XIXAX Film Forum

Film Discussion => The Vault => Topic started by: Finn on April 20, 2005, 05:02:29 PM

Title: CRASH
Post by: Finn on April 20, 2005, 05:02:29 PM
I couldn't find a thread for this movie, so redirect me if you must. This looks really good, sort of Magnolia-esque. The posters and trailer look promising at least. It'll probably be either really good or really pretentious.

Posters:
http://www.impawards.com/2005/crash.html

Trailer:
http://www.apple.com/trailers/lions_gate/crash/
Title: CRASH
Post by: SHAFTR on April 20, 2005, 05:43:26 PM
It isn't that good, at all.  It is pretty much a straight Magnolia ripoff with no substance (although it tries to be important).
Title: CRASH
Post by: UncleJoey on April 20, 2005, 06:06:54 PM
I hated it. The writing is extremely clumsy and manipulative, which surprised me considering how impressed I was with his Million Dollar Baby screenplay. However, everyone at the screening all but sucked off Paul Haggis in the Q&A afterwards (one particular moron suggested he win the nobel peace prize for it), so I'm scared that this piece of trash will do better than it deserves.
Title: CRASH
Post by: meatball on April 20, 2005, 06:21:10 PM
It seems very, very Magnolia-ish. Watching the trailer, I'm totally thrown off by the casting choices. Sandra Bullock is too recognizable for me to think of her of anything but Sandra Bullock. Same with Ludacris.

Isn't Crash the title of a James Spader film? How can they use the title again for this?
Title: CRASH
Post by: UncleJoey on April 20, 2005, 06:45:06 PM
Quote from: Meatball
It seems very, very Magnolia-ish. Watching the trailer, I'm totally thrown off by the casting choices. Sandra Bullock is too recognizable for me to think of her of anything but Sandra Bullock. Same with Ludacris.

Isn't Crash the title of a James Spader film? How can they use the title again for this?


You forgot the weirdest choice - Tony Danza, although he has a small part. Ludacris is actually decent in the movie.

And yeah, it's the same title as the Cronenberg film with Spader (which is much better).
Title: CRASH
Post by: MacGuffin on April 20, 2005, 06:47:55 PM
(http://us.movies1.yimg.com/movies.yahoo.com/images/hv/photo/movie_pix/lions_gate_films/crash/crash_bigposter.jpg)

Release Date: May 6th, 2005 (wide)

Cast: Sandra Bullock (Jean), Don Cheadle (Graham), Matt Dillon (Officer Ryan), Jennifer Esposito (Ria), William Fichtner (Flanagan), Brendan Fraser (Rick), Terrence Dashon Howard (Cameron), Ludacris (Anthony), Thandie Newton (Christine), Ryan Phillippe (Officer Hansen), Larenz Tate (Peter), Nona Gaye (Karen), Michael Pena (Daniel), Tony Danza (Fred), Keith David (Lt. Dixon), Eddie Fernandez (Officer Gomez), Billy Gallo (Officer Hill), Daniel Dae Kim (Park), Yomi Perry (Maria), Alexis Rhee (Kim Lee), Ashlyn Sanchez (Lara), Paul E. Short (Officer Stone), Marina Sirtis (Shereen), Kathleen York (Officer Johnson)

Director: Paul Haggis (feature debut)

Screenwriter: Paul Haggis (Oscar nominee for Million Dollar Baby) & Robert Moresco

Premise: A Brentwood housewife and her DA husband. A Persian store owner. Two police detectives who are also lovers. An African-American television director and his wife. A Mexican locksmith. Two car-jackers. A rookie cop. A middle-aged Korean couple. They all live in Los Angeles. And during the next 36 hours, they will all collide.
Title: CRASH
Post by: cowboykurtis on April 20, 2005, 07:10:57 PM
this reeks of HD -- anyone know?
Title: CRASH
Post by: cowboykurtis on April 20, 2005, 07:14:04 PM
Quote from: cowboykurtis
this reeks of HD -- anyone know?


ill answer my own question - its suprisingly super 35 -- looks like shit if you ask me.

upon viewing the trailer again, I'm argueing that the tech specs on imdb are wrong - thats HD
Title: CRASH
Post by: Ravi on April 20, 2005, 09:04:02 PM
Terrible-looking film.  Levity came to my mind when I saw the trailer.
Title: CRASH
Post by: Ghostboy on April 21, 2005, 12:37:04 AM
I saw it last week - I hated it too. All the criticism that Million Dollar Baby received, and that I uderstood but didn't necessarily agree with, is amplified ten fold here. It's all about white man's piety. Blechh.

Also, it's definitely film. Really grainy film.
Title: CRASH
Post by: Pubrick on April 21, 2005, 03:17:33 AM
the trailer is like a collection of the most embarrassing lines a person could write. and the text "when ur moving at the speed of life".. jesus christ. well at least u know what to expect going into this..

Quote from: cowboykurtis
this is garbage
Title: CRASH
Post by: w/o horse on May 06, 2005, 01:44:56 PM
I'm glad I came here and read this thread before I went and saw the movie.

Sounds like a 13 Conversations About One Thing.
Title: CRASH
Post by: Ghostboy on May 06, 2005, 02:08:55 PM
Quote from: AwkwardAsIAm


Sounds like a 13 Conversations About One Thing.


Yes! That's exactly what it's like.

I'm fairly astounded at the number of glowing reviews it's received. Ebert's was to be expected, but everyone else loves it too, it seems...
Title: CRASH
Post by: Ravi on May 06, 2005, 02:13:17 PM
80% positive reviews on the Tomatometer. (http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/crash/)

Everyone seems to be fawning over this film.  Lines from the trailer like "when we are moving at the speed of life we are bound to collide with each other" make this seem preachy and trite.  Makes me want to watch Magnolia again, though.
Title: CRASH
Post by: atticus jones on May 06, 2005, 02:24:05 PM
Quote from: Ravi


...seems preachy and trite.  Makes me want to watch Magnolia again


a preachy/trite movie always creates an appetite for a peachy/tyte one...

movies that preach are some of my favorites...slippery sermons slide down easier than other dis course

the "moving at the speed of life" line is actually more creative than 99% of what i find here...i will definitely go see this...to cum pear and con trast at least...

aj to his hs hos...put up or shut up...

understimulated and underwhelmed...over and out
Title: CRASH
Post by: MacGuffin on May 06, 2005, 02:51:39 PM
Quote from: Ghostboy
Quote from: AwkwardAsIAm


Sounds like a 13 Conversations About One Thing.


Yes! That's exactly what it's like.


I think it sounds more like Grand Canyon.
Title: CRASH
Post by: w/o horse on May 06, 2005, 03:07:02 PM
Ghostboy agrees with me, Roger Ebert agrees with MacGuffin.

Quote from: Roger Ebert
Other cross-cutting Los Angeles stories come to mind, especially Lawrence Kasden's more optimistic "Grand Canyon" and Robert Altman's more humanistic "Short Cuts."


It sounded like 13 Conversations to me because it sounded forced, both in terms of concept and message.

But hell.  I haven't even seen the movie.
Title: CRASH
Post by: Finn on May 06, 2005, 04:36:02 PM
Wooow a lot of Crash hating around here. I saw it today and thought it was absolutely amazing. It was very powerful without being pretentious or self-concious. The performances are terrific and Paul Haggis is obviously a very gifted writer but he's also a very good director. I might be alone here, but I think it's the best film of the year so far.
Title: CRASH
Post by: Ravi on May 07, 2005, 04:51:32 PM
I will probably see this, though the Xixax consensus isn't favorable and the trailer doesn't make it look so great.  Seems like a "love it or hate it" film, so I have a 50-50 shot.
Title: CRASH
Post by: analogzombie on May 07, 2005, 05:40:37 PM
a Magnolia/Short Cuts-like ensemble film concerning rascism starring Brenden Fraser, Ludacris and Sandra Bullock? pass.
Title: CRASH
Post by: MacGuffin on May 10, 2005, 01:47:01 PM
FEATURE - Seven Million Dollar Baby
Screenwriter Paul Haggis woke up one morning at 2 a.m. and started writing. By morning, he had the gist of his low-budget directorial debut, Crash. Source: FilmStew.com

Ryan Phillippe is stunned. Though he co-stars in Paul Haggis' feature directorial debut Crash and worked with him briefly a decade ago when he guest-starred on Due South, a series that Haggis created and produced, he never knew that the man had once been a staff writer on the popular '80s sitcom The Facts of Life. When this factoid comes out at the end of a round table interview at San Francisco's Ritz-Carlton Hotel, the actor delightedly asks, "You wrote for Tootie?"

"I did," Haggis confirms, adding, "I even wrote the episode “Tootie Drives.””

While it may seem that, with Crash and his Oscar-nominated screenplay for this year's Best Picture winner Million Dollar Baby, the 52-year-old London, Ontario native came from out of nowhere to conquer Hollywood, but in fact he is a longtime veteran. It is just that his tour of duty until now mostly took place on the small screen where, in addition, to Due South and The Facts of Life, he wrote for such shows as The Love Boat, L.A. Law, thirtysomething, L.A. Law and The Tracey Ullman Show. He eased action star Chuck Norris' transition to the small screen when he created Walker, Texas Ranger and some credit him for opening the door to series like The Sopranos when he developed EZ Streets, a critically acclaimed but short-lived series drama about the daily lives of cops and criminals.

Among his many awards for his television work are two Emmys, a Humanitas award, and a Viewers for Quality Television prize for EZ Streets. And as all the nominations for Million Dollar Baby suggests, the accolades have continued in his transition into features. The latest is the first annual Kanbar Award, given by the San Francisco International Film Festival for screenwriting excellence, making his reasons for visiting the city threefold: promote the new movie, accept his prize, and following a festival screening of the film, conduct a screenwriting master class.

The last six months or so have been a heady time in Haggis' life, but he remains self-effacing, joking at the master class that prior to breaking into films, "I was failing upward really, really well."

The genesis for Crash actually began during his TV years. In 1991, he and his first wife, Diane, attended the premiere of The Silence of the Lambs, but one movie wasn't enough for them, so they stopped off in their Porsche – Haggis' first ever new car -- at the local Blockbuster to pick up a Nordic art-house video. Outside the store, he found a gun pointed at his face, as a pair of young men jacked his car.

It was in the nervous atmosphere following 9/11 that Crash was born, as Haggis suddenly felt compelled to revisit the carjacking. "I never intended to write this movie; it's something that just crept into my psyche," he insists.

"At two o'clock in the morning one day, I woke up and started writing,” Haggis continues. “By the morning, I had these stories. It wasn't something planned. I never thought, 'Ooh, I'll write a movie about this someday.'"

But when Haggis began writing, it was not from his own viewpoint of what happened to him, it was from the perspective of the carjackers. That fits perfectly with Haggis' philosophy. "You can't write things from your own perspective," he suggests. "If you're going to cast yourself in the film, you have to be the villain."

In the movie, the carjackers played by Larenz Tate and hip hop star Chris "Ludacris" Bridges are among the most likeable characters, in spite of their bad behavior. As they wander around the streets of L.A., plying their trade as if it were any other business, the two engage in lively debates about the film's main subject, which is race.

Haggis insists that writing about such a frightening incident and humanizing the perps was not a particularly tough assignment. "I think the fact that I was viewing it through their eyes really helped and creating those characters as full and wonderful people,” he suggests. “They're sort of like my Rosencrantz and Gildenstern. I think the whole experience was liberating."

The carjackers, who choose Rick (Brendan Fraser), the Los Angeles district attorney, and his high-strung wife, Jean (Sandra Bullock), as their victims are only the starting point. There is Daniel (Michael Pena), the Latino locksmith Rick hires to change the locks in his house in the wake of the theft, a working class husband and father who's just moved his family into a neighborhood where random bullets won't fly through his daughter's window.

There are two sets of cops, homicide detectives Graham (Don Cheadle) and Ria (Jennifer Esposito), who are investigating the shooting of a black police officer by a white one, and two patrolmen, idealistic Hanson (Phillippe) and his racist partner Ryan (Matt Dillon), who African-American TV producer Cameron (Terrence Howard) and his wife Christine (Thandie Newton) have the misfortune of meeting at a traffic stop.

All of these characters and more touch on one another in unexpected ways, with nearly all finding a reason to take a good look at themselves and what lurks within their souls. Some characters find a touch of grace, while others are left poised over a spiritual abyss. Ultimately, Haggis believes, Crash is a hopeful movie, and for someone so used toiling under the strictures of television, the script, co-written with Robert Moresco, was a revelation.

"It really was just a matter of following the characters,” he explains. “Usually I plan things out; I structure things. I had no idea and I still have no idea what the structure of this film is. It was a point where I wanted to put all the characters under pressure immediately and see what happened to them and then I just wanted to follow them."

In this instance, Haggis believes the dual nature of his citizenship served him well. He spent the first 22 years of his life in Canada, until his father gently suggested that he didn't have a future in construction and should perhaps follow his dream of writing scripts in Hollywood. He has lived in the States ever since.

"Having lived in both communities for so long, I now feel comfortable enough to be an outsider in both places," he says. "That's a great place to be, just a little bit back, just a half-step behind everyone else. You can view them and yourself from a perspective that maybe you can't if you're so close to it."

With a script so rich in characterization, it is no wonder that Haggis was able to attract such a high-profile cast to a low budget ($7 million) movie by a new director. Cheadle was the first actor to sign on, suffering an embarrassment of riches when Haggis gave him the opportunity to choose whether he wanted to play the homicide detective or the television producer. Cheadle also was instrumental in recruiting other talent, personally calling actor friends to chat up the project.

Taking the role of Hanson, the liberal cop who discovers to his horror the true import of his cynical partner's warning that he doesn't know himself as well as he thinks, was a no-brainer for Phillippe. "Everyone in this is three-dimensional and everyone in this you believe and is depicted fairly, across social and ethnic lines," he raves.

