Lounge of Tomorrow

€uromeinke, FEJ. and Ghoulish Delight RULE!!! NA abides.  


Go Back   Lounge of Tomorrow > A.S.C.O.T > Beatnik
Swank Swag
FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Clear Unread

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
Old 02-27-2006, 11:07 AM   #26
lizziebith
Wishing these titles could be longe
 
lizziebith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Pearblossom CA
Posts: 984
lizziebith is the epitome of coollizziebith is the epitome of coollizziebith is the epitome of coollizziebith is the epitome of coollizziebith is the epitome of coollizziebith is the epitome of coollizziebith is the epitome of coollizziebith is the epitome of coollizziebith is the epitome of coollizziebith is the epitome of coollizziebith is the epitome of cool
Because I am ALWAYS late to the party:

Well, I finally rented and watched "Crash" yesterday -- I didn't really have an interest in doing so until reading this thread. I must confess that I have a bias against films that come out swinging in "I hate L.A." mode. So I wasn't all that interested in subjecting myself to this movie, and was fully prepared, as I set the disc in the player, to hate it. [/disclaimer]

I watched it twice, just to be sure I hadn't missed something, but I didn't hate it. I didn't like it either. It made me feel cold and alienated and depressed. It rang false to me from the git-go: we're so isolated and self-absorbed here in L.A. that we crash into each other to connect? Puh-leeze. That is an embarrassingly pretentious device to utilize at the beginning of a piece of freaking film.

I didn't see anyone I've ever met in this film: I wondered who all the fantasy people were. I was amazed at the phoney dialogue and the stilted feel of it. It looked so "staged" -- even the big scene with the fingering. I didn't buy it at all. I'm kind of shocked that I have this much of a disconnect with a representation of Los Angeles that resonates with so many others...

Still, I actually really dig the style of films like this: all the artificial intersections and threads...(Altman-esque! A director you either love or hate -- I love!) But I think the style was wholly inappropriate for the subject matter, and contributed to the sense of ummmmm what planet is this supposed to be taking place on feeling I had all through both viewings. Or maybe it was not inappropriate for the subject matter -- maybe it just plain wasn't well-executed. :shrug: It was pretty, though, I'll give it that! I loved the shots of the valley. Although I'm a sucker for pretty valley shots -- because I loves me my valley. All the people in it were pretty, too. Maybe a little too pretty? Again, I didn't find that realistic. This film maybe needed some gritty, not pretty. Only the Middle-Eastern shopkeeper looked real. Oh, and Matt Dillon's dad. More of that and less of Sandra Bullock's carefully-ironed hair, please. I know that was supposed to illustrate the rigidity of her character, but I just hate that visual hammer-on-the-head manipulation.

Bottom line for me: it didn't succeed. Two viewings. I tried. And I just felt "meh" about it. As I said to the Mr.: A Good Rental. I enjoyed the pretty. I was reminded that I miss Altman. I like my fantasy clearly labeled as such. Won't be buying it.

EDIT: The next post better be all about how I'm wrong, wrong, WRONG!
__________________
$ DO || !$ DO ; TRY
TRY: COMMAND NOT FOUND

Last edited by lizziebith : 02-27-2006 at 11:24 AM.
lizziebith is offline   Submit to Quotes Reply With Quote
 


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:49 AM.


Lunarpages.com Web Hosting

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.