Roger Ebert really likes-likes Crash

Perhaps the "issue" at the heart of "Crash" is just too close to Roger Ebert's heart for him to see clearly. The laborious solemnity of the film, the contrived nature of its interlocking storylines, the coincidences, and the portrayal of L.A. as a place in which no human interaction can take place without some kind of strong undercurrent of racial tension... these things took a sledgehammer to my suspension of disbelief. Magnolia, for all of its coincidences, at least ADMITTED they were coincidences, and furthermore, PT Anderson gave his characters personalities and lives that extended beyond the narrow lines of their overlapping conflicts. I believed those people existed, but not Haggis's characters.

I respect what Haggis wants to accomplish with Crash. I respect the cast, who do good work. I just wish I had been drawn in by it. Sure, it has the power to provoke rewarding discussions and to awaken us to our own blindspots. But the way it does those things is too deliberate to allow for any mystery or to make for rewarding return-visits.

That's my experience with the film, anyway. Having said that, I can't say I think the other Best Picture nominees are much better. It's a really lousy year. What we're seeing is a competition of hot-button conversations, not an assessment of artmaking. Otherwise, we would see films like "The New World" and "A History of Violence" in the winners' circle.

If "Crash" wins, I won't complain. There's more there to admire than in "Brokeback Mountain," which is a decent Ang Lee film but certainly not his best. (I'm a big Ang Lee fan: "The Ice Storm" is one of my all-time favorites.) It's the cultural conversation and hype that's propelling Lee to victory this time. He did good work, but it's a small achievement compared to several other films.

Jeffrey

Reply

I'm actually writing a column as we speak about the sudden, problematic resurgence of Crash, that (cross your fingers) should be up by morning.

Jeffrey, you're absolutely right that both HoV and The New World are far superior to anything that made the Best Picture final four, but it's no surprise that neither sucessfully grabbed the zeitgeist. I think Crash is really, really awful, but its nominations are far less frustrating than Ebert's endless fawning, and strenuous, and ultimately sad, attempts to defend it. Really, the less said about this Dickens stuff, the better.

Reply

Well, the problem is that Ebert just can't tell the difference between a real work of art by Charles Dickens and a tired derivative load of cliches by Paul Haggis. Of course, Mr. Ebert also referred to Million Dollar Baby as a masterpiece.

Reply

I must disagree with all of the above. I think in order for Haggis to get his point across he HAD to make the characters into caricatures. Displaying so many viewpoints on American racial relations in one movie cannot be done with nuance and subtlety. It was bigger than life for the purposes of telling a compelling and thought provoking movie. 'Message' movies and biopics about bigger than life historical figures often contain convienience and coincidence. I think a lot of the situations and the characters reactions, although a bit aggrandized, rang true. Really, really provocative and compelling.

On the other hand, William Hurts portrayal of a gangster made my stomach hurt. Loved the movie, but I just couldn't get past William Hurt.

just my opinion and I know everybody has one...

Reply

I loved Crash too- I'm rooting for it this year, the first time I've seen all 5 Best Picture nominees. The plot is a bit more stylistic than the standard Hollywood boilerplate, which I like. I'm surprised Jeffrey doesn't see it as "artmaking," but Crash isn't for everyone. I thought Brokeback Mountain was incredibly overrated.

I'm not sure Dickens is the first person I'd think of after seeing Crash. I can understand where Ebert is coming from though. A Christmas Carol has a very contrived and perhaps manipulative plot, (come on, the guy's poor employee's son is a Bible-quoting cripple?!) with the focus on character examination rather than a believable plot.

Reply

Well, yeah, the characters are caricatures and the audience is spoonfed cliches by the dozen, but it's the twists that drew me in - everytime I thought I knew where yet another cliche was going to take me, Haggis spun it around to show how wrong my presumptions were. It's how the movie gets its message across.

Subtle, no. Realistic and uncontrived, no. But entertaining and thought-provoking, heck yes!

Reply

Well, I seem to be in the minority here in finding CRASH to be thought-provoking only in that it provoked thoughts about how certain films manage to pull the wool over the eyes of certain audiences by pretending to deal with BIG ISSUES like Racism. I don't see how anyone who has ever seriously read Dickens can possibly see a comparison between Dickens and Haggis that isn't a serious insult to Dickens art.

Reply

There are at least 3 'wow' cinematic moments in Crash that make it worth seeing. They will last with me a long time and my hat is off to the director. Crash is not a 'feel good' movie. But, it does move you and it is definitely one you want to see on the big screen.

Reply

Three quarters into the movie, my friends and I couldn't stop laughing as the ridiculous "coincidences" piled up one on the next.

To the people who think this absurdity was necessary to get a point across, I would have to say the point was made in the first fifteen minutes.

To see the same technique in a GOOD movie, rent "Grand Canyon."

Reply

OK, let me get this straight. In order to show I really know how to appreciate a film, I have to say I preferred snoozing through New World and nodding through Brokeback to being interested and entertained by "Crash?" Sorry, no can do. I'm sure there are a lot of literature buffs who turn their noses up at Dickens, but I like my books to keep me awake, too.