"Also, when actors get a chance to be part of a movie like this, the passion is genuine and everybody comes together for the right reasons,” he adds. “It's for the greater good. It's not about self-serving, 'I'm the star.' There were no egos; everyone came ready to work and believed in what we were making."

Haggis says he finally made the leap into movies because he was increasingly frustrated by his work in television. "I personally wasn't doing good work. I was continually compromising myself. It wasn't feeding my soul," he told the crowd at his writing seminar.

But as accomplished as these first two forays into feature films have been, he seems surprised at his success. He describes Million Dollar Baby as "like Leaving Las Vegas, only depressing." On Crash, he recalls shooting the most difficult scene, the confrontation between Ryan and Christine. It was difficult even to witness Dillon and Newton act out the highly charged scene and Haggis remembers thinking, "I know I wrote that, but do they have to do that?" And now that the film is completed, he says he finds it difficult to watch, because all he sees are what he perceives as its flaws.

One thing he is confident of, though, is that Crash has a lot to say to anyone willing to invest in a movie ticket. The characters, the crises they face, and the biases that come spilling out, he believes, are universal. "We all contain those extremes and we all think we're so all well-evolved, and we have our opinions based on logic,” says Haggis. “But these things come from odd places and they come up at strange times. I think anyone from any political perspective can watch this and can find things to identify [with]."

Certainly, Haggis has made a true believer in the movie out of Phillippe, who admits that he normally dislikes the promotional portion of moviemaking. He avers, "Most of the time it is a chore to promote a movie. Most of the time you don't want to do it, like, 'I got paid. I'm done.' With this, I want to be here. I want to talk about it. I want to people to see it."

"This movie is not cute," he insists. "It will punch you in the mouth, wake you up, it will make you think, it will encourage maybe an argument, some kind of dialogue. That's exciting to me. There's substance. That's worth my $10."
Title: CRASH
Post by: w/o horse on May 10, 2005, 09:08:26 PM
Quote from: MacGuffin


"This movie is not cute," he insists. "It will punch you in the mouth, wake you up, it will make you think, it will encourage maybe an argument, some kind of dialogue. That's exciting to me. There's substance. That's worth my $10."


Spoilers.

Hmm.  That's odd, because it doesn't really raise any issues.  It's more like "be careful about the black woman you molest because you might save her from a car fire one day" and "buying blanks for you father's gun might mean that one day the little girl he accidentally shoots won't die" and other such circumstancial nonsense.  Now, hell, I like circumstance, I think we all like circumstance, but the time to bring them up is not while attacking societal stereotypes and hyprocracies.  Especially if you're trying to make the audience think.

I admit:  I went and saw the film last Friday.  I was ready to like it because of the critics, I was ready to hate it because of you guys.  Just to be sure, I brought along the old parental unit (impervious to artfilm snobbery and a glutton of hype) for a second, more neutral opinion of the film.  When the gun shot blanks, my mom was asking if it'd be alright if she went and watched Hidalgo instead.

It was pure rubbish, the kind of film that is literally insulting to people with real problems, the kind of problems that don't rap up tidy.  It was an episode of a 50's sitcom disguised as a portrait of the human spirit - which makes it all the more insulting.  There were tense moments, for sure; several sequences were just undeniably well written, acted, and shot.  But I couldn't help feeling that Haggis always cared more about servicing himself and setting up these situations than paying attention to the characters and what was happening to them.

That, simply, is the fatal error as far as I'm concerned.
Title: CRASH
Post by: meatball on May 10, 2005, 09:16:39 PM
Quote from: AwkwardAsIAm
my mom was asking if it'd be alright if she went and watched Hidalgo instead.


 :shock:
Title: CRASH
Post by: Pozer on May 10, 2005, 09:32:12 PM
Quote from: Ghostboy
I saw it last week - I hated it too. All the criticism that Million Dollar Baby received, and that I uderstood but didn't necessarily agree with, is amplified ten fold here. It's all about white man's piety. Blechh.

Really? I'm gonna see this this weekend and your reviews usually get me pumped up for the flicks, now I'm a bit bummed.
Why am I hearing such good things elsewhere?
Title: CRASH
Post by: Ghostboy on May 10, 2005, 10:08:35 PM
I honestly don't know - I had no idea critics were still such softies on such a large scale. Seriously, though, since it's so polarizing, I'd suggest going and forming your own opinion. At the best, you'll love it. At the worst - well, as AwkwardAsIAm suggested, there are some scenes that, in their own context, are undeniably good.
Title: CRASH
Post by: SiliasRuby on May 10, 2005, 10:43:28 PM
I'm a total sucker for ensemble films of any kind. So, I am hoping to see this this weekend and I'll give you my report.
Title: CRASH
Post by: Pubrick on May 11, 2005, 02:52:25 AM
Quote from: SiliasRuby
I'm a total sucker for ensemble films of any kind. So, I am hoping to see this this weekend and I'll give you my report.

yep. we'll all be anxiously awaiting ur latest one-sentence, empty blurb.

anyway, this is the worst kind of movie, it just pretends to be good and is infuriating cos the silias's and small town loners of the world, who can't tell the difference, won't shut up about its "brilliance". shoot me if this gets any award recognition.

all haggis has to do is work with halle berry next to solidify his phony agenda.
Title: CRASH
Post by: SHAFTR on May 11, 2005, 10:04:04 AM
Quote from: Pubrick


anyway, this is the worst kind of movie, it just pretends to be good and is infuriating cos the silias's and small town loners of the world, who can't tell the difference, won't shut up about its "brilliance". shoot me if this gets any award recognition.



Pubrick and SHAFTR unite in agreement.
Title: CRASH
Post by: meatball on May 11, 2005, 12:37:41 PM
Quote from: SHAFTR
Quote from: Pubrick


anyway, this is the worst kind of movie, it just pretends to be good and is infuriating cos the silias's and small town loners of the world, who can't tell the difference, won't shut up about its "brilliance". shoot me if this gets any award recognition.



Pubrick and SHAFTR unite in agreement.


Who else would like to join in the circle jerk?
Title: CRASH
Post by: w/o horse on May 11, 2005, 03:47:39 PM
I think the members of the, um, circle jerk, are being a little presumptuous.  It's getting great reviews for no apparent reason, but I hardly hear anyone calling it brilliant, even Small Town Loner, who was referenced, only called it amazing.  I'd say amazing is a far more general term.

Anyway.  My guess is that it'll disappear relatively soon and slip into obscurity due to a lack of presence, force, and feeling.

But yeah, if for some reason it explodes I'll be startled.
Title: CRASH
Post by: Finn on May 11, 2005, 04:17:00 PM
You can't compare this movie to Magnolia. It's totally different. Now Magnolia is a more brilliant film (particularly in terms of the directing, etc...) but this is a terrific movie on it's own terms. It's not really brilliant but it emotionally absorbed me in. This movie has even more urgency than Magnolia does with some many of the characters held at gun point. To me it's a study on the dangerous urban streets and how they affect the people who live in them. It's also about how people have good and bad in them. Just as Ebert & Roeper said, a bad person could do something really good and a good person could do something really bad. It does have too many coincidences but they have big emotional payoffs. The story about human nature is universal. I might be the only one on this site who felt that way but many other people did too. It's gotten great reviews from the critics and high ratings from the audience (if you look on IMDB). Go see it and stop comparing it to Magnolia and these previous ensemble dramas.
Title: CRASH
Post by: Pozer on May 11, 2005, 05:47:22 PM
Why couldn't they even come with an original title? That bugs me, right off.
Title: CRASH
Post by: Rudie Obias on May 11, 2005, 06:46:32 PM
there's one shot in CRASH that lasts for only 3 seconds (maybe) that the editor should have taken out.  if they did take this shot out then CRASH would have been a much much better movie (imo).  can anyone guess which shot i'm talking about?  (probably not)

but all in all, i did like the movie enough to see it again and when it comes out on dvd i'll buy it.  but by no means is a great movie but its a good movie.  during the movie, i could not stop thinking about MAGNOLIA (structurally).  more power to you paul haggis...

Quote from: POZER
Why couldn't they even come with an original title? That bugs me, right off.


i think the title is apt.
Title: CRASH
Post by: meatball on May 11, 2005, 06:48:32 PM
A lot of the flak is coming from people who haven't seen the movie.
Title: CRASH
Post by: Pozer on May 11, 2005, 07:17:04 PM
Actually no, around here it seems to be coming from most who have seen it. I was looking forward to it, the reviews made me even more excited and even some friends who have seen it said it was really good.
Then I come to ol' xixax where I go for reviews that I can count on and then BLAM! My expectations are shot right the F down.
I shoudn't of said the title thing bugs me. after all, the other Crash movie was shite.
Title: CRASH
Post by: MacGuffin on May 11, 2005, 08:30:59 PM
Quote from: POZER
I shoudn't of said the title thing bugs me. after all, the other Crash movie was shite.


Which one?
http://www.imdb.com/find?q=crash;tt=on;mx=20
Title: CRASH
Post by: Pozer on May 11, 2005, 09:01:30 PM
oh you know which one.
Title: CRASH
Post by: pete on May 12, 2005, 12:03:42 AM
I just saw it tonight without knowing anything about it, except that Ebert gave it 4 stars.  In the beginning I wasn't really into it because it took place in LA and though had a lot of double backs and twists on you regarding racism, I felt like it wasn't saying anything, like a Spike Lee movie would.  And then you know, a lot of like screenwriting 101-type character arcs (or setups of those) for me.  that being said, I was quite moved by the film.  I dunno how to defend it yet, since "intellectually" it didn't have that much going on that wasn't already done somewhere else before.  but I do appreciate the interaction between the characters and the acting and I dunno, maybe just how I liked most of the characters and I was affected by the tension and their choices.  I understand that on paper (or in the trailer), the film just sounds like Any Ensemble Film Ever, but I dunno, I think Paul Haggis is so familiar with what's cheesy and what's not (obviously not enough, reading the last three pages) to allow the plot to unravel in a way that still holds great tension.

When I saw this thread staying on top of the page I thought it was gonna be at least a 50/50 debate, and I was ready to jump in and be all snotty on how I considered this to be the best "hack movie" I've seen--"hack movie" meaning that a movie that employs all the familiar tricks that you can associate with Hollywood, but I guess everyone kinda already knows that, but I thought it was the best hack movie because like a handful other hack movies, it actually moved me.

it moved me because though certain events seem contrived, I thought all of the characters' epiphanies were truthful enough.  I also liked how nice the people were to each other when we all stepped out of the movie theater.

though it certainly ain't Do the Right Thing.
Title: CRASH
Post by: Gamblour. on May 14, 2005, 10:17:27 PM
Spoilers maybe:


It seems like Ryan Phillipe got unnecessarily fucked over. He was cool until the end, which I thought was overdone. A lot of it was kinda overwritten. The scene where Matt Dillon argues for his father's HMO coverage was really really good. The car crash was great too, but then, where'd Dillon or Newton go to the rest of the movie?
Title: CRASH
Post by: Ultrahip on May 20, 2005, 12:43:28 AM
this was certainly well intentioned and often very good but way too manipulative, and by no means can it ever be compared to magnolia. when the snow started falling at the end of crash, and the camera went from character to character with that fucking push-in on thandie newton on the bed smiling like melora walters, it was just so devoid of impact that frogs would have provided.

also, the 'almost deaths' made me stop caring. when phillipe busts a cap it was just not painful in the least, not after haggis rips your heart out with the locksmiths daughter and then force feeds it back to you. that scene did not feel divine or anything of the sort, it felt twisted and clever in the worst ways possible.

and that song at the end was just, well...not aimee mann. but since this can't be compared to magnolia, it was a better than average flick that was, at least, trying to say something.
Title: CRASH
Post by: Pozer on May 23, 2005, 08:55:34 PM
Well, he's exec producing PTA's next flick so looks like your S.O.L.

just kidds.
Title: CRASH
Post by: Hodgemeyer on May 28, 2005, 06:29:38 AM
Quote from: rudiecorexxx
there's one shot in CRASH that lasts for only 3 seconds (maybe) that the editor should have taken out.  if they did take this shot out then CRASH would have been a much much better movie (imo).  can anyone guess which shot i'm talking about?  (probably not)


So which shot are you talking about?
Title: CRASH
Post by: MacGuffin on May 30, 2005, 01:19:51 PM
Cultural 'Crash' at the water cooler
Despite mixed reviews, the controversial depiction of a tinderbox Los Angeles has become the movie to see and discuss.
Source: Los Angeles Times
 
With its depiction of multicultural Los Angeles as a city riven by racial strife, urban ennui and class warfare, "Crash" has sharply divided film critics. But it has pulled together a critical mass of filmgoers to remain among the top-grossing movies at the box office for four weeks running.

The ensemble drama has turned into must-see viewing for those who want to stay inside the cultural loop, much the same as last year's "The Passion of the Christ" — another controversial movie that became unavoidable small-talk fodder — albeit on a smaller scale.

"The movie is becoming water-cooler conversation," said John Hegeman, president of worldwide marketing for the movie's distributor, Lions Gate Films. "There's a cultural relevance to it."

The Los Angeles Times called "Crash" "a grim, histrionic experiment in vehicular metaphor slaughter"; it also received a scathing review in the New York Times. The New Yorker, however, hailed it as "the strongest American film since Clint Eastwood's 'Mystic River.' " Despite those mixed reviews, the $7.5-million film — which stars Don Cheadle, Matt Dillon and Sandra Bullock — has played strongly throughout the country. In Manhattan, "Crash" was the most highly attended movie on its opening weekend, and it remains among the three most attended films in Southern California.

"Everyone in my office has been talking about it," said Jun Rhee, 37, an Internet technology supervisor from Los Angeles. "I felt like I had to see for myself or else I wouldn't be part of the conversations."

For his part, writer-director Paul Haggis, the Oscar-nominated screenwriter of "Million Dollar Baby," feels gratified that "Crash" has gotten people talking. "I think it's fabulous that people are coming out of any film and debating it," he says.

