The polarization of "Crash"

[LSPoorEeyorick]

No, I'm not talking about the James Spader/Holly Hunter sexfest, though surely that polarizes, too. I'm talking about the Paul Haggis film that is an Oscar dark horse this year.

The film, which is a talking-piece about racism in Los Angeles (and at large), seems to me to elicit one of two responses.

Response one: "Beautiful! Thoughtful! Touched me deeply and made me think!"

Response two: "Hated it."

I've only heard those responses from the people I've talked to, and I'm curious to find out why it so polarizes its audience. Have you seen Crash? What did you think? Did it move you, or did you despise it? Or did you split the difference?

There are a lot of hard questions rolling around in my head. Do people who love it love it because of its treatment of race? Do people who hate it hate it because of its treatment of race?

I have problems with the film, and they are mainly threefold. First, I tend to dislike films about groups of people tenuously connected by coincidence, especially if it's a very large group of people and you don't get much time with anyone. Second, I tend to dislike films that are about an "issue," instead of about characters, where everything is fed to you in one conversation after another instead of letting the audience masticate their own thoughts on the piece. And third: the film, written by a self-admitted hater of Los Angeles, is a depiction of a LA that seems nothing like my own city. And I've been to a lot of parts of this city. I've dated a black man from Compton, and had no racial conflicts to speak of. I live in Thai Town and I speak to my Korean neighbors. I work in the Valley alongside people of all kinds of ethnic origins without struggle, and I hug them, I touch people, I walk alongside of them all the time. Crash's LA is not the city I know and love, and I was offended by that.

But I have been digging deep to ask questions of myself. Am I being racist by finding the film's depicted racism to be exaggeraged? Because my experience is different that Haggis'? Because he was in a car jacking and I wasn't? Because I am middle-class and others aren't? Probably, yes. But then, I feel like the movie's point was that everyone is racist to some degree, and everybody needs to keep that in check. And my response to this is: "And? What else is new?"

I am anxious to hear other people's thoughts on the matter.

[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??



.

[MouseWife]

I loved the movie.

I normally don't like too much stories that skip around but this worked out. I loved how it all worked together.

That said. Hmm. It did make me think about my own racism. I think that while people do get along there is a definite bond between races and also levels of wealth {or lack of}. I know my neighbor was upset that a Hispanic bus driver went against what she said happened in an incident telling me 'And he's one of us, too'.

And Oh my gosh, Terrance Howard was fantastic. Made me rent 'Hustle & Flow'. Great movie. Felt a little awkward when my friends asked what it was about 'A pimp and his ho's'. Won't spoil that one.

But, yeah, I was told by someone 'Eh, what's the big deal? They act like this movie gives some revelation. The cast was on Oprah like it was a big deal.' I told his guy 'You didn't see the movie, did you?' And no he hadn't.

[€uroMeinke]

Let me know when we can talk about the James Spader/Holly Hunter sexfest - that scene in the Mercedes dealership was hot - oh sorry, haven't seen the remake.

[Gemini Cricket]

'Crash' is not a good movie.

I understand what the movie was trying to say, but it just didn't say it very well. The characters were weak, the dialogue was unrealistic and the acting was terrible (but I will lay the blame on this with the director, I have seen all of these actors in better roles, so maybe I should say this movie was poorly directed).

First and foremost, the film felt like it was written and directed by two people who have never experienced racism firsthand nor seem to know what it actually feels like to be on the receiving end of it. (There's a wonderful scene in the not-so-good 'Poetic Justice' where Maya Angelou and another older actress berate Regina King's character when the late-teens King says she's in love. One of the older women says, 'What do you know about love?') My question to these filmmakers is 'What do you know about racism?'

Now I'm not saying one should be a minority to write/direct a movie about racism. But what I'm saying is that it helps to know your subject matter. That is why 'Do the Right Thing' accomplished a lot more with fewer characters, a simpler story and smaller budget.

First off, in one of the first scenes we see Jennifer Esposito's chastize an Asian lady for the way she drives. Anyone in a high profile position would never, ever talk to someone like that and expect to keep their job. Yes, she might talk that way behind the lady's back, but never to her face. Sorry, that would never happen. And if it did, that person would have never gotten as high as she did in her dept without being exposed as someone idiotic early on in her career.

Secondly, Matt Dillon's character is beyond liking the moment the frisking scene occurrs. The director did get an effective performance in this scene from Thandie Newton. But it was so good that nothing, and I mean nothing, Dillon's character could do in the film could possibly redeem his character. Including saving her life later on in the film, including helping his father take a dump...

The dialogue in this film was so unconvincing that it became laughable. No one in LA, no one in the world talks like the people talk in this film.
At one point, William Fitchner's character says, 'Black people, huh?' in a wink wink knowing way to Don Cheadle. They were illustrating his bigotry, yes. But who talks like that? Someone might say, 'Typical' like it just slipped out. Oops. But what he said was diliberate and hokey. (Not to mention that he says it to an African American.)

And this happens throughout the film!

ie. An owner of a gun store calls Shaun Toub's character 'Osama' and kicks him out. Um, if he didn't like people from the Middle East, wouldn't he just refuse to help them period? But he does it well into a sale. Wrong. Not only this, but after that his daughter buys a gun from him anyway. Anyone who was treated like that would not buy anything from this man.

ie. Brendan Fraser's character stomps around saying, 'I'm the District Attorney of Los Angeles!' The script should show us that not have the character announce it. Someone should introduce him as the DA, not have the character tell us. That's just lame. (What's more is that Brendan Fraser is a 'George of the Jungle', he is an 'Encino Man', he is a Warner Brothers Security Guard... but a DA? I don't buy it.)

ie. Ludacris: 'I ran over a China Man.' Who says 'China Man'?

ie. Sandra Bullock's character is unaware of anyone else existing in her universe. To totally go off on a guy that's in the room without talking to him is weird.

ie. Bullock's maid's performance made her seem like English is her second language (yes, we get it) but also that she's somewhat mentally challenged.

