Jump to content






Photo

Crash: Remarkably intelligent film



[indent]People are randomly colliding particles, fired through the accelerator of modern life, hitting at high speed, splitting, firing off fragments that carve trace patterns on the lives of those with whom they interact. That's Crash, a compelling and intelligent film about how an unconnected group of people interact in the events of 24 hours in Los Angeles.

Unlike most pallid Hollywood output, Crash is thoughtful, challenging and at times intellectually disturbing. It's not one story, rather a dozen, intertwined chapters from many lives that all intersect in one single day. There's a mix of passion, poignancy, jealousy, bigotry, vanity, hipocrisy and innocence spread unevenly through the characters, almost everyone showing a facet of weakness through which we see them. Sometimes more.

Crash is also a series of stories of redemption, and of failure. An angry racist risks his life to save the life of a black woman he assaulted previously. A pampered and arrogant rich woman finds in her Spanish housemaid more friendship, loyalty and affection than in her rich friends. A good cop who tries to uphold his values in a bigoted world becomes an killer of an innocent black man he tries to help. An unrepentant black car thief faces the choice of wealth or humanity. But that simplifies the film more than it deserves. And it's only a small portion of the interwoven tales in the film.

Perhaps the most immediate message is that nothing is easy. In Crash, as in real life, there are no simple answers, no cut-and-dry solutions. Life sucks, no matter what you do. But sometimes we can rise above the crap and, for that fleeting moment, be redeemed. Or destroyed. Sometimes no matter how hard we try, no matter how much we strive, it ends in the crapper. Or so Crash suggests, at least in some of the tales.

Not everything is fully explained or completed. There are a lot of unresolved threads, stories uncompleted. The audience is left wondering at the end about many elements that we've been shown. This isn't a fairy tale; it's a slice of life, and as such doesn't fit into those carefully scripted films that wrap everything up so cleanly at the end. Still, one can't help wonder while the credits roll up what happened to the young cop? To the old man with the prostate problem? To the Iranian shopkeeper? Did the car thief change his life?

Crash seemed to me to be almost British in its style and portrayal of characters. Not everyone is believable, of course, and sometimes the characters are typically overdone or underdone in American film fashion. The DA (Brendan Fraser) is a cardboard cutout. Officer Hanson (Ryan Philippe) was wooden. But overall, the cast did very well at portraying real people. Hollywood could take a page from the British and try casting actors who aren't Beautiful People in the leads now and then.

Crash is an adult film, but has little sexual content (only a brief moment of nudity between Don Cheadle and Jennifer Esposito). Cheadle is the only character I recall who smokes. While perhaps realistic in the scope of the film, having Cheadle a non-smoker would have been more consistent with the other characters. The film also portrays another addict (aside from tobacco) - heroin - but it's a minor character. Cheadle's addiction is one of those unresolved failures in the film, I suppose.

I recommend Crash to anyone who wants a movie that demands attention, avoids simple classification and makes you think. It's provocative and that makes it good in my eyes. Four out of five stars, despite Cheadle's smoking.
[/indent]



I'd give this movie a rare 5 stars. I can't be bothered to pay attention to which characters smoke in movies, but the one time I remember smoking was Cheadle's character, during the following exchange:

JENNIFER ESPOSITO: You want a lesson? I'll give you a lesson. How about a geography lesson? My father's Puerto Rican. My mother's from El Salvador. Neither one of those is Mexico.

DON CHEADLE: Well, then, I guess the big mystery is, who gathered all those remarkably different cultures together and taught them all how to park their cars on their lawns?

I don't know, but I don't think you mind a guy smoking while making that comment.

One thing I have found mildly disturbing -- on more than one occasion when declaring that I really liked the movie, I have gotten a response like "What's the big deal? It's about racism and stereotyping. I learned nothing." -- as if you must be self-righteous to appreciate the movie.
Five stars, eh? I've wrestled with rating systems for years - I used to review film and music in the local newspaper among other dutuies - and rarely, very rarely these days, give anything a five. I have a modest collection of film on DVD and wouldn't even rate most of my favourites a five. Well, maybe Young Frankenstein.... but not even Kurosawa or Hitchcock can rate many fives. To Citizen Kane I give only 4.

I pay attention to several cultural markers in most films, trying to determine if the movie is a covert platform for propaganda, for product placement, for social, religious or moral views. Smoking is an easy one to pick up on because it's so obvious. The question I always ask myself: is the smoking a critical component of character portrayal (and it can be argued it is in films like Crash and Pulp Fiction), or a greasy insertion of tobacco use into the film in an effort to influence viewers by pretending it's harmless, casual and sexy?

