[innerSpaceman]

I love polarizing pics. I'm usually on the "loved it" side of the equation, and I dig that the same film is viciously "hated" by so many people. It's much more interesting than liking films that everyone else likes, or being lukewarm about films that most people are lukewarm about.

I'm on the "loved it" side of the Crash equation.

I don't hate film stories structured around coincidences if that's the purpose of the story's structure. Meaning, I hate giant apes when they show up in most movies, but I'm ok with that tactic in "King Kong."

Haggis' experience of L.A. may be drastically different than mine, but - um - it's a big, big city with many realities, and many of them quite nasty. Besides, I don't think the critique of racism was a critique of Los Angeles, simply because it was a plausible setting for such a tale.

And while I don't generally prefer ensemble casts with multiple threads, I will accept that it's a genre which naturally produces a bit more "message" in the dialogue. It could be looked upon just a different method of achieving cohesion.

Yeah, I'll admit that the theme might have been expressed a little leadfootedly. But that was cleanly offet by emotionally resonant situations helped along by consistently amazing performances.

Matt Dillon was chilling. Terrance Howard was seethingly good. Sandra Bullock was delightful in a reversal of type, and even Ryan Phillippe turned in good work! Who'da even thunk that possible??



.