presented, sparks a fine interest even in a non-crossword puzzle player like myself. As words are all that we have to work with in communication and just everyday discourse, it's also attached here to the idea of testing, of competition, and how different and varying crosswords can get. Like the documentary Spellbound from a few years back, the director is also after the kind of irony of making such an isolated experience of finishing a puzzle into an event with hundreds of players once a year with friendships and acquaintances- a social event as much as a match-up.
Many parts are amusing as well; we get interviews from Jon Stewart, Bill Clinton, Bob Dole, and the editor of NY Times Crossword himself, Will Shortz, and they all give some insightful, funny little bits of interest into making the puzzles and playing them. But for the most part we're into the mind-set of several key players, real people whom will all come together for the tournament in Jaunary. What makes all of this work, and what actually makes crossword puzzles become good enough for cinema, is watching smart people, un-cluttered for the most part with problems, who can focus all of their attentions on this one activity, to the point of obsessive compulsive behavior. It's really fun, in a nerdy way, trying to guess some of these words (or rather watching them guessing the words) along with the players. And the way the puzzles are created sparks a little interest too, as it's one of those parts of life I myself could never, ever accomplish. Worth a look, though probably more so for fans of the activity.
Many parts are amusing as well; we get interviews from Jon Stewart, Bill Clinton, Bob Dole, and the editor of NY Times Crossword himself, Will Shortz, and they all give some insightful, funny little bits of interest into making the puzzles and playing them. But for the most part we're into the mind-set of several key players, real people whom will all come together for the tournament in Jaunary. What makes all of this work, and what actually makes crossword puzzles become good enough for cinema, is watching smart people, un-cluttered for the most part with problems, who can focus all of their attentions on this one activity, to the point of obsessive compulsive behavior. It's really fun, in a nerdy way, trying to guess some of these words (or rather watching them guessing the words) along with the players. And the way the puzzles are created sparks a little interest too, as it's one of those parts of life I myself could never, ever accomplish. Worth a look, though probably more so for fans of the activity.
Being someone who has enjoyed figuring out crossword puzzles here and there over the last 20 years, I was enthused about watching this documentary and wondered if it would renew the passion I used to have for doing these puzzles. Yes, it did, so kudos to the documentary to make it interesting enough.
Is it enough to hold the interest of a non-crossword player? I doubt it. If the puzzles aren't fun to you, I doubt this movie would be entertaining, either.
The film is in two parts: a look at "celebrities" who play, and some of their comments and to the man who puts together the daily New York Times puzzle. The second part - the largest segment - is devoted to USA Crossword Championships held in each in Stamford, Conn. We see the top players profiled and then are witness to the 200- tournament with it's dramatic 3-person playoff finals.
The first part is simply an unabashed Liberal love-fest with big plugs for the Times and NPR, and the celebs are all big Liberals, from Bill Clinton to Jon Stewart to Ken Burns, the Indigo Girls, etc. If one can ignore the obvious political bias, it's still interesting.
Then, we get profiles of the top players, from the young prodigy who first entered the tournament at 16 and is one of the favorites to win at 20; the veteran who always is in the finals but never can do better than third; to the gay guy who is seen at home playing pinball with his roommate. They kiss each other on the lips. What was the purpose of inserting that in the movie? What did that have to do with the story? Nothing, obviously, and it wasn't necessary but when have Liberal filmmakers ever exercised good judgment?
Also profiled is an interesting woman who won this tournament once but hasn't been close since. Then, we have others such as a guy who plays a guitar and sings and another who is extremely introverted, on and on. Many of them fun to watch. Many of them are amazing crossword talents who can zip off thee answers to a fairly tough one in just a few minutes.
Although not hard to predict given their "past performances," the finale was still dramatic and interesting to watch.
Overall: puzzle devotees - highly recommended; non-players: not recommended.
Is it enough to hold the interest of a non-crossword player? I doubt it. If the puzzles aren't fun to you, I doubt this movie would be entertaining, either.
The film is in two parts: a look at "celebrities" who play, and some of their comments and to the man who puts together the daily New York Times puzzle. The second part - the largest segment - is devoted to USA Crossword Championships held in each in Stamford, Conn. We see the top players profiled and then are witness to the 200- tournament with it's dramatic 3-person playoff finals.
The first part is simply an unabashed Liberal love-fest with big plugs for the Times and NPR, and the celebs are all big Liberals, from Bill Clinton to Jon Stewart to Ken Burns, the Indigo Girls, etc. If one can ignore the obvious political bias, it's still interesting.
Then, we get profiles of the top players, from the young prodigy who first entered the tournament at 16 and is one of the favorites to win at 20; the veteran who always is in the finals but never can do better than third; to the gay guy who is seen at home playing pinball with his roommate. They kiss each other on the lips. What was the purpose of inserting that in the movie? What did that have to do with the story? Nothing, obviously, and it wasn't necessary but when have Liberal filmmakers ever exercised good judgment?
Also profiled is an interesting woman who won this tournament once but hasn't been close since. Then, we have others such as a guy who plays a guitar and sings and another who is extremely introverted, on and on. Many of them fun to watch. Many of them are amazing crossword talents who can zip off thee answers to a fairly tough one in just a few minutes.
Although not hard to predict given their "past performances," the finale was still dramatic and interesting to watch.
Overall: puzzle devotees - highly recommended; non-players: not recommended.
I really enjoyed this film. There is wonderful insight into the "characters" who participate in the crossword competition - a whole world out there that I was not aware of. They employ many different techniques to present the information and in the end it is just a feel-good documentary. Not sappy and a fun, short film. I think that people who live in New York City will especially appreciate this film, and I guess those individuals who take their crosswords very seriously will find some sense of kindred spirit in the people they see on screen.
A must see.
A must see.
Did you know
- TriviaTyler Hinman would eventually work for Google for a few years.
- Quotes
Merl Reagle: [driving by a Dunkin' Donuts shop] Dunkin' Donuts... put the D at the end, you get Unkind Donuts... which I've had a few of, in my day.
- How long is Wordplay?Powered by Alexa
Details
- Release date
- Country of origin
- Official site
- Language
- Also known as
- Word Play
- Filming locations
- Production companies
- See more company credits at IMDbPro
Box office
- Gross US & Canada
- $3,121,270
- Opening weekend US & Canada
- $32,847
- Jun 18, 2006
- Gross worldwide
- $3,177,636
- Runtime1 hour 34 minutes
- Color
- Sound mix
- Aspect ratio
- 1.66 : 1
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content