"When you're making a film like this, you want strong opinions. You want people to argue about things. When [executive producer and co-star] Don Cheadle and [co-writer and producer] Bobby Moresco and I were setting out, we knew we'd stir up a lot of feelings — some of them negative."

However, to combat perceptions that the filmmakers had set out to sensationalize racial conflict, the movie's marketers pre-screened "Crash" for influential activists and pop icons, including Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Los Angeles), hip-hop mogul Jay-Z, music producer L.A. Reid and the Rev. Al Sharpton.

"We got community leaders from a diverse makeup of nationalities who we wanted to give a feeling of why this was important," said Hegeman of Lions Gate. "All were supportive of the movie. We just had to screen it and they said, 'Do you need help getting the word out? We would love to spread it.' "

Further, "Crash" has benefited from the kind of "you gotta check out this movie" buzz that is hard to manufacture.

"The proverbial fourth act — when you're walking out of the theater — is the most important act," observed Vicangelo Bulluck, executive director of the National Assn. for the Advancement of Colored People's Hollywood bureau, who enjoyed the film. "It's about what it makes you think about and discuss with friends and colleagues."

The breakdown of ticket sales illustrates Bulluck's point. "Crash" was the fourth-highest-grossing film on its opening weekend, May 6-8, and attendance dropped only 23% in its second week in nationwide release. (By comparison, "House of Wax," which was released the same weekend as "Crash," dropped 46% in the same period.) More significantly, on "Crash's" third weekend, the drop-off rate fell slightly, to 21%.

By the fourth weekend, the drop-off rate was only 13% — an indicator that interest in the film is holding relatively steady. Its cumulative gross, meanwhile, stood at just below $35 million.

"I not only recommend this film to friends, family and colleagues," said Beth Sacks, 36, an actress in New York, "but to strangers I may happen to talk to on the street."

"Crash," which is playing on 1,800 screens across the country, appeals to moviegoers from every demographic stripe, its marketers say.

"So often, a movie will click with a specific target audience," said Hegeman. "What's interesting about 'Crash' is that it's working across the board in upscale theaters, blue-collar areas and racially diverse areas across the country. This is a movie that's hitting a chord with a diverse group in terms of age and racial composition."

"I think the movie has very strong word of mouth," said the NAACP's Bulluck. "In the African American community, those that I know are encouraging everyone they know to go and see it."

Not everyone shares the same warm feeling for the film, however. Angela Clemons, for one, walked out of the theater about an hour before the film's ending.

"I couldn't stand the anger and frustration everyone exhibited toward each other," said Clemons, who lives in Tyler, Texas, where she also saw the movie. " 'Crash' seemed to pit every race against the other races. It overwhelmed me."

At work, she cautioned an African American colleague to avoid the film, citing the way it would push her emotional buttons. The advice, however, backfired. "That's made her more curious," said Clemons, 48. "Now, she wants to see it."

While she doesn't second-guess her decision to leave the film before it was over, Clemons remains curious enough to give "Crash" a second chance.

"I can't get the dang movie out of my head," she said. "I will have to rent the video when it comes out. The anger that made me walk out of the movie has stuck with me and I want to see if there's a happy ending."
Title: CRASH
Post by: Gamblour. on May 30, 2005, 01:41:15 PM
Geez, I'm not seeing what the big deal is. People act like "Do the Right Thing" never came out.
Title: CRASH
Post by: socketlevel on May 30, 2005, 02:04:35 PM
Quote from: Gamblor Posts Drunk
Geez, I'm not seeing what the big deal is. People act like "Do the Right Thing" never came out.


agreed.  It's too clever for it's own good.

-sl-
Title: CRASH
Post by: pete on May 30, 2005, 02:07:44 PM
do the right thing was too intelligent and "realistic" for most of the people.  crash is more accessible because it's dumber and more blatant.
Title: CRASH
Post by: MacGuffin on June 03, 2005, 12:27:55 AM
Lions Gate's 'Crash' gamble paying off big
By Nicole Sperling, Hollywood Reporter

"Crash," writer-director Paul Haggis' film about race relations in Los Angeles, did not seem the obvious choice for an early summer success story. But with the boxoffice experiencing a slump this year, Lions Gate Films' pickup from the Toronto International Film Festival has become one of the season's few bright spots.

Its success can be credited to a bold release plan, an emotional marketing campaign and an aggressive screening program. For "Crash" has been able to do what few movies accomplish nowadays: It has attracted four very distinct demographic groups -- college students, upscale adult audiences, the urban market and females -- in a meaningful way.
 
The result has been a $36 million boxoffice gross in just four weeks. The film could gross as much as $50 million -- a number that might exceed the final domestic grosses of the expected summer blockbusters it opened against, 20th Century Fox's "Kingdom of Heaven" and Warner Bros. Pictures' "House of Wax."

And it hit that mark in the very unconventional manner for a specialty film by opening wide in the early summer instead of taking the more traditional route of opening in New York and Los Angeles in the fall, gaining traction through word-of-mouth and expanding to a critical mass just in time for Academy Awards consideration.

"Fall is a season when a lot of highbrow quasi-commercial pictures get released," Lions Gate Releasing president Tom Ortenberg said. "We didn't feel the need to wait that long and then compete in a crowded marketplace."

Lions Gate picked up the Stratus Film-produced pic for $3.3 million in the fall and soon after pursued a wide release plan.

"Platforming is a great way to hedge a bet if you are not sure of your allocation of resources," Ortenberg added. "But we didn't feel like we needed to hedge our bets. We were very confident in both our movie and our materials. We had great actors, a very promotable filmmaker and a lot of national press. We didn't want to waste it on a few city openings."

The film was perfectly timed in that director Haggis was coming off his Oscar-nominated screenplay for "Million Dollar Baby" and Don Cheadle was fresh off his Oscar-nominated role in "Hotel Rwanda."

In retrospect, a platform release actually could have killed Haggis' directorial debut starring Cheadle, rapper Ludacris, Sandra Bullock, Matt Dillon and others. While the film received mostly positive reviews around the country when it opened May 6 on 1,864 screens, both the New York Times and the Los Angeles Times film critics issued scathing reviews.

"There was a lot of talk about a fall release in New York and Los Angeles, but there would be no conversations right now (about 'Crash') if we had done that," said John Hegeman, president of marketing at Lions Gate. "Our only bad reviews were in the New York Times and the L.A. Times."

Instead of betting on big-city reviews, Lions Gate instead relied on early data that showed the movie to have strong playability across different demos in addition to high marketability to those same groups. Although Ortenberg said the company didn't spend more than $20 million to market the film, Hegeman added that the campaign went much deeper into each demographic than is usual. With four specific targeted audiences, the company bought more TV ads than it ever had before and spent more money than it usually does.

With "Crash" a boxoffice success, the results have been noticed throughout the industry.

"It's a brilliant campaign," one marketing executive said. "They took a not-very-extraordinary story and elevated it to being very emotional. It was also very courageous to roll the dice and go out there wide with something that isn't like everything else out there."

It also has been a huge win for producer Bob Yari, with "Crash" marking his biggest success since entering this industry.

"Lions Gate made the exact right decisions with this film, and they did it very intelligently," Yari said. "This is a project that I've loved from the time it was a script. It's the ultimate success for me. It has a message, it has an opportunity to affect people who watch it, and it's a commercial success. I don't know of any other reason why I'm in this business."

The other component to Lions Gate's marketing plans was a widespread screening program, targeting racial groups nationwide, both to get early feedback and also to spread the word about the film. According to Hegeman, Haggis, Cheadle and Dillon hosted screenings throughout the country to offer a "platform for people to talk." The film also received endorsements from such community leaders as Los Angeles' Mayor-elect Antonio Villaraigosa, the Rev. Al Sharpton and NAACP leaders.

"Why wouldn't we go wide with this?" Hegeman asked. "We had something relevant, cultural, timely and with a diverse cast. With Haggis, Cheadle, Sandra Bullock and Ludacris, we had such diversity and a ton of marketing hooks. Why chance it and waste it when you have something that could bust through the gates? No one agreed with us until after the first weekend."
Title: CRASH
Post by: Rudie Obias on June 03, 2005, 01:22:04 AM
Quote from: flagpolespecial
Quote from: Hodgemeyer
Quote from: rudiecorexxx
there's one shot in CRASH that lasts for only 3 seconds (maybe) that the editor should have taken out.  if they did take this shot out then CRASH would have been a much much better movie (imo).  can anyone guess which shot i'm talking about?  (probably not)


So which shot are you talking about?


he's talking about the shot where you see that the red box is full of blanks. like we fucking didn't know the moment she wasn't hurt. shit house mother fucking movie.


exactly.  but i still like CRASH (enough)....
Title: CRASH
Post by: ©brad on June 06, 2005, 06:49:31 PM
has a couple powerful moments (oddly enough, i was really moved during the sandra bullock 'your the best friend i have' scene with the maid), but overall a muddled mess with more holes than swiss cheese and enough heavy-handed symbolic imagery to make u vomit. a few funny lines tho. can't remember any off the top of my head but i did chuckle a few times.
Title: CRASH
Post by: Myxo on June 08, 2005, 12:56:34 AM
Saw this tonight..

It had moments of brilliance overshadowed by an awkward script.

Without reading a single post in this thread the influence of Magnolia is very heavy here. The snow at the end was a big time rip off. Ty Burr at the Boston Globe from his review..

"Its characters come straight from the assembly line of screenwriting archetypes, and too often they act in ways that archetypes, rather than human beings, do."

I still think it's worth checking out and wouldn't discourage anyone from seeing it for some of the things that really worked well. Mat Dillon with his father, the Persian store owner in front of the locksmith's house, and Ryan Phillipe's scenes were all excellent I thought. Cheadle was great as usual.
Title: CRASH
Post by: ᾦɐļᵲʊʂ on June 08, 2005, 11:33:05 PM
There will probably be SPOILERS in this...


It's been bugging me lately that I've been liking every movie I've seen.  I've seen so many great films lately, I've been wondering if I lost my abilities of distinction.  Could it be that I just like watching movies?  Maybe it's just that all movies have something to offer and there can always be another way to look at the movie.  These thoughts have been plauging me for a long time.

Then I saw Crash.

Crash seemed to throw subtlety to the fan.  I loved the idea of a movie about racism, classism, hate in general and showing the consequences of it, but that's where my love for the movie ended.  

The movie was way too sweeping in its ideas, it didn't give the viewer any credit.  There is little to nothing that I'd catch upon a second view, which is sort of pretentious of me to say, but through the movie, they made everything blatantly obvious.  How the hell do so many people change in the course of two days simultaneously, with little or no catalyst?  I understand that people change, but Sandra Bullock changed almost instantly with no real reason.  She said on the phone "I woke up and realized I'm always angry, I want to stop" Now fucking come on... Someone whose car had recently been jacked by two black people and maid who won't do things the exact way her OCD self wants things will one day spurn the idea herself?  

I could buy that, I guess, if it didn't happen to everyone.  Everyone just had this spark of inspiration that they needed to change out of nowhere.  

OH and what the fuck was up with the partner cop shooting the black guy?  How out of character was that?  This guy who really gives black people the benefit of a doubt, shoots a black guy who glimmers light that might give away the possibility of having a gun.  Also factor in, he used diplomacy with a black guy he'd only seen once to let him get off with a warning, stepping into the line of fire of the black guy and cops, who were both mad.  Not only that, but he takes advice from a cop he apparently loathes, seeing as how he watched the cop molest that black woman.  Why would he take his advice that in a few years, he'd lose his patience with the black community?

That bulletproof cape story was cool, but when he told it, I knew she was going to be shot at.  Honestly, I wanted her to die.  I wanted something shocking to happen.  Really this whole movie was rather predictable in general.  

I think all the sex and swearing was tossed in to make the movie edgy.  The sex scene didn't seem too appropriate for the characters to be having, especially if the girl was going to find out the guy didn't treat his mother right.  I guess being ethical between partners, and moral with your parents is a different story.

This movie sounds like a good idea, since it's compared to Magnolia and Do the Right Thing, but really, if turned into an equation, would look like:

(Do the Right Thing + Magnolia) - Soundtrack - Script - Directing = Crash

A friend asked me if I wanted to see this for free, so I said "Sure, free movie can't hurt, plus this movie sounds great."  I try not to read any material about movies until I see them so I give it a fair chance and I'm not over or underwhelmed.  I told him that, to me, Crash was basically like Everybody Poops with an extra 3,000 pages.  There isn't much you can say about the subject matter on such a literal basis, but the movie tries its best to do it.  The friend disagreed with me, but I had to again relate it to the fact that if Hillary Duff made a song called "dont B angri", it wouldn't quite deal with the subject matter adequately enough.

Basically, the movie pointed out there's hate in the world, using very obvious mediums.  I'm glad I know I can still not like movies.
Title: CRASH
Post by: w/o horse on June 09, 2005, 03:28:44 PM
That's a good review right there Walrus.  Also,

Quote from: pete
do the right thing was too intelligent and "realistic" for most of the people.  crash is more accessible because it's dumber and more blatant.


If Crash had had this kind of bluntness it would have been better.
Title: CRASH
Post by: soixante on June 09, 2005, 04:53:10 PM
Just saw Crash.  For the most part, I thought it was quite good.  I need to let it sink in and think about it, but I think it is much better than Do The Right Thing and Grand Canyon, the two films it resembles the most.

I think one of the themes of the film is that people aren't what they seem to be on the surface.  The Ryan Phillipe character, who saves one black man from certain death, kills Larenz Tate.  Maybe he's more of a racist than the Matt Dillon character.  Sometimes, the people with the best of intentions do the most damage.

The locksmith is looked upon as a gangbanger by Sandra Bullock's character, and is suspected of robbery by the Persian store owner, but despite apprearances, he is a hard-working, law-abiding conscientious man.