Reply

"Crash" was by far the best movie I have seen in a long, long time. The acting was superb, but, mostly each segment made you think. Yes, it might have seemed contrived, but the issues covered are real.
It wasn't just about race, but how peoples stereotypes of other peoples prevents them from relating to stereotypes instead of groups.

Frankly, I think it was underrated and I doubt if it will win any awards, which is a shame. It deserves recognition.

Reply

To "Haggis" should be a verb meaning to pander self-righteously. For our Million Dollar Baby lessons he Haggised feminism and right-to-die. For Crash he Haggised that we're all guilty of racism and have no clue how deeply it is ingrained in us until he Haggises us about it. I only hope that the Haggising in his scripts is due to cynicism and an understanding that it is the only way to get a film greenlighted today. If his next film is on McCarthyism and Islam I'll know it's cynicism that motivates to Haggis so.

Reply

As I am currently reading "Great Expectations," to my children, I can absolutely see where Ebert is coming from--contrived it exactly how I felt, but remember folks every person who sees the film has a different level of intelligence and experience. In this case Haggis chose to "hit," the viewer over the head to raise awareness of the dangers of prejudice and racism.

In regard to Brokeback Mountain, I am hard pressed to compare this to Ang Lee's other work, because he directed the film, he did not write the story. The story that unfolds envelops the viewer to understand the relationship of these characters and how their choices affect others. I think the understated nature of the film, with its dramatic moments, illustrates the frustration these people felt, and displays the love that they shared. Direction notwithstanding, this is a milestone for American cinema.

Alex

Reply

" crash " was like a two hour after school special..you knew nothing more by the end of it than you knew before except the EXACT lesson you were supposed to learn because it had been spelled out for you in BOLD TYPE...at least movies like " Magnolia " and several of Robert Altman's films have a sense of mystery about them, not everything is sealed and finished at the end and you remember more the character's than the lessons.." CRASH " felt like school work, connecting the dots, and the connections were way too easy to make...movies with serious lessons and issues shouldnt be this easy to follow, not if you want to keep your viewer thinking about it afterwards....I'd take " Traffic " over " Crash " anyday...

Reply

Wait a minute wait a minute! The solemn beauty of "Crash" is not justified by calling it a movie about racism. Racism is the cliched overlay put on by the most superficial of critiques. The real underlying message is the human condition in a world fraught with the angst of the soul struggling to survive, and wrestling with moral choices. The complex interweaving of lives and the results of our actions and interactions is the where the heartbreak and the inspiration of this movie lie.

Reply

It really is sad to see so many people blind to the art and brilliance that is Crash. I agree 100% with Ebert's analogy of Haggis to Dickens. What makes Crash so brilliant is that it goes full force rather than remain at a shallow end (i.e. Brokeback Mountain). I personally feel that Crash is going to win Oscar night and upset the favored Brokeback Mountain. My greatest reasoning for this is that Crash has remained strong ever since it came out in theatres in May. Rarely do films get nominated if they were released so early and yet Crash has. Why would the Oscars remember it if they weren't planning on giving it the gold? Brokeback Mountain, as I've stated before in other blogs, is this year's Sideways. It seemed like 95% of columnists thought Sideways was going to win and that it should becuase it was "different". Then came Million Dollar Baby and completely beat it out. That's right, the BETTER film beat out the favored one. Just because Brokeback Mountain is "different" (which really it's not bc Far From Heaven is very similar and much better) does not mean it is the BEST FILM of the year. I feel that in Anne Proulx's short story of Brokeback Mountain that there definitely is a story there however the way the film is made and directed to me didn't seem like they really figured out what that "story" was. It is good in an "okay" sense but certainly not great. I've noticed various entertainment magazines, that have been covering the upcoming Oscars, have been completely disregarding Crash as an option to win. Could this perhaps be bc these magzines feel threatened that their favored Brokeback Mountain is going to get the rug swept under it? The hype about Brokeback Mountain is quickly fading and it only came out about 3 months ago. Just as Sideways' hype faded last year. And yet Crash which came out about ten months ago has still been remembered and stayed strong regardless of the bashing it has faced from those that don't get it. I am expecting Crash to take the big prize Oscar night because like last year and pretty much since A Beautiful Mind won, the BEST FILM has won.

Reply

Wanted to say that I agree that CRASH is a very thought-provoking movie. I was reading a few comments on other sites about it early this morning. I do see where the characters are very extreme. One minute they are being racist and cruel in nature, while the next you see them at their weakest and most vulnerable. I think that it is a wonderful juxtaposition. But, it is does have a very empty finale. I don't feel that the movie will win on Oscar night. I do, however, think that Matt Dillon's performance was very unique. I would have to confess that having seen only 2 or 3 movies this past year I would reserve my judgment of any Oscar contenders. I would have to see them all to be just. CRASH is nonetheless still worth seeing and the performances are 'A' grade.

Reply

I agree with Brooke and Kevin (#12 and #13). Ebert is right on with the Dickens analogy. Crash is the finest movie to come along in a very very long time. It is a story about redemption as much as racism.

Reply

Kim, regarding your comments on the movie "Crash". Who are you? Based upon your analysis of the movie, since you admit you hav'nt seen it, anything else you would have to say is meaningless if not worthless. This is my opinion since I've never actually read anything else you have ever written.

Reply

Don't feel bad Kim, I never read "Mobey Dick."

Reply