CRASH - tricking audiences into thinking it's a good movie since May 2005

[BakeTheMooCow]

Paul Haggis manages to squeeze every drop of humanity out of this mediocre, forgettable movie that only works because of the mostly hard-working cast -- yet Crash continues to seduce critics and audiences, JoBlo being the latest to sing its praises.

It has all the makings of a moving, raw, gritty look at a difficult subject. Except at it's core, it has no heart. It's an empty shell full of contrivances and predictable speechifying and one-dimensional characters. Despite Don Cheadle and Terrence Howard giving 110% percent, they fail to make an impact because Haggis is intent on spreading the intersecting plot as thin as possible, a failed attempt to mimic Magnolia and Short Cuts. Where those movies worked because of the 3-hour+ running times which gave enough time to allot equal time to all it's characters, Crash clocks in at just under 2 hours, scrambling to make Sandra Bullock's Jean go from a vile racist to a woman transformed in about seven minutes on screen.

The movie shows no understanding of actual bigotry, with most of the dialogue played for laughs or lifted off statistical surveys giving no overarching sense of realism whatsoever. There are numerous coincidences which could be acceptable, except they function as plot devices to give everyone an insta-realization of their racist tendencies. The script gives no explanation to events that caused them to develop such feelings in the first place, which is not only inaccurate but also insulting because the filmmakers assume everyone has racist bones in their bodies and all we need are life-changing moments for us to recognize this. Sorry, not everyone shares that viewpoint and I would have appreciated some exposition on how these characters came to be the way they were.

Finally, a word on the frustrating direction, packed with melodramatic slow-motion sequences and a heavy handed Eastern score meant to extract every tear from your eye whether you like it or not. This movie is nothing more than a dismal after-school special and it surprises me that more people don't see through it.

I edited the title because it was phrased badly and would detract from the actual rant.. that Crash is a terrible movie

[Raoul Duke]

God, I can understand when someone doesn't like a movie, but when they say that others have been "tricked" if they liked it is just fucking stupid and annoying.

I found it to be overall powerful, had meaning, and was quite well acted. So I guess i've been had, eh?

It's your opinion, just yours, so don't even feel like you're mildly superior to me or anyone else that liked CRASH.

[BakeTheMooCow]

By 'tricking', I mean a movie that tries too hard to be powerful, emotionally involving and life-altering (think typical Oscar bait), but at it's center, is void of any merits. I don't think I'm smarter than anyone who liked the film.

[CMAGUS]

I thought the film was rather good myself.It could of had a little more but it was hardly garbage at all

[Raoul Duke]

Originally posted by BakeTheMooCow
By 'tricking', I mean a movie that tries too hard to be powerful, emotionally involving and life-altering (think typical Oscar bait), but at it's center, is void of any merits. I don't think I'm smarter than anyone who liked the film.

Ah, I see..I just got that kind of impression from the thread title and all.

But, I just don't really see it as the typical Oscar bait...If it does win any, I can't really relate it to other past winners and say they're similar.

Was this movie hyped up for you at all, and didn't meet expectations? Or did you just really not get into it at all...I seen it a while back having not heard too too much about it.

But all in all, wouldn't you say it's a rather good directorial debut from Haggis?

[BorderEevilIII]

***MAY CONTAIN SPOILERS & REFERECES!***



I finally got to see this!
Crash did somehow made me think.....
The movie does stress the theme RACIAL RELATIONS!
But yes the way Haggis presents the movie does look like somethin PT Anderson would do. What I got out Crash is that each actor will be affected by encountering each other. Will it be something good or will it be bad? Majority of the actors were pissed/angry you name it and midway they somehow decide that they do not wanna be this way anymore and turns over a new leaf. Others were less fortunate or did not gain anything positive. Crash was not thee best gritting movie like Boyz in The Hood but Crash IMO did leave some kind of mark me thinks....

[thedudeman69]

Originally posted by BakeTheMooCow
By 'tricking', I mean a movie that tries too hard to be powerful, emotionally involving and life-altering (think typical Oscar bait), but at it's center, is void of any merits. I don't think I'm smarter than anyone who liked the film.