I think the point of the film is that everyone in this film crashes, in one way or another, and has to walk away from the wreckage with (hopefully) some hard-earned wisdom.
Title: CRASH
Post by: Gamblour. on June 09, 2005, 06:40:23 PM
My only regret is that Conan seemed to like it so much.
Title: CRASH
Post by: ᾦɐļᵲʊʂ on June 09, 2005, 11:25:21 PM
Quote from: soixante

The Ryan Phillipe character, who saves one black man from certain death, kills Larenz Tate.  Maybe he's more of a racist than the Matt Dillon character.  Sometimes, the people with the best of intentions do the most damage.


That is one of my biggest problems with the movie.  He steps into the line of fire for a black man he'd only seen once, he wants to change cars and not be with a racist, and then sporadically, he fires upon a guy that he picked up... he really seems like the guy who would've given Tate the benefit of a doubt.

This movie was saturated with character inconsistencies.. and not the kind that happen normally.  I think that there were 14 writers for the movie, and this is the best they could assemble.
Title: CRASH
Post by: 82 on June 12, 2005, 01:09:39 PM
I didn't mind the version of Samuel Barber's Angus Dei in the trailer...  on the other hand, the trailer wasn't very engaging.  I think i'll pass.
Title: CRASH
Post by: SiliasRuby on June 18, 2005, 07:05:32 PM
All Magnolia similarities aside, this multi-character drama was pretty darn good. Although I would have liked to see more of Brendan Fraser and Sandra Bullock. Cheadle really has the magic touch, he really shines in this and I was surprised by Ludacris's performance. I really liked it but when I left the theatre I was begging for more. Solid Flick, but nothing can beat Do the Right Thing.
Title: CRASH
Post by: Myxo on June 23, 2005, 07:09:52 PM
Paul Haggis (who penned this film and Million Dollar Baby) also created Walker, Texas Ranger.

Think that's a chapter of his life he'd like to forget? :lol:
Title: CRASH
Post by: Gamblour. on June 23, 2005, 07:42:00 PM
Quote from IMDb:

"I agreed to write the pilot because I thought it would just go away, but it became this huge hit and I remember waking up at 3 or 4 in the morning in a cold sweat, dripping wet. I mean, I was drenched. I just pictured my tombstone and it said: 'Paul Haggis: Creator of Walker Texas Ranger.' So the impetus for making these movies is really just to wipe that image from my mind."
Title: CRASH
Post by: cron on June 23, 2005, 07:58:26 PM
wowsers, that isn't made up.
Title: CRASH
Post by: w/o horse on June 23, 2005, 08:42:02 PM
Quote from: Gamblor Posts Drunk
Quote from IMDb:

"I agreed to write the pilot because I thought it would just go away, but it became this huge hit and I remember waking up at 3 or 4 in the morning in a cold sweat, dripping wet. I mean, I was drenched. I just pictured my tombstone and it said: 'Paul Haggis: Creator of Walker Texas Ranger.' So the impetus for making these movies is really just to wipe that image from my mind."


So wow.  Maybe life really is that dramatic for Paul Haggis.
Title: CRASH
Post by: Pubrick on June 23, 2005, 11:15:55 PM
and then it snowed.
Title: CRASH
Post by: MacGuffin on June 26, 2005, 11:55:12 PM
'Crash' position: Sept. 6 on video

The acclaimed indie film "Crash" will be released on video Sept. 6, Lions Gate Entertainment is set to announce Monday. The DVD ($28.98 ) will include an introduction and commentary by writer-director Paul Haggis as well a "making of" featurette and, tentatively, a music video. "Crash" also marks Lions Gate's first day-and-date Universal Media Disc release, targeting the lucrative young-adult market that has embraced Sony's PlayStation Portable. "This picture is truly a phenomenon, given that it started with a $9 million opening weekend and is projected to do more than $50 million, five times its opening gross," Lions Gate Entertainment president Steve Beeks said. "This just demonstrates how the public has really locked onto this picture. It has not only found an audience but worked its way into common, everyday vernacular. Everywhere I go, I hear people talking about this picture."
Title: CRASH
Post by: Brazoliange on June 27, 2005, 02:11:39 AM
umm, wasn't Saw Lion's Gate?
Title: CRASH
Post by: w/o horse on June 27, 2005, 02:17:22 AM
Quote from: Brazoliange
umm, wasn't Saw Lion's Gate?


Read it again, slower, more carefully.
Title: CRASH
Post by: cine on June 27, 2005, 02:51:56 AM
Quote from: Brazoliange
drunk post?
Title: CRASH
Post by: MacGuffin on June 28, 2005, 01:45:42 PM
FX gets 'Crash' course

After a detour to the big screen, writer/director Paul Haggis' "Crash" is about to reach its original destination: television.

FX is developing a cable TV series based on the hit Lions Gate Films release, which has earned almost $50 million after eight weekends.

Don Cheadle, one of the stars of the gritty drama about race relations in post-Sept. 11 Los Angeles, is likely to appear in and direct several episodes of the project if it goes into series. Sources said talks are under way with all other members of the cast, including Sandra Bullock, Matt Dillon, Brendan Fraser and rapper Ludacris, to reprise their roles from the film.

Haggis is executive producing the TV project, which has received a script commitment from the network. Bobby Moresco, who co-wrote the feature script with Haggis, is in negotiations to write the pilot script, sources said.

The idea for "Crash" stems from a real-life carjacking that happened to Haggis and his wife 10 years ago in front of a video store in Los Angeles. The scene is re-created in an opening scene of the movie by Bullock and Fraser as the couple whose car gets stolen.

Several years later, Haggis woke up one night with the idea for "Crash" and soon penned 40 pages. Because of his TV pedigree, Haggis, who by that time had worked only in television on such series as "thirtysomething," "Due South," "EZ Streets" and "Family Law," envisioned the project as a TV series while also pursuing the project as a feature.

But in 2001, when reality was red hot and taking over drama series' one-hour time slots, no networks were interested. So Haggis called his friend Moresco, and the two finished the script as a feature.

Lions Gate picked up "Crash" at the Toronto International Film Festival last September for $3.3 million and released it May 5. By that time, Haggis had received an Oscar nomination for writing "Million Dollar Baby," and Cheadle an Oscar mention for his lead role in "Hotel Rwanda."

"Crash" has emerged as the indie hit of the summer, and is expected to do continue its successful run on video when it's released Sept. 6.
Title: CRASH
Post by: Finn on June 28, 2005, 02:56:02 PM
not sure if this is a good idea
Title: CRASH
Post by: ᾦɐļᵲʊʂ on June 28, 2005, 09:08:19 PM
Well, usually a TV series is a crappier version of the movie... so... um...

What would be funny is Crash became a reality TV show.  Where they put racists from all walks of life into a room, the last one not conforming to some ridiculous ideal of "equality" wins.
Title: CRASH
Post by: SiliasRuby on June 28, 2005, 11:55:15 PM
Quote from: Walrus
Well, usually a TV series is a crappier version of the movie... so... um...

What would be funny is Crash became a reality TV show.  Where they put racists from all walks of life into a room, the last one not conforming to some ridiculous ideal of "equality" wins.

Sounds like a winner, but ya, most of the movie to TV stuff is complete shit.
Title: CRASH
Post by: ᾦɐļᵲʊʂ on July 31, 2005, 05:54:35 PM
"Easily the strongest American film since 'Mystic River'."

How many movies has David Denby seen?
Title: CRASH
Post by: pete on July 31, 2005, 05:58:57 PM
david denby on ben stiller:
http://www.newyorker.com/critics/cinema/?050124crci_cinema

owen wilson on denby:
(http://www.defamer.com/hollywood/owen-wilson-letter.jpg)
Title: CRASH
Post by: SHAFTR on July 31, 2005, 06:36:31 PM
Quote from: The W
"Easily the strongest American film since 'Mystic River'."

How many movies has David Denby seen?


Haggis and Denby were at the Crash screening.  I left hating all 3.
Title: CRASH
Post by: Pubrick on July 31, 2005, 11:25:27 PM
Quote from: Hedwig
September 6, 2005 (http://images.amazon.com/images/P/B000A3XY5A.01.LZZZZZZZ.jpg)

why not just post the pic?

(http://images.amazon.com/images/P/B000A3XY5A.01.LZZZZZZZ.jpg)
Title: CRASH
Post by: Finn on August 01, 2005, 10:21:33 AM
that's really good for a dvd cover
Title: CRASH
Post by: modage on August 01, 2005, 11:10:21 PM
whats funny is, with the exception of don cheadle, i dont see any of the people on that cover and think 'actors actor' or whatever.  like, it seems like a cast of people who dont belong in this sort of movie.
Title: CRASH
Post by: Myxo on August 02, 2005, 03:37:21 AM
Quote from: themodernage02
whats funny is, with the exception of don cheadle, i dont see any of the people on that cover and think 'actors actor' or whatever.  like, it seems like a cast of people who dont belong in this sort of movie.


I can't stand Sandra Bullock, but saw this movie anyway. I'm right there with you on that one. Mat Dillon? I can't remember the last movie he did before Crash. Was it Wild Things? It would be really insightful to hear how the casting director came up with his/her choices.
Title: CRASH
Post by: killafilm on August 03, 2005, 12:07:45 AM
I'd say most of the movies that I like Ryan Phillippe in are kinda sorta 'ensemble' like.
Title: CRASH
Post by: Weak2ndAct on September 03, 2005, 04:22:15 AM
Shithouse.

This is the movie for people who are dumb and think they're smart.  I hated this so much, I'm seriously reevaluating my admiration for M$B (gah, imagine if Haggis had gotten to direct as he had originally hoped).

The list of offenses are too high to count:
- Fraser as the DA-- HA!
- The epically overwrought coincidences
- Snow
- The bullshit copouts (blanks, Dillion crawling back into the car)
- The casting of Tony Danza (when I see him, I think 'oh, Terrence Howard is the director of a Danza sitcom.'  No, Danza plays a writer/producer/whatever, thanks, I've been totally taken out of the movie-- why not cast anyone else, say, who's not a sitcom actor?)
- The opening scene, especially in retrospect
- Luda's character.  Nigga please.

And that's just off the top of my head.  Fuck this movie in the face.
Title: CRASH
Post by: Gamblour. on September 03, 2005, 12:31:31 PM
It's not so much for people who are dumb but think they're smart (though I do agree), as it is for people who just haven't seen movies that have already done this. I mean, if you've seen a Spike Lee movie, this should seem old hat. Coincidences? I don't even have to name the films. I think it just pisses me off that THIS is the film that gets noticed. Ugh, I do not want to see the Oscars this year.

I think what hurts the most is that Conan raved about it so much. Sigh.
Title: CRASH
Post by: The Perineum Falcon on September 03, 2005, 04:06:32 PM
Quote from: Weak2ndAct
Shithouse.

This is the movie for people who are dumb and think they're smart.  I hated this so much, I'm seriously reevaluating my admiration for M$B (gah, imagine if Haggis had gotten to direct as he had originally hoped).

The list of offenses are too high to count:
- Fraser as the DA-- HA!
- The epically overwrought coincidences
- Snow
- The bullshit copouts (blanks, Dillion crawling back into the car)
- The casting of Tony Danza
- The opening scene, especially in retrospect
- Luda's character.  Nigga please.

And that's just off the top of my head.  Fuck this movie in the face.

Thank you so much for speaking my mind.
Title: CRASH
Post by: SHAFTR on September 03, 2005, 05:17:13 PM
Quote from: ranemaka13
Quote from: Weak2ndAct
Shithouse.

This is the movie for people who are dumb and think they're smart.  I hated this so much, I'm seriously reevaluating my admiration for M$B (gah, imagine if Haggis had gotten to direct as he had originally hoped).

The list of offenses are too high to count:
- Fraser as the DA-- HA!
- The epically overwrought coincidences
- Snow
- The bullshit copouts (blanks, Dillion crawling back into the car)
- The casting of Tony Danza
- The opening scene, especially in retrospect
- Luda's character.  Nigga please.

And that's just off the top of my head.  Fuck this movie in the face.

Thank you so much for speaking my mind.


I'm glad more agree with me.
Title: CRASH
Post by: The Perineum Falcon on September 03, 2005, 07:46:59 PM
I actually never thought, or even wanted to compare it to Magnolia. What would be the point?
An ensemble cast of characters connected by fate and coincidence? Come on, there's got to be more to it than that.
Title: CRASH
Post by: ono on September 03, 2005, 07:52:49 PM
Quote from: RedVines
Quote from: Gamblour
I think what hurts the most is that Conan raved about it so much. Sigh.


Well if CONAN says it then it must be great :roll:

You miss the point.  He's smart and very well educated, he's funny, he usually has good taste.  No film is Magnolia, but not every film should try to be.  The point being made in this thread is this film is too on the nose, too obvious, just tries way too hard.  Much like most people during their first 100 or so posts here.
Title: CRASH
Post by: Gamblour. on September 03, 2005, 10:00:59 PM
Quote from: onomataviva
Quote from: RedVines
Quote from: Gamblour
I think what hurts the most is that Conan raved about it so much. Sigh.


Well if CONAN says it then it must be great :roll:

You miss the point.  He's smart and very well educated, he's funny, he usually has good taste.  No film is Magnolia, but not every film should try to be.  The point being made in this thread is this film is too on the nose, too obvious, just tries way too hard.  Much like most people during their first 100 or so posts here.


Yeah exactly. Why crack on my Conan line, which is clearly lighthearted?

Here's what's wrong: a film like "Do the Right Thing" puts the audience in a position to consider, was Mookie right? Did he do the right thing?  However, this movie takes the rather unobscured elephant and parades it around for two hours. Then people regurgitate what they've seen, rather than consider what they've seen. "Oh America is racist." Yeah, but you could watch two hours about anything like this..."Oh America is capitalistic." There's no thinking involved. American History X even poses a question, "Can people be changed and have their sins unavenged?" This film tries to answer every question and fails at it with melodrama and contrived situations.
Title: CRASH
Post by: Gamblour. on September 04, 2005, 01:36:36 AM
Ok, I'm gonna be bold and say yes, it is about racism and that that is not shallow. You can disagree if you want. Saying this movie is not about racism is like saying 40 year old virgin is not about a 40 year old virgin. Sure, there's "other" stuff going on, but for god's sakes, why go out on a limb and say that's not the main issue? You could be wrong, you could prove you're right, but don't try to say it's not about racism just for the sake of being right in some self-proven way.

You know what? I'm sorry, but that's just ri-fucking-diculous to say that it's SHALLOW. goddammit. you pompous ass.
Title: CRASH
Post by: The Red Vine on September 04, 2005, 08:57:52 AM
Glad to see you have the capacity to read into movies and understand them to the fullest extent.


I must be as pompous as 80% of America since most people think it's a great film with the small exception of the XIXAX group. Hell, it's at #58 on IMDB's top 250 movies.
Title: CRASH
Post by: modage on September 04, 2005, 10:24:44 AM
Quote from: RedVines
I must be as pompous as 80% of America since most people think it's a great film with the small exception of the XIXAX group.

80% of America sucks.  we're the elite.
Title: CRASH
Post by: kotte on September 04, 2005, 10:49:37 AM
Quote from: RedVines
Hell, it's at #58 on IMDB's top 250 movies.


Like every fucking film the first month...
Title: CRASH
Post by: cron on September 04, 2005, 11:20:36 AM
hahahaha
Title: CRASH
Post by: SHAFTR on September 04, 2005, 11:22:56 AM
Quote from: RedVines

I must be as pompous as 80% of America since most people think it's a great film with the small exception of the XIXAX group. Hell, it's at #58 on IMDB's top 250 movies.


about 130 spots above Magnolia, I must have my priorities screwed up.
Title: CRASH
Post by: Garam on September 04, 2005, 11:26:25 AM
Oh yeah, i just love the IMDb list.

(http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y40/Garam_21/FUCK.jpg)

FUCK. That just makes me angry right there.

Anyway, Crash. Saw it, and neither liked it or hated it. It was just mediocre. I never want to see it again and it made no kind of impact on me.
Title: CRASH
Post by: Gamblour. on September 04, 2005, 11:42:21 AM
Yeah I mean, why is Big Lebowski so high anyway?
Title: CRASH
Post by: The Red Vine on September 04, 2005, 12:04:33 PM
Quote from: Gamblour
Yeah I mean, why is Big Lebowski so high anyway?


good question
Title: CRASH
Post by: Garam on September 04, 2005, 02:05:42 PM
:'-(
Title: CRASH
Post by: Pas on September 04, 2005, 02:53:52 PM
This didn't even get to theater here and there's only 5 copies in our biggest video-dvd-rental-thing ... there is hope in French Canada
Title: CRASH
Post by: modage on September 06, 2005, 07:02:40 PM
a little fuel for a fire from AICN...

CRASH- Hands down one of the best movies of 2005 thus far. In some ways it reminds me of MAGNOLIA. I wasn’t a big fan of Haggis’ work on THE MILLION DOLLAR BABY – it just felt like I’d seen better versions of it before. However, Haggis’ work here is absolutely sterling.

it probably wasn't meant that way, but the way it's written implies that MDB wasn't as good as prior movies of that type whereas with Crash he has not seen better versions of movies of this kind (specifically Magnolia!)

i will be seeing this later this week...
Title: CRASH
Post by: killafilm on September 06, 2005, 11:41:32 PM
Also from AICN...

Paul Haggis, eh? I know many of you genuinely adored MILLION DOLLAR BABY, and hooray for you. I still think his work plays like over-earnest TV, and all the good performances in the world don’t save it for me. I haven’t written a full review of this one, but maybe I will once I look over the Lions Gate disc. In the meantime, if you want to be lectured about how racism is bad, this is the film for you today.

- Moriarty



I'll probably check it out to, but right now i'm kinda ehhh about it.
Title: CRASH
Post by: Weak2ndAct on September 07, 2005, 03:20:14 AM
I love that fact that Haggis did a movie about racism, yet it's pretty racist itself (the stereotypes hurt my head).
Title: CRASH
Post by: cine on September 07, 2005, 03:23:20 AM
how is the movie racist itself?  theres no one like that anywhere?
Title: CRASH
Post by: SHAFTR on September 07, 2005, 03:51:12 AM
"guys, racism is bad"

I guess this was the tagline that took 2nd place.
Title: CRASH
Post by: ᾦɐļᵲʊʂ on September 07, 2005, 10:55:02 AM
I understand Crash touched some people, and for that I can like about it... it made a lot of people I know take a look at stereotypes and racism, but for me this movie was very trite and simplistic.  The idea was fine (you'd think blending Magnolia with Do The Right Thing would work) but the execution didn't give the viewer enough credit.
Title: CRASH
Post by: kotte on September 07, 2005, 02:04:04 PM
Quote from: Walrus
the execution didn't give the viewer enough credit.


The problem with every fucking movie made today.

When I sit down to watch one of those I start to question myself.
"Am I? Am I an idiot??" (P, don't bother.)
Title: CRASH
Post by: Gamblour. on September 07, 2005, 02:19:40 PM
Quote from: Weak2ndAct
I love that fact that Haggis did a movie about racism, yet it's pretty racist itself (the stereotypes hurt my head).


I would only say the movie is racist against (as someone either here or elsewhere mentioned) Asian people, because they're the only group that gets made fun of with no real conflict or redemption. It IS horribly horribly stereotyped and that is what the fuck is wrong with this movie: you can't seriously address issues of race if you're dealing with overwritten stereotypes. People aren't racist so overtly, that's where racism is fucking scary is when it's covert and suggested, not in your fucking face like Matt Dillon or the car accident at the beginning. Hinting at inferiority is today's racism.
Title: CRASH
Post by: Ghostboy on September 07, 2005, 05:04:50 PM
Today's undercover racism, and segregation, has just been widely exposed in the New Orleans situation.

Meanwhile, I like how, after writing the comment posted above, Moriarty at AICN went on to say that Fraggle Rock is a much better commentary on racial harmony than Crash could ever hope to be.
Title: CRASH
Post by: Ravi on September 09, 2005, 01:19:05 PM
Quote from: Gamblour
It IS horribly horribly stereotyped and that is what the fuck is wrong with this movie: you can't seriously address issues of race if you're dealing with overwritten stereotypes. People aren't racist so overtly, that's where racism is fucking scary is when it's covert and suggested, not in your fucking face like Matt Dillon or the car accident at the beginning. Hinting at inferiority is today's racism.


That's what I was thinking when I saw the movie yesterday.  People these days aren't all "lynch them niggers" and such.  The racism is there, but its passive-aggressive and hidden behind other things.  The LAPD has been notoriously racist so I had no problem there, but the way Matt Dillon is racist was not believable.  The opening car accident scene played out like some high schooler's play on racism.

Everyone in this film was some sort of stereotype, except the locksmith.  You got the racist white gun-shop owner.  The two black thugs.  The Cheadle's character has a crack-addict mother and his brother is one of the thugs.  The stuffy white Bullock character.  The racist cop.  The Asians who deal in human trafficking.  If a character here is not a stereotype or archetype, they're underdeveloped.  For a film that purports to be about racism, it does an awful job of portraying the characters as real people.

The events and dialogue were just.  A few moments shined, such as Dillon pulling over Howard and Newton, and Dillon's frustration at the HMO, but for the most part this has to be the most written-feeling film I've seen this year.  I'd say this film is worse than the sequels and remakes that HW churns out since it pretends to be intelligent and really isn't.  At least The Dukes of Hazzard has no such pretensions.
Title: CRASH
Post by: analogzombie on September 09, 2005, 01:28:53 PM
Quote from: Ghostboy
Today's undercover racism, and segregation, has just been widely exposed in the New Orleans situation.



I think you're confusing socio-economic factors related to historically unbalanced cultural norms with rascism. It's more about poverty than it is about rascism. Race is the smoke screen that keeps us from looking into the real issues (personal and social) that allow situations like New Orleans to happen.

At any rate, Crash strikes me as the moron's 'moving ensemble emssage film'. Much like Million Dollar Baby was. Both are overwrought and as blunt as a ballpeen hammer, completely lacking any nuance in the thinly drawn characters. Besides that, it has Brenden Frasier, Sandra Bullock, and Ludacris in it. I mean c'mon. 2 of the worst actors who are somehow popular today, and the prerequisite urban character as played by a rapper. The best thing about the movie is Don Cheadle and it seems obvious to me that he was cast to give the film some credibility.

This is a big stupid movie attempting to come off as an emotional character piece that attacks our preconceived notions of America. For people who don't know any better, it works.
Title: CRASH
Post by: Ghostboy on September 09, 2005, 02:15:02 PM
Quote from: analogzombie
Quote from: Ghostboy
Today's undercover racism, and segregation, has just been widely exposed in the New Orleans situation.



I think you're confusing socio-economic factors related to historically unbalanced cultural norms with rascism. It's more about poverty than it is about rascism.  


You're correct; I was thinking as well, though, of the news footage that showed black people looting while white people waited patiently on their roofs. A result of socio-economic factors, yes, but coun'dt that also arguably be a latent expression of racism?
Title: CRASH
Post by: pete on September 09, 2005, 03:52:45 PM
well, that's only if you truly believe that none of this is related--racism, classism, socio-economic discrimination...etc.  do all those black people just happen to be poor by coincidence?  the real estate prices in middle class neighborhoods in black and white long island just HAPPEN to be drastically different despite the fact that they're in the same socio-economic bracket?  in a capitalist country, of course racism is going to result in socio-economic issues.  the middle class white folks of today don't have to do much to reinforce racism, just by not being empathetic enough, you'll be propelling the current infrastructure of race and class in a capitalist America.  I mean, the New Orleans thing right, nobody in the middle class understood that to evacuate people in them po' black neighborhoods is gonna take more than shouting "the storm is coming so leave!" I mean we probably all thought the city had some kinda systematic evcuation process with buses and firemen or something, who knew it was just some guy saying some word.  and that's everyone in America's fault together, including me, an Asian male living in da ghetto of Boston who is not even a citizen.
Title: CRASH
Post by: Ravi on September 10, 2005, 04:55:17 PM
Quote from: rudiecorexxx
there's one shot in CRASH that lasts for only 3 seconds (maybe) that the editor should have taken out.  if they did take this shot out then CRASH would have been a much much better movie (imo).  can anyone guess which shot i'm talking about?  (probably not)


SPOILER








The shot of the red box of blanks?
Title: CRASH
Post by: analogzombie on September 10, 2005, 07:37:11 PM
Quote from: Ghostboy
Quote from: analogzombie
Quote from: Ghostboy
Today's undercover racism, and segregation, has just been widely exposed in the New Orleans situation.



I think you're confusing socio-economic factors related to historically unbalanced cultural norms with rascism. It's more about poverty than it is about rascism.  


You're correct; I was thinking as well, though, of the news footage that showed black people looting while white people waited patiently on their roofs. A result of socio-economic factors, yes, but coun'dt that also arguably be a latent expression of racism?


you're right. it could be, but only if we assume that both black and white were looting for the same items i.e. not just food but material goods.

I saw that footage and thought "man looks like only the black people got stuck in town". And considering that the city of New Orleans has an extremely large population of black people that live below the pverty line, it's not surprising that we saw a disproportionate amount of black people to white on tv. Now to discuss why most of the poor people are black and not white is another discussion entirely. But I think you make a point that is common in America, and is made by Crash. namely that if you see any negartive images of black people in the media, it's almost automatically considered rascist. We all know that looting is something that is usually conducted by the extremely poor. We also know that the population of New Orleans is somehting like 65% black, with more than half of that number living in poverty and therefor unable to evacuate. So it's then no surprise to see black people looting. The few shots of white I did see were not looting, you are correct. But I also saw many scenes of black people not looting either. I think in this case it's more a symptom of the reality of the demographics and income level of the city than it is overt media rasicism.

However, I definitely do not rule out the possiblity of media bias. We all know that it exists, but even if that is the case, would you argue that the scenes of black people looting shoe stores and gun shops were staged? I'm not so naive to think that no white people were involved in the looting, but just because we only see certain images doesn't mean they aren't still accurate. And this is the major fault I find with the race-bating culture of this country, and films like Crash. They really don't attempt to tackle or even pose questions, about the real issues surrounding race in this country. Instead they seem content to continue to rely on racial witch hunts and the emphasizing of stereotypes to divide our society on the color line.

When automatically default to the issue of race whenever there is a problem in America, we often completely miss the bigger picture and real issues that led to that problem in the first place.
Title: CRASH
Post by: pete on September 11, 2005, 09:25:36 AM
but did you ever stop to think about why in a country with only 12% black, about 70% of them are in the inner cities?  did you ever learn about the "white flight" of America in the 50's and 60's?  that's not that long ago, that's our parents' generation ago.
"social economic" and racial discrimination is not just the KKK's burning crosses or "The Man" keeping everyone down with the media sensationalizing a certain race...it's mainly ignorance from the status quo--the middle class whites looking only for themselves, not realizing that there are people out there who have been oppressed and have never really been "freed" in a true capitalistic systematic American sense--so now that they're declared "free" they're still living in the same area getting the same crap from the same people.  it's not just about images of looters and stuff, it goes much further than that.
Title: CRASH
Post by: ᾦɐļᵲʊʂ on September 11, 2005, 12:18:25 PM
That doesn't make this movie good simply because it addresses racism in a way that we don't think about.  I applaud the effort to reveal the undercurrent of an almost transparent, but very existent level of racism.  But there's a lot more to a movie than a premise, and Crash didn't really excel at anything more than that.  The dialogue was poor, the directing was so-so, the editing was all right... If we're debating the idea behind it, it wasn't so bad.  If we're debating the film, I don't see how it was very well done.
Title: CRASH
Post by: modage on September 11, 2005, 03:26:07 PM
Quote from: Walrus Star
If we're debating the idea behind it, it wasn't so bad.  If we're debating the film, I don't see how it was very well done.

