The word mover's distance (WMD) is a fundamental technique for measuring the similarity of two documents. As the crux of WMD, it can take advantage of the underlying geometry of the word space by employing an optimal transport formulation. The original study on WMD reported that WMD outperforms classical baselines such as bag-of-words (BOW) and TF-IDF by significant margins in various datasets. In this paper, we point out that the evaluation in the original study could be misleading. We re-evaluate the performances of WMD and the classical baselines and find that the classical baselines are competitive with WMD if we employ an appropriate preprocessing, i.e., L1 normalization. However, this result is not intuitive. WMD should be superior to BOW because WMD can take the underlying geometry into account, whereas BOW cannot. Our analysis shows that this is due to the high-dimensional nature of the underlying metric. We find that WMD in high-dimensional spaces behaves more similarly to BOW than in low-dimensional spaces due to the curse of dimensionality.