God, everybody is making this movie out to be a shitfest. Magnolia was the same thing but that sucked because it was boring as hell. Crash had excitement because of all the vibrant and great acting by the cast.
Besides, in December I bet you will be saying the same shit about Cinderella Man .

[bigred760]

This is my rant on your rant:

How does it "seduce" critics and audiences? Maybe people really liked it for what it was - a character driven movie about racial tensions among several people whose lives end up intertwined.. You're obviously in the minority as far as who didn't like it and yet you have to bash critics and audiences, making them seem like drones and dopes not being able to "see" through what this movie is trying to deliver. Maybe you're just not able to see what this movie has to offer.

I don't think Bullock's character is a "vile racist" but a woman who's been through a traumatic experience and wants to blame somebody. She obviously has a change of heart at the end - it's called character development. It also negates your "one-dimensional character" remark. While it wasn't seven minutes (I get it, you were exaggerating), that amount of "screen time" can be an eternity in the chronology of the movie.

I liked the movie - 8/10 - and I wasn't seduced by anything in it. I found it to be a good character driven movie that dealt with a serious issue that is still affects society. I haven't seen Magnolia or Short Cuts so I can't comment on those.

But don't assume that because everybody else liked it and you didn't means that the director has some special power to make people like his movie that affected everybody but you. 'Cuz that would be a movie I'd like to see too.

[BakeTheMooCow]

Originally posted by Raoul Duke
Was this movie hyped up for you at all, and didn't meet expectations? Or did you just really not get into it at all...I seen it a while back having not heard too too much about it.

But all in all, wouldn't you say it's a rather good directorial debut from Haggis?

It was hyped up certainly, but I saw it very early in its run before people could skyrocket my expectations. It's not a good directorial debut at all. The tricks Haggis used were tired and ineffective. He certainly packages the product beautifully, but if only more people studied the contents, they might realize how lacking it is.

I don't think Bullock's character is a "vile racist" but a woman who's been through a traumatic experience and wants to blame somebody. She obviously has a change of heart at the end - it's called character development. It also negates your "one-dimensional character" remark. While it wasn't seven minutes (I get it, you were exaggerating), that amount of "screen time" can be an eternity in the chronology of the movie.

I'm not exaggerating. She is not on screen for more than 10 minutes. She has a change of heart, yes. But so does every other character, and each experiences the exact incident that would spark that transformation. Nothing happens except to push the flimsy plot toward its eventual predictable conclusion. That is weak storytelling.

[BorderEevilIII]

Sandra Bullock's role was thee most different I have seen since she shot to fame w/ Speed back in the mid 90's. Majority of the roles she played was more in the "goody goody" category. And her role in Crash was something different I have NEVER seen. She may say that she is NOT rascist but non-verbal behavior will make you look like you are one as seen in the movie.

[bigred760]

Originally posted by BakeTheMooCow
I'm not exaggerating. She is not on screen for more than 10 minutes. She has a change of heart, yes. But so does every other character, and each experiences the exact incident that would spark that transformation. Nothing happens except to push the flimsy plot toward its eventual predictable conclusion. That is weak storytelling.

Ryan Phillippe doesn't. Ludakris doesn't. Pretty sure Don Cheadle doesn't.
She does have a change of heart, but probably not because of her maid being of a different race; it's probably because she hated feeling like she did.

[Mr-Blonde]

Originally posted by BakeTheMooCow
I'm not exaggerating. She is not on screen for more than 10 minutes. She has a change of heart, yes. But so does every other character, and each experiences the exact incident that would spark that transformation. Nothing happens except to push the flimsy plot toward its eventual predictable conclusion. That is weak storytelling.

This is my biggest single problem with the film. A lot of the character development is weak as in the case with Sandra Bullock. Couple that with the unlikely things that occured in the film and the nonstop coincidences that happened throughout it all robbed the film of any power it could have had. It just seemed too contrived-- as has been mentioned, like an afterschool special on race relations.

[bigred760]

I don't have a problem with people not liking the movie; different people have different opinions and like different things. I just didn't like how Bake said that the movie is tricking and seducing people into liking it. You didn't like the movie, fine. Just don't hate other people for liking it.