*cough BROWN BUNNY! *cough
Title: CRASH
Post by: ᾦɐļᵲʊʂ on September 11, 2005, 05:10:21 PM
*cough Star Wars Episode III cough*
Title: CRASH
Post by: modage on September 16, 2005, 11:48:04 PM
it was okay.  SPOILER the movie kicked in a bit during the scene where thandie newton is pulled out of the car crash by matt dillon.  END SPOILER it was preposterous and yet i was being 'moved' against my will.  the whole movie was a bit like that.  WAY too focused on ONLY racism, you dont get to know any of the characters that much.  and taking GIANT leaps of faith/logic in order to make things happen to these characters seemed lazy.  also, all the actors but don cheadle seemed like they were playing out of their league (atleast in the beginning).  i didnt love it, i didn't hate it.  it was whatever.  C
Title: CRASH
Post by: w/o horse on September 19, 2005, 02:28:09 PM
I was just randomly reading the comment on Harry's 1st week of September DVD picks over at AICN news and I thought this one was funny:

Quote
Is Crash worth watching
by Jeeks September 6th, 2005
11:42:51 PM CST
I heard it was like Final Destination but with racism instead of death chasing you.
Title: CRASH
Post by: pete on September 19, 2005, 02:39:51 PM
wow, that's so accurate.  and I haven't even seen final destination.
Title: CRASH
Post by: ᾦɐļᵲʊʂ on September 19, 2005, 03:03:03 PM
Quote from: pete
I haven't even seen final destination.


Lucky bastard.
Title: CRASH
Post by: Kal on September 19, 2005, 04:53:05 PM
I just saw it on DVD... and its once again one of those movies that I was expecting to love and they are nothing special.

What is so great about it? What made it so special that everyone loved it and its supposed to be one of the few exceptions of the year and one of the most succesful films of the year (box office)? I dont get it.

It was ok... but damn even Transporter 2 had better editing and directing
Title: CRASH
Post by: killafilm on September 28, 2005, 06:37:05 PM
Quote from: analogzombie
At any rate, Crash strikes me as the moron's 'moving ensemble emssage film'. Much like Million Dollar Baby was. Both are overwrought and as blunt as a ballpeen hammer, completely lacking any nuance in the thinly drawn characters.


I totally agree, even though I have no clue what a ballpeen hammer is.  How are you supposed to care or relate about any of the characters when they are all stereotypes in the worste way possible.  I think I'll go as far to say that I hate this movie.

I think Crash is more likely to cause hate crimes than stop them.
Title: CRASH
Post by: cowboykurtis on September 28, 2005, 06:48:23 PM
the writer's efforts made me hate the color of my own skin.
Title: CRASH
Post by: Figure 8 on September 28, 2005, 10:23:58 PM
I thought some of those racist slurs were just so bad.  They seemed like they were attempting to put in racist slurs where they didn't fit AT ALL.  But the movie did have some really clever (for lack of a better word) moments to it.
Title: CRASH
Post by: matt35mm on October 17, 2005, 02:00:48 AM
Okay, just so I have an idea... is this so bad that I should spare myself and never watch it, or watch it just so I have an idea what the hell everybody's talking about?
Title: CRASH
Post by: pete on October 17, 2005, 02:09:56 AM
nah, I think it's entertaining, just really dumb.  if you can somehow watch it and realize it has nothing to do with real racism, but, just a morality play with good actors, then you'll really enjoy it, like I did at the time.
Title: CRASH
Post by: matt35mm on October 17, 2005, 02:15:32 AM
Thanks.  I figure that I should, yeah, just because I'm kinda curious as to why so many people think it's great, and why so many think it's crap.  I don't think I'll think it's great, but I'm curious either way.

I keep confusing this movie for the Cronenberg movie.  Someone will say that they loved Crash and I'll say "ohh you kinky little devil," and they don't know what I'm talking about.
Title: CRASH
Post by: analogzombie on October 17, 2005, 10:00:44 AM
Quote from: andyk


What is so great about it? What made it so special that everyone loved it


it's the average person's ensemble drama. i.e. the poor man's short cuts/magnolia

the actors are familiar and not too deep (except for Cheadle and Dillon who offer the credibility), and the topic is overt and not too "artsy".

brenden fraser+ sandra bullock+ ludicris+ rascism= bullshit movie
Title: CRASH
Post by: ᾦɐļᵲʊʂ on October 17, 2005, 01:11:54 PM
I think Encino Man covered more about racism than this did.
Title: CRASH
Post by: pete on October 17, 2005, 01:57:12 PM
haha, speaking of movies that try to cover racism.
anyone remembers die hard with a vengence?
Title: CRASH
Post by: modage on October 17, 2005, 02:15:07 PM
"i hate niggers"
Title: CRASH
Post by: pete on October 17, 2005, 02:18:46 PM
I remember seeing it on Fox, edited for tv, and they digitally changed it to "I hate everybody".
Title: CRASH
Post by: modage on October 17, 2005, 02:22:44 PM
i saw that too, which makes the scene totally hilarious that all the black people are getting so upset and offended at such a ridiculous sign.
Title: CRASH
Post by: Gamblour. on October 17, 2005, 02:28:59 PM
I love me some Die Hard. Remember the game for playstation? Die Hard was a third person shooter, Die Harder was a first person arcade shooter, and with a Vengeance was a car game. Vengeance was just fucking awesome as hell, trying to beat the clock and shit. Damn, I need to download that.
Title: CRASH
Post by: MacGuffin on October 17, 2005, 04:45:50 PM
Quote from: modage
i saw that too, which makes the scene totally hilarious that all the black people are getting so upset and offended at such a ridiculous sign.


No wonder the NAACP is in an uproar about the portrayal of Blacks on TV.
Title: CRASH
Post by: Gold Trumpet on October 17, 2005, 05:43:09 PM
Quote from: Gamblour
I love me some Die Hard. Remember the game for playstation? Die Hard was a third person shooter, Die Harder was a first person arcade shooter, and with a Vengeance was a car game. Vengeance was just fucking awesome as hell, trying to beat the clock and shit. Damn, I need to download that.


First off, the movies are pure happiness for me. Especially the first one.

But, the games were great too. Again preference was the first. It felt like its own really good game at the time and I really don't like video games. You can download....how and where? I would love to play that again.

Apologies for going off topic.
Title: CRASH
Post by: Gamblour. on October 17, 2005, 06:22:33 PM
I'm only assuming I can download a playstation rom or something...I haven't looked into it...yet.

They are also a joy for me, mostly the third. The first I saw second, so it's got its own appeal for me. The second film was on TV yesterday...I didn't want to see it again.
Title: CRASH
Post by: grand theft sparrow on October 22, 2005, 10:12:51 PM
I love how this thread went from talking about Crash to talking about Die Hard.  

To get it back on track...

Just finished watching Crash.  My fucking head hurts from all the goddamn sledgehammers.  People of every race should be offended that anyone at all found this movie thought-provoking.

I'd have been willing to forgive the blatant Altman/PTA theft if the subject matter were handled in an intelligent way.  This is the kind of movie that conservatives would cite as "liberal propaganda".  And for once, they're right.

Crash is fucking BULL. SHIT.  


But getting back to Die Hard... even though the second one is the weakest one, I still love the part with the icicle in the eye.
Title: CRASH
Post by: ᾦɐļᵲʊʂ on October 22, 2005, 11:36:59 PM
Quote from: hacksparrow

Just finished watching Crash.  My fucking head hurts from all the goddamn sledgehammers.  People of every race should be offended that anyone at all found this movie thought-provoking.

I'd have been willing to forgive the blatant Altman/PTA theft if the subject matter were handled in an intelligent way.  This is the kind of movie that conservatives would cite as "liberal propaganda".  And for once, they're right.

Crash is fucking BULL. SHIT.  


But getting back to Die Hard... even though the second one is the weakest one, I still love the part with the icicle in the eye.


I wouldn't so much say it's bullshit... I can't exactly deny that racism exists.  This movie had a point it wanted to make, it just did so very poorly.
Title: CRASH
Post by: grand theft sparrow on October 23, 2005, 12:27:19 AM
Quote from: Walrosferatu
I wouldn't so much say it's bullshit... I can't exactly deny that racism exists. This movie had a point it wanted to make, it just did so very poorly.


That's what I meant by bullshit.  The point it was trying to make is nothing new or even overlooked.
Title: CRASH
Post by: ono on October 24, 2005, 07:30:52 PM
Spoilers, maybe.

I just started watching Crash to see what all the fuss was about.  Five minutes in I'm already annoyed.  Don Cheadle wasted.  Jennifer Esposito, too, bitching to an Asian woman that she didn't "blake."  Haha.  This is similar to the pain I had watching Dogville -- the preachy, pretentious, preposterous pain.

Ludacris had a point about tipping, but the irony is thick, and this whole thing is way too preachy already.  Broken record.  I'm sure all this has been sung before.  It's gonna be a long night.

EDIT: Yep, finished it.  Pretty bad overall, but not completely unredeemable.  The script was just pretty poor.  There were scenes here which could've added up to the great movie people purport it to be, but it caters and panders to the stupid, ignorant general public, which explains why it's so widely acclaimed.  It's the Gladiator of racism.  Watch it win best picture, or at least get nominated.  I lump it with films like Boys Don't Cry, Bamboozled, Closer, and Dogville as films that mean well but miss the mark because they're too angry, pointed, on the nose, and/or sensationalistic just for sensationalism's sake.  Like I said, a few really great scenes, but the irony is way too strong.  It wants to be Magnolia, Lantana, or Short Cuts (though I doubt Haggis has even heard of Altman), but it lacks the finesse of these films, which is what makes them so great and this one so ... not.
Title: CRASH
Post by: ᾦɐļᵲʊʂ on October 24, 2005, 09:48:08 PM
SPOILERS?


Yeah, when Cheadle basically sums up the movie in the first line, using the title in its context, it is immediately cheapened.
Title: CRASH
Post by: Ravi on October 24, 2005, 09:56:05 PM
It was like something shot for the trailer that accidentally made it into the final film.
Title: CRASH
Post by: abuck1220 on October 28, 2005, 10:43:07 PM
wow, you guys are harsh. i thought it was pretty good. for me, the preachiness and sledge hammer subtlety was much worse in north country, which i think is an inferior film. i didn't like it because i learned about racism and stuff...i just thought it was a well-played drama with good characters and interesting stories.

my main problems w/ it was it was either too short or there were too many characters. bullock and fraser's characters were pretty much non-existent. it's tough to do an ensemble film w/ like 10 characters in an hour and fifty minutes.

given the fact that it's certainly magnolia-ish, i should have expected everyone here to hate it. of course, magnolia is probably a lot more like short cuts than this is like magnolia, but whatever...
Title: CRASH
Post by: modage on October 28, 2005, 11:25:07 PM
is it just me or is your avatar suddenly better quality?
Title: CRASH
Post by: abuck1220 on October 29, 2005, 12:43:50 AM
Quote from: modage
is it just me or is your avatar suddenly better quality?


someone with much better computer skills fixed it for me.  :-D

glorious, isn't it?
Title: CRASH
Post by: modage on October 29, 2005, 09:58:03 AM
that person has no idea how much i appreciate it.
Title: CRASH
Post by: pumba on October 30, 2005, 11:16:17 AM
yea this was deffinitely and after school special movie. But whatever, we got to see Don Cheadles ass!


"oorah!"
-Jamie Fox
Title: CRASH
Post by: mogwai on October 30, 2005, 11:49:14 AM
Quote from: modage
that person has no idea how much i appreciate it.

thank you. :kiss:
Title: CRASH
Post by: Gamblour. on October 30, 2005, 11:51:22 AM
Quote from: shnorff

"oorah!"
-Jamie Fox


Was that adding something to your post, or do you want it as a sig? Because you can do that.
Title: CRASH
Post by: JG on October 30, 2005, 01:44:43 PM
is this movie even worth renting?    i mean i want to join in on the bashing but there is so much that I want to see.
Title: CRASH
Post by: ᾦɐļᵲʊʂ on October 30, 2005, 01:47:25 PM
Quote from: abuck1220
Quote from: modage
is it just me or is your avatar suddenly better quality?


someone with much better computer skills fixed it for me.  :-D

glorious, isn't it?


All this time I thought my monitor's resolution just magically improved.

You ruined it.
Title: CRASH
Post by: polkablues on October 30, 2005, 02:17:42 PM
Quote from: JimmyGator
is this movie even worth renting?    i mean i want to join in on the bashing but there is so much that I want to see.


It's worth seeing just so you know what we're all talking about when we say how ridiculous it is.  It's easy to say, "It can't be that blunt and obvious... the trailer looked all right... Paul Haggis has an Oscar..."  Until you see it.  Then it becomes much harder to say those things.  Especially the Oscar one.
Title: CRASH
Post by: JG on October 30, 2005, 02:30:47 PM
I didn't love MDB, but I liked it.  I have a few friends that don't know much about movies and loved it.  Then I have another friend who kinda likes movies who says its so stupid.  I might check it out but I've been kinda watching Kurosowa lately, and this might take me out of the groove.  I am interested though.
Title: CRASH
Post by: abuck1220 on October 30, 2005, 05:09:22 PM
Quote from: JimmyGator
I didn't love MDB, but I liked it.  I have a few friends that don't know much about movies and loved it.  Then I have another friend who kinda likes movies who says its so stupid.  I might check it out but I've been kinda watching Kurosowa lately, and this might take me out of the groove.  I am interested though.


well, it's certainly no kurosawa...

i really don't think it's as disgustingly blunt and obvious as everyone here says it is. it certainly isn't subtle, but i think some people here may give it extra hate because it's similar to magnolia. even if you don't like the movie overall, there are some really good (in my opinion) scenes...and some decent performances.
Title: CRASH
Post by: Ravi on October 30, 2005, 05:55:37 PM
Quote from: abuck1220
i really don't think it's as disgustingly blunt and obvious as everyone here says it is. it certainly isn't subtle, but i think some people here may give it extra hate because it's similar to magnolia. even if you don't like the movie overall, there are some really good (in my opinion) scenes...and some decent performances.