The deal with racist people is that most of their racist tendencies are never overtly displayed to the people they are targeting. It happens inconspicuously. It's a snide whisper to a friend, it's a defiant look at someone, it's not listening to someone, etc. Yes, the in-your-face attitude comes out in anger directly to the target, but according to this film everyone in LA is a volcano and everyone targets everyone all the time. If that were the case, in anger management terms, the venting would be healthy for the venter and the victims would learn to just get over it just to cope. Racism is a problem because a lot of it is covert. If it were out in the open more, it would be easy to target and avoid the racist. Racist people aren't always out in the open.
(I also believe everyone has it in them to be racist. The one thing I agree with the filmmakers on. There are good and bad people in every color.)

And if this post weren't long enough already, I'd like to say that the scene between the locksmith and his daughter in her bedroom was fantastic. Great performances.

Oh, and Ryan Phillipe looked like he was twelve wearing a cop uniform...

I don't mind the intertwining stories and characters. It's cool. But you have to buy the premise first. If you don't, none of it works.

[Ponine]

I am actually in the middle for this movie. I didnt love it, I didnt hate it... it disturbed me, and it made me laugh. That said...

Originally Posted by Gemini Cricket

Secondly, Matt Dillon's character is beyond liking the moment the frisking scene occurrs. The director did get an effective performance in this scene from Thandie Newton. But it was so good that nothing, and I mean nothing, Dillon's character could do in the film could possibly redeem his character.

Agreed. Though I so identified with Thandie Newton I cried almost everytime she was on screen, and that scene killed me, and I had to walk away.

Originally Posted by Gemini Cricket

ie. Brendan Fraser's character stomps around saying, 'I'm the District Attorney of Los Angeles!' The script should show us that not have the character announce it. Someone should introduce him as the DA, not have the character tell us. That's just lame. (What's more is that Brendan Fraser is a 'George of the Jungle', he is an 'Encino Man', he is a Warner Brothers Security Guard... but a DA? I don't buy it.)

ie. Ludacris: 'I ran over a China Man.' Who says 'China Man'?

ie. Sandra Bullock's character is unaware of anyone else existing in her universe. To totally go off on a guy that's in the room without talking to him is weird.

ie. Bullock's maid's performance made her seem like English is her second language (yes, we get it) but also that she's somewhat mentally challenged.

wow...I disagree with you...

Brendan Fraser... YOu dont buy that? Am I the only one that does stand up in my cube, or walk outside and say loudy.. G@@ Dammn it... I am the payroll tech. I am a payroll tech, I know what I am doing....
I was sold on that speech

China man... I still hear that. A lot

Bullock... nope, I've seen people do that, heard about it, and done it myself.

Bullocks house keeper... nope I didnt get that impression at all.
I saw a woman who was afraid of overstepping her bounds who has been treated as a second class citizen by this woman, when in fact she knows thats not the way it has to be.
She wanted to help, but knew that she would not be allowed because of the prior history with Bullock.

[Gemini Cricket]

Originally Posted by Ponine

Bullock... nope, I've seen people do that, heard about it, and done it myself.

Yes, but I doubt very highly that Jana Cooley (Steve Cooley's wife) would act the same way in the same circumstance even after being carjacked/mugged.

Bullock was so foul, why would anyone want to work for her?

Nope, didn't buy that at all...

[innerSpaceman]

Sorry, G.C., but you and I simply did not see the same movie.


If you think racism is only displayed covertly, than perhaps it's because of your own limited experience with it. Now that you're living in a bigger city, maybe you'll see some of it in its purer form.

I think this is a case of you simply not buying into the premise and style of the movie, and nothing worked for you from that moment on. That's perfectly legitimate - - - but hardly the definitive truth of this widely acclaimed film. Many others had no problem buying into the film's premise and style and, for them, everything worked from that moment on.

You're opinion is as valid as anyone else's, and it contributes to the polarizing factor which makes my enjoyment of 'Crash' even greater. So, um, thanks for hating it.


btw, where does anyone get the idea that Matt Dillon's character is supposed to be "redeemed" in the eyes of the audience? I think his character is supposed to be given some dimension, not receive forgiveness for what a vile person he remains ... despite good works as a cop and as a son.


I'll grant that subtlety was not in any way the style of this film. But why would it have to be? (I wanted a giant hamster to ravage New York in the new King Kong, but most people seemed fine with the same old giant ape .... sometimes you have to accept the style that the filmmaker chooses, and judge it on those terms rather than on standards that simply don't apply.)

[Gemini Cricket]

Originally Posted by innerSpaceman

If you think racism is only displayed covertly, than perhaps it's because of your own limited experience with it.

Don't assume too much, iSm. If I didn't know you, I'd call you out of line. I'm not going to qualify your quote with a laundry list. And don't expect to see a smilie of any sort after this sentence.



This film is widely acclaimed because no one has had the guts to touch this subject in a long while. Someone did, and that's great, but that someone didn't do it well.

[innerSpaceman]

Um, Hawaiian discrimination? If it's true ... and I cannot doubt your word ... that's a new one on me.




(oh, and if it's the homo thing ... well, that's not exactly racism, but I'll grant some similarities)


Or are we talking racism from the giving end???