Generally, smoking has become one of those elements that portrays a villian: good guys/gals are portrayed as smoke free. Like the gunfighter in the black hat you immediately knew was evil, the smoker identifies the crook or the killer in many films today. I become fretful when the protagonists are also smokers, not least because it blurs the distinction between opposing values and views, but it also sends a message to the viewer (one might call a film where protagonists smoke little more than a 90-minute commerical).

Film, and its offspring TV, has a huge influence on daily life. People see their Tinsel Town heroes driving SUVs, and they rush out and mortgage their lives to buy one so they too can be Tom Cruise. They see Don Cheadle smoking and they see a suave, sophisticated, cool, sexy and intelligent guy unruffled by the horrors of tobacco. Hey, if Don can smoke, and still be cool smelling like a week-old ashtray, so can I.

Corporations, governments, religious and political groups are all savvy to the use of film to propel their causes, promote their products. I'm wary of these things and find they intrude on my watching pleasure, they interfere with my entertainment, my immersion. It's not the clumsy efforts to promote a political agenda under the guise of entertainment that worry mean - most people aren't swayed by such comic efforts as Red Dawn for example. It's the more subtle messages that concern me; the "casual" dialogue that carefully builds the argument towards a particular message, the sly product placement that you ignore during the action but later find yourself gravitating towards the aisles of running shoes because an image of a brand-name show sticks in the corner of your mind and you can't quite remember why.

I suppose I'm more critical, more likely to dissect a film than most.

Aside from that, I really liked Crash, enough to want to see it again and try to find what I missed the first time. The dialogue was good enough to make me think it was British (or had British writers).

While it has threads of racism and stereotyping throughout, I found it wove many other elements, not the least being the synchronicity of people's lives and how they all interacted outside the obvious connections.
Yeah, 5 stars. I don't need perfection in a movie for it to rate 5 stars, nor perfection in a tequila to rate it a 10. I find that if I reserve the 5-star ranking for only a select few movies, then the rest of the good ones end up being shades of 4 stars. So maybe Adaptation is a 4.3, No Somos Nadie a 4.1, and Eternal Sunshine a 4.4? Too difficult. Bell-curves don't really apply, because most of the drivel out there belongs on the far left. I prefer a relatively even distribution.

And as far as smoking in Crash goes, I would further claim that one of the themes in the movie was that people are capable of both good and bad, so it's not such a flawed concept to show Cheadle smoking. Could be wishful thinking though.

And finally, yes indeed, Crash was written and directed by Paul Haggis, born in London, Ontario, Canada. This is abundantly clear if you watch the movie with the director's commentary turned on, which is a relatively interesting feature (though not so interesting that I made it more than 30 minutes in...).
Just a note on rating... I agree: it becomes silly if you start shading ratings so finely for a single person's review. Unless you're working a database with a larger sample (like an online review system), there's no need for such complexity. I prefer 1-5 with half-stars to really make it a ten-step rating. But I like the difference between a 2 and 3, say, in a five-step, where it's not as obvious in a ten-step system.

And it's not that I don't give our five stars - but I try to reserve them for what I feel are truly outstanding, films that rise above the crowd and have both repeat quality (you can watch them many times and still enjoy them, or at least find something valuable and enjoyable within) and longevity (the film will still be worth watching in 10, 20 even 50 years).

My 'fives' at the moment include Casablanca, Young Frankenstein, Hunchback of Notre Dame (Charles Laughton), Fiddler on the Roof, Lawrence of Arabia, the first Star Wars, Hard Day's Night, and Ice Age.
As a result of the recommendations here, I watched the movie last night with my wife, my adult daughter and my sin-inlaw. As promised, we all enjoyed it very much.

A quick comment about smoking in movies. As a former two pack a day, 30 year smoker, I find it interesting how often movies try to pass off obvious non-smokers as smokers. Watching these people take a big mouthful of smoke, hold it and then let it almost drift out of their mouths would be funny if it were not distracting. Unfortunately it is also distracting to my wife, a lifelong non-smoker, since I can never seem to resist commenting, "They're not a real smoker."

A Man Called Papa

Facebook

Latest Entries

Latest Comments

Daily chess puzzle

Search My Blog

Word of the day

May 2013

S M T W T F S
   1234
567891011
12131415161718
192021222324 25
262728293031 

Latest Visitors