But what good are some isolated scenes and moments and performances if they don't contribute to the film being good as a whole?
Title: CRASH
Post by: matt35mm on October 30, 2005, 06:11:31 PM
Quote from: Gamblour
Quote from: shnorff

"oorah!"
-Jamie Fox


Was that adding something to your post, or do you want it as a sig? Because you can do that.

It added that he was excited to see Cheadle's ass.
Title: CRASH
Post by: polkablues on October 30, 2005, 07:00:12 PM
Quote from: abuck1220
i really don't think it's as disgustingly blunt and obvious as everyone here says it is. it certainly isn't subtle, but i think some people here may give it extra hate because it's similar to magnolia. even if you don't like the movie overall, there are some really good (in my opinion) scenes...and some decent performances.


I don't even really see a big resemblance in it to "Magnolia", though, beyond being an ensemble drama set in LA.  It's actually far closer to something like "13 Conversations About One Thing" than it is to "Magnolia".

And I agree with you to an extent... there were some great scenes in the movie:  SPOILERS AHEAD....

Terrence Howard facing down the cops and Matt Dillon pulling Thandie Newton out of the car.

SPOILERS BEHIND

There were also some embarassingly bad scenes:

The rest of the movie.

I think the big complaint that most of us had with the movie is that it didn't live up to its pretentions.  If you're making a movie that's setting out to be this big important parable on racism in America, you'd better come up with something deeper than "Asian people drive poorly."
Title: CRASH
Post by: Ravi on October 30, 2005, 07:10:13 PM
Quote from: polkablues
I think the big complaint that most of us had with the movie is that it didn't live up to its pretentions.  If you're making a movie that's setting out to be this big important parable on racism in America, you'd better come up with something deeper than "Asian people drive poorly."


And practice human trafficking.
Title: CRASH
Post by: abuck1220 on October 30, 2005, 10:37:04 PM
Quote from: polkablues
Quote from: abuck1220
i really don't think it's as disgustingly blunt and obvious as everyone here says it is. it certainly isn't subtle, but i think some people here may give it extra hate because it's similar to magnolia. even if you don't like the movie overall, there are some really good (in my opinion) scenes...and some decent performances.


I don't even really see a big resemblance in it to "Magnolia", though, beyond being an ensemble drama set in LA.  It's actually far closer to something like "13 Conversations About One Thing" than it is to "Magnolia".

And I agree with you to an extent... there were some great scenes in the movie:  SPOILERS AHEAD....

Terrence Howard facing down the cops and Matt Dillon pulling Thandie Newton out of the car.

SPOILERS BEHIND

There were also some embarassingly bad scenes:

The rest of the movie.

I think the big complaint that most of us had with the movie is that it didn't live up to its pretentions.  If you're making a movie that's setting out to be this big important parable on racism in America, you'd better come up with something deeper than "Asian people drive poorly."


well, i didn't really see it w/ those great expectations, and i didn't see it as setting out to be super important.

SPOILERS

and i didn't see the racism stuff as being cut and dry 'racism is bad' like everyone else did. if bullock's character had been just a little more racist, she wouldn't have gotter her car jacked. phillippe's character was the least racist of all of them, and he ended up shooting up a black guy. in some instances the racist people were right.

the way everyone's talking about it makes it seem like some evil redneck was out hanging black people and some angelic, open-minded liberal rode into town and taught him the err of his ways.

it wasn't super complex by any means, but it was waaaaay more developed than an after school special.
Title: CRASH
Post by: Gamblour. on October 31, 2005, 03:31:25 AM
This movie, to me, does for racism what Sex and the City does for feminism.

Sex and the City is about coping with men, but then also about being independent of them, which is a contradiction, of course. On top of which, the women are gross stereotypes, and, with the exception of Miranda, just horrible people.

My point is this. You can't address a topic seriously with stereotypes. Next time, let's see a movie about homophobia with a flaming homosexual and try to take it seriously. Philadelphia did a great job of avoiding this (except that scene where he listens to opera, BUT that was more about his humanity than the cliche of gay man being inclined to listen to opera).

To go back to the Asians in this movie, it's clear that they're the butt of racism from Haggis, because they're a fucking joke the entire movie. hell, why didn't they hand out egg rolls to the humans they were trafficking? The guy gets RUN OVER for fuck's sake. They're the only group not taken seriously or given any real redemption.

abuck, the idea that racists can be right.....again, let's go back to the idea of a movie about a homosexual. At any point during the watching of a film like that, would you EVER want to think to yourself, "Man, those homophobes are right some of the time?" It's ok for this movie to present it as maybe being right and the using that to contrast later. And it kinda does that. Kinda.
Title: CRASH
Post by: ono on October 31, 2005, 04:41:24 PM
Today I was at a friend's house and he put in a Dr. Seuss tape for his 2 1/2 year old daughter to watch.  It had three stories: The Sneetches, The Zax, and Green Eggs and Ham.

The Sneetches is a simple story: a race of creatures, one with stars on their bellies, the other without.  The ones with stars persecute the ones without, and exclude them from their fun.  So the ones without stars go to this guy who puts them through this machine that paints them on.  So the ones with stars go to the same guy and gets their stars removed (both for a price).  Chaos ensues with the removal and addition of stars until they all realize how silly they're being.

Now, it says a lot about how horrible Crash is when a simple Dr. Seuss story such as The Sneetches can say more about racism than a Hollywood movie from an Oscar nominee (whose previous effort I did love).
Title: CRASH
Post by: ᾦɐļᵲʊʂ on October 31, 2005, 11:56:12 PM
I did feel that I Can Read With My Eyes Closed touched base with its topic more than Million Dollar Baby, though.
Title: CRASH
Post by: NEON MERCURY on November 04, 2005, 06:56:14 PM
i finally saw this and its rather cheesy. the screenplay reminds me of a group of high school drama kids writing something that they think its profound and hip but comes off ignorant and ridiculous.  there are episodes of saved by the bell that pact more intellect and social awareness that thsi shit  [believe me, i am the only loser who owns all the saved by the bell season too].  i think part of the film problem besides the script is the b-list actors saying this crap.  the only person w/ talent is cheadle and we only like him b/c of the pta connection.  but bullock, frasier, howard, ludacris, thandie newton, that mexican guy, matt dillion are all sappy actors.  bu ti like ryan phillapie [whatever his name is].  the only thing that kept me from stickign a fork in my eyes were the cinematography and the score-both were well done.  and  thought the scene.......

spoilers


w/ newton and dillion and the upside down car thats dripping gasoloine was erotic and surreal.     dont kno wif it was intentional by haggis but i liked it.

basically, this a "movie that assholes like".  whoever thought that this film was great, probly thought fight club was the coolest shit ever.
Title: Re: CRASH
Post by: ᾦɐļᵲʊʂ on November 04, 2005, 10:31:49 PM
the upside down car thats dripping gasoloine was erotic and surreal.

You're thinking of the wrong Crash.
Title: Re: CRASH
Post by: polkablues on December 19, 2005, 03:53:27 PM
Here's chud.com's Devin Faraci with #1 on his list of Worst Movies of 2005.  I agree with every word in this:

1 – Crash. One of the most critically loved films of the year is one of the worst movies I have ever seen in my entire life. Bee Season was filled with smug New Age nonsense – Crash one-ups it by being filled with smug Afterschool Special nonsense. One should not walk out of a movie about racial tolerance with an overwhelming urge to commit genocide, but I left my screening of Crash just about ready to end all of humanity.

What makes Crash most insidious is that it’s well made and well acted. It fools you into thinking that it’s worth a damn, but it’s really a wholesale rip-off of Magnolia soldered onto a Very Special Episode of Diff’rent Strokes. At least in Magnolia the coincidences that brought the characters together were part of the point of the movie – here they’re just a distracting series of plot contrivances engineered by a writer/director so full of himself that there’s no room left for dessert. Characters don’t behave like people or even stereotypes – they simply move across the screen like chess pawns, doing whatever the simplistic themes of the film require.

I call foul on every critic who fell for this film. I call foul on people like Roger Ebert, who have put it at the top of their ten best lists for the year. I call foul on any group that gives this film an award (including NYFCO, the critic group I belong to). This is a false movie. This is a movie made up only of manipulation and simplicity, a movie designed to pat you on the head and never truly challenge you with a new or original thought or concept. It’s the White Man’s guilt movie of the year, assuring us that everybody is just as bad as we are, and then giving us a greasy prostate massage of utter falsity. The fact that America’s movie theaters weren’t burned to the ground during the scene when the Saintly Hispanic daughter of the Saintly and Misunderstood Hispanic locksmith was “shot” proves only that the movie-going public is corrupt and depraved.
Title: Re: CRASH
Post by: Sunrise on December 19, 2005, 04:40:40 PM
I watched this last night for the first time. Never intended to see it but I had to see what all the hype was about. I have to admit that I was emotionally affected (manipulated might be a better word) by several scenes, but by the time credits rolled I was tired of the sermon. This film REALLY wanted to be great...and usually when a film and/or the filmmakers are that conscious of their intended greatness, the results are anything but.

I love this quote from the chud review:

Quote
It fools you into thinking that it’s worth a damn, but it’s really a wholesale rip-off of Magnolia soldered onto a Very Special Episode of Diff’rent Strokes.
Title: Re: CRASH
Post by: Sal on December 19, 2005, 07:29:35 PM
After that review I'm a big fan of Devin.
Title: Re: CRASH
Post by: Gamblour. on December 19, 2005, 09:03:06 PM
I'm a big fan of the White Man's guilt movie of the year.
Title: Re: CRASH
Post by: Figure 8 on December 20, 2005, 03:59:42 PM
You know, that makes me wonder if it hadn't been for all the praise this movie got, would people be bashing it so bad?  I think that's just making it so much worse that everyone seemed to like this movie.
Title: Re: CRASH
Post by: grand theft sparrow on December 20, 2005, 05:32:11 PM
You know, that makes me wonder if it hadn't been for all the praise this movie got, would people be bashing it so bad? 

If Crash was given the same regard as something like, say, Jarhead - just slightly more favorable than unfavorable reviews - I'd still hate the movie, but I wouldn't be as vocal about it because, 1) there's less of a need for constant affirmation that you're not crazy for despising the movie; and 2) it's just not as interesting to bash something unless there's a sizeable contingent praising it - that's why this thread is at 12 pages and counting but the Hulk thread was only 4.

I think that's just making it so much worse that everyone seemed to like this movie.

You have that backwards, actually.
Title: Re: CRASH
Post by: SHAFTR on December 22, 2005, 02:10:18 PM
You know, that makes me wonder if it hadn't been for all the praise this movie got, would people be bashing it so bad?  I think that's just making it so much worse that everyone seemed to like this movie.

I saw it months before it was released.  So, I know that isn't the case for me.

I will admit though that all the praise for it has made me hate it worse.
Title: Re: CRASH
Post by: Anonymous Joe on December 22, 2005, 03:27:36 PM
I saw it the day it came out, and had heard nothing about it other then it was 'magnoliaish.' I was considered walking out but I had alredy paid $9, so I stayed. Also there where more people laughing at all the racial comments then being effected by them.
Title: Re: CRASH
Post by: Fernando on January 09, 2006, 03:33:26 PM
So I saw this on the weekend; I won't deny I was influenced by the bashing this movie received around here, which I feel somehow ruins the experience of watching the movie, doesn't matter if its a bashed movie or an overpraised one.

Having said that, I mostly agree with mod's comments and particularly with polka:

WAY too focused on ONLY racism, you dont get to know any of the characters that much.  and taking GIANT leaps of faith/logic in order to make things happen to these characters seemed lazy.  i didnt love it, i didn't hate it.  it was whatever.

I don't even really see a big resemblance in it to "Magnolia", though, beyond being an ensemble drama set in LA.

And the following will eventually appear in the blast from the past thread. hahaha

Quote from: SiliasRuby
I'm a total sucker for ensemble films of any kind. So, I am hoping to see this this weekend and I'll give you my report.
yep. we'll all be anxiously awaiting ur latest one-sentence, empty blurb.

anyway, this is the worst kind of movie, it just pretends to be good and is infuriating cos the silias's and small town loners of the world, who can't tell the difference, won't shut up about its "brilliance". shoot me if this gets any award recognition.

all haggis has to do is work with halle berry next to solidify his phony agenda.
Title: Re: CRASH
Post by: ᾦɐļᵲʊʂ on January 09, 2006, 11:17:53 PM
I thought Crash was a racism PSA for Schwarzanegger fans, though.
Title: Re: CRASH
Post by: modage on February 03, 2006, 09:38:57 PM
from ew...

Crash co-writer-director-producer Paul Haggis meanwhile, was also recognized in three catagories for his complex character piece, which premiered at the Toronto film festival way back in 2004 (around the time Clint Eastwood was editing the Haggis-scripted Million Dollar Baby).  "I remember that first [Crash] screening with an audience," Haggis says.  "I was sitting there horrified at them laughing, crying, gasping at all the right places, and I was thinking "These fools! Can't you see how flawed this is?'  It's taken me a great deal of time to get some distance.  I still see the flaws.  Thank God no one at Lionsgate listened when I told them how awful it was." 

hey, this guy's not so bad!
Title: Re: CRASH
Post by: Kal on February 03, 2006, 09:55:19 PM
lol

he should explain it to scorsese, kubrick (if he could), pta and the others who thought they had to make good films to get an oscar!
Title: Re: CRASH
Post by: polkablues on February 03, 2006, 11:53:29 PM
That's the first time I've ever seen a director acknowledge how dumb the people who like his movie are.  Now I want him to win Best Screenplay so he can go onstage and yell "Are you people INSANE?!!?!"  Anyways, that's what I would do if I were him.
Title: Re: CRASH
Post by: ᾦɐļᵲʊʂ on February 04, 2006, 12:16:13 AM
I might actually like him now, if that quote is true.
Title: Re: CRASH
Post by: Pubrick on February 04, 2006, 12:22:17 AM
he was fishing for compliments. he's the kind of girl who needs constant reinforcement to alleviate deep insecurities. he'll never be america's next top model.
Title: Re: CRASH
Post by: SiliasRuby on February 06, 2006, 08:57:20 AM
That's a hilarious quote. I'm thinking we can all try and look at crash as if it were a satire on society and how it deals with racism....It could work.
Title: Re: CRASH
Post by: grand theft sparrow on February 06, 2006, 09:35:25 AM
That's a hilarious quote. I'm thinking we can all try and look at crash as if it were a satire on society and how it deals with racism....It could work.

You mean that Crash itself is a satire of the American stance on racism or that Crash being a half-assed interpretation of the American stance on racism is a satire of the American stance on racism? 

Title: Re: CRASH
Post by: polkablues on February 06, 2006, 12:51:43 PM
I could imagine viewing Crash as if it were a Not Another Teen Movie-style parody of serious ensemble dramas.  On that level, I think I might enjoy it very much.

"What the hell is wrong with you people?  Uh-uh... don't talk to me unless you speak American!"

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!
Title: Re: CRASH
Post by: matt35mm on February 06, 2006, 01:05:54 PM
I see it as a live satire, taking into account the reception it's getting.

Such as:

I could imagine viewing Crash as if it were a Not Another Teen Movie-style parody of serious ensemble dramas.  On that level, I think I might enjoy it very much.

"What the hell is wrong with you people?  Uh-uh... don't talk to me unless you speak American!"

AUDIENCE: (Applause) (tears) That made me see deeply into myself.  That was so complex and moving!

ACADEMY: Here's a bunch of Oscar nominations!

I guess it's really more of a social experiment. 

... somewhere, an extra-intelligent lab mouse is shaking its head...
Title: Re: CRASH
Post by: The Perineum Falcon on February 06, 2006, 02:02:51 PM
I guess it's really more of a social experiment. 

... somewhere, an extra-intelligent lab mouse is shaking its head...
(http://www.blackwolf-images.com/images/wbg/loon/pbrain_sq.jpg)
Title: Re: CRASH
Post by: SiliasRuby on February 06, 2006, 06:16:53 PM
That's a hilarious quote. I'm thinking we can all try and look at crash as if it were a satire on society and how it deals with racism....It could work.

You mean that Crash itself is a satire of the American stance on racism or that Crash being a half-assed interpretation of the American stance on racism is a satire of the American stance on racism? 


I meant that crash itself is a satire of the american Stance on racism, but it could be the later.
Title: Re: CRASH
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on February 10, 2006, 11:37:23 PM
It's true, this is a white guilt movie, and not a particularly valuable one... if only because it doubles back continuously by removing some characters' dignity and redeeming others, especially the Matt Dillon and Sandra Bullock characters. And it's a little confusing that it decided to perpetuate most of the stereotypes it deals with... not especially helpful.

This movie strikes me as a pretty good litmus test, and the 77% at Rotten Tomatoes is a bit frightening.

I also didn't appreciate its cheap duplication of Magnolia (it even had a Wise Up moment and a climactic precipitation), or the horrifyingly bad music, or the fake slow motion.

It's refreshing to hear that Paul Haggis knows this movie is trash. I wonder if he's realized the same about Million Dollar Baby.
Title: Re: CRASH
Post by: ono on February 10, 2006, 11:44:41 PM
It hasn't been established if he was being facetious (or fishing for compliments, which is probably most likely) or not.  Would you pass me that coaster?  Water rings are a bitch.
Title: Re: CRASH
Post by: Recce on February 11, 2006, 12:54:05 AM
I'm kinda getting a different view on the quote. I think he was saying it was bad pacing and structure wise not because its exagerated and whatever the hell you people don't like it for. I, for one, thought it was great.
Title: Re: CRASH
Post by: ᾦɐļᵲʊʂ on February 23, 2006, 03:41:50 PM
SPOILER... and i like how they made cheadle fuck over his own race to better himself...

That's the problem with the entire movie.  It deals with race issues, but still using broad generalizations.  Don Cheadle turns on his own race... so the fuck what?  If a black man shoots a black man is it the end of an era?  Race isn't a network, it's the color of your skin. The movie didn't do anything about that, although it kept leading you to think it would.

Also, I guess I didn't notice the trend, but what mainstream movies are the african americans martyrs and white people devils?  I guess maybe Night of the Living Dead, but which particular movies do this? (This isn't a rhetorical question, I'm thinking maybe these movies have slipped my mind because the trend just doesn't seem apparent to me).  Plus, there was no juxtaposition anyway.  No white person was really even a hero.  Maybe Matt Dillon's dad, if anyone.
Title: Re: CRASH
Post by: NEON MERCURY on February 23, 2006, 09:16:37 PM
SPOILER... and i like how they made cheadle fuck over his own race to better himself...

That's the problem with the entire movie.  It deals with race issues, but still using broad generalizations.  Don Cheadle turns on his own race... so the fuck what?  If a black man shoots a black man is it the end of an era?  Race isn't a network, it's the color of your skin. The movie didn't do anything about that, although it kept leading you to think it would.

Also, I guess I didn't notice the trend, but what mainstream movies are the african americans martyrs and white people devils?  I guess maybe Night of the Living Dead, but which particular movies do this? (This isn't a rhetorical question, I'm thinking maybe these movies have slipped my mind because the trend just doesn't seem apparent to me).  Plus, there was no juxtaposition anyway.  No white person was really even a hero.  Maybe Matt Dillon's dad, if anyone.

popular films that hate white people:

in the heat of the night
seperate but equal
glory
mississippi burning
a time to kill
l.a. confidential
american history x
the color purple
amistad
monstar's ball
do the right thing
men of honor

.these are just off the top of my head that i've seen...you could add any other film dealing w/ nazis, kkk, slavery.etc., etc., etc............

in these films that i mentioned i am NOT defending the white characters..but we have seen hundreds of films where white people=bad  and the african-americans=good.....crash, flipped that around..its fucked w/ the typical race relations bewtween whites and minorites...that is an original idea that i applaud haggis for.

Quote
That's the problem with the entire movie.  It deals with race issues, but still using broad generalizations.  Don Cheadle turns on his own race... so the fuck what?  If a black man shoots a black man is it the end of an era?  Race isn't a network, it's the color of your skin. The movie didn't do anything about that, although it kept leading you to think it would.

my point of it is instead of the typical enron douche bag white boys fucking each other up and taking advantage of one another ...it was a minority doing it in a race relation genre film...
Title: Re: CRASH
Post by: pete on February 23, 2006, 10:58:25 PM
that was more retarded than the special olympics:


popular films that hate white people:

in the heat of the night
seperate but equal
glory
mississippi burning
a time to kill
l.a. confidential
american history x
the color purple
amistad
monstar's ball
do the right thing
men of honor

.these are just off the top of my head that i've seen...you could add any other film dealing w/ nazis, kkk, slavery.etc., etc., etc............

in these films that i mentioned i am NOT defending the white characters..but we have seen hundreds of films where white people=bad and the african-americans=good.....crash, flipped that around..its fucked w/ the typical race relations bewtween whites and minorites...that is an original idea that i applaud haggis for.

my point of it is instead of the typical enron douche bag white boys fucking each other up and taking advantage of one another ...it was a minority doing it in a race relation genre film...

oh, so I guess it's up to the white boy of hollywood to show the rest of the world how there might be some bad minorities in the world too--just like in Glory and Amistad and Mississippi Burning and A Time to Kill when white people came in and saved the poor black folks and gave their lives meaning?  Yeah, real negative portrayal of them white people.  Hollywood HATES white people, every week those slews of movies starring white people and directed white people should just all be titled "Self Loathing Number Vol. 14-336."  I can't think of "hundreds" of films that actually starred the African-Americans, nevermind the hundreds of films that starred both black people AND white people, except in porn of course.
So Crash's brilliant twist was that instead of having whites vs. the minorities, it had the minorities vs. the whites?  That's effing brilliant.  I mean, instead of centering it around white people, it centered around white people?  I loved how it played with the convention with the "race relation genre", god, I mean, hundreds of "race relation genre" movies and I can't think of one instance where the minorities wait, let me hold on that thought, and just say that, for the record, Bill O'reilly with his mouth full of his own cocks come of as more coherent as what you've just typed here.  You're a pitiful sheltered creature (albeit probably a nice person who cooks great food and has some kinda capacity for some basic human emotions) whose view of the world and especially of people not your skin color comes from movies, waiters, and that one guy in school who laughs at your racist jokes--ALL squeezed into this knee-jerk anti-PC frame, without much understanding of the history and the politics behind the PC controversy, and with even less understanding (if that is even possible) of things like "points of views" and "racial dynamics", coupled with a total lack of diversity in your awesome neighborhood, makes you severely handicapped in the arena of human understanding.  Your view of race and politics and the world and humans in general has just been tainted by this reactionary ideology of rebelling against rebellion, where everything is theoretically threatened by unseen forces from the "left" (which is defined here by any foreign idea that approaches you from non-traditional venues, or just any new idea you're unwilling to personally think through).  And this might've been alright if you had an aging machine that allows you to grow into a 70 year old diaper wearing retard, but to see it go to waste on a potentially friendly and charming and intelligent human being such as yourself, is heartbreaking enough for me to type up this long observation.  I've been reading your hollow reactions for months now, and every reaction you've ever posited on this here board can summarize you better than I have just now.  I'm just holding up the big mirror.  Take a look.  Don't waste your life away.
Title: Re: CRASH
Post by: Reinhold on February 23, 2006, 11:03:28 PM
so, should i see this or capote this weekend?
Title: Re: CRASH
Post by: polkablues on February 24, 2006, 01:41:50 AM
so, should i see this or capote this weekend?

See this.  Capote's no fun to argue about.
Title: Re: CRASH
Post by: NEON MERCURY on February 24, 2006, 01:43:52 AM
that was more retarded than the special olympics:


popular films that hate white people:

in the heat of the night
seperate but equal
glory
mississippi burning
a time to kill
l.a. confidential
american history x
the color purple
amistad
monstar's ball
do the right thing
men of honor

.these are just off the top of my head that i've seen...you could add any other film dealing w/ nazis, kkk, slavery.etc., etc., etc............

in these films that i mentioned i am NOT defending the white characters..but we have seen hundreds of films where white people=bad and the african-americans=good.....crash, flipped that around..its fucked w/ the typical race relations bewtween whites and minorites...that is an original idea that i applaud haggis for.

my point of it is instead of the typical enron douche bag white boys fucking each other up and taking advantage of one another ...it was a minority doing it in a race relation genre film...

oh, so I guess it's up to the white boy of hollywood to show the rest of the world how there might be some bad minorities in the world too--just like in Glory and Amistad and Mississippi Burning and A Time to Kill when white people came in and saved the poor black folks and gave their lives meaning?  Yeah, real negative portrayal of them white people.  Hollywood HATES white people, every week those slews of movies starring white people and directed white people should just all be titled "Self Loathing Number Vol. 14-336."  I can't think of "hundreds" of films that actually starred the African-Americans, nevermind the hundreds of films that starred both black people AND white people, except in porn of course.
So Crash's brilliant twist was that instead of having whites vs. the minorities, it had the minorities vs. the whites?  That's effing brilliant.  I mean, instead of centering it around white people, it centered around white people?  I loved how it played with the convention with the "race relation genre", god, I mean, hundreds of "race relation genre" movies and I can't think of one instance where the minorities wait, let me hold on that thought, and just say that, for the record, Bill O'reilly with his mouth full of his own cocks come of as more coherent as what you've just typed here.  You're a pitiful sheltered creature (albeit probably a nice person who cooks great food and has some kinda capacity for some basic human emotions) whose view of the world and especially of people not your skin color comes from movies, waiters, and that one guy in school who laughs at your racist jokes--ALL squeezed into this knee-jerk anti-PC frame, without much understanding of the history and the politics behind the PC controversy, and with even less understanding (if that is even possible) of things like "points of views" and "racial dynamics", coupled with a total lack of diversity in your awesome neighborhood, makes you severely handicapped in the arena of human understanding.  Your view of race and politics and the world and humans in general has just been tainted by this reactionary ideology of rebelling against rebellion, where everything is theoretically threatened by unseen forces from the "left" (which is defined here by any foreign idea that approaches you from non-traditional venues, or just any new idea you're unwilling to personally think through).  And this might've been alright if you had an aging machine that allows you to grow into a 70 year old diaper wearing retard, but to see it go to waste on a potentially friendly and charming and intelligent human being such as yourself, is heartbreaking enough for me to type up this long observation.  I've been reading your hollow reactions for months now, and every reaction you've ever posited on this here board can summarize you better than I have just now.  I'm just holding up the big mirror.  Take a look.  Don't waste your life away.

 :violin:

what is up w/ you?????  

all i'm saying is that this film was different..than the typical race relation genre in the fact that haggis made a statement saying minorites can suck just as much as white people do......you didnt need to go all armchair psychiatry on me...this film doesnt even deserve this much thought devoted to it...

oooh child..things are gonna get easier.....oooooooh, child things are gonna get brighter

  
Title: Re: CRASH
Post by: matt35mm on February 24, 2006, 02:34:37 AM
all i'm saying is that this film was different..than the typical race relation genre in the fact that haggis made a statement saying minorites can suck just as much as white people do
That's a pretty stupid statement for a film to make, though.  Especially when done so obviously.  "Minorities can suck just as much as white people do" could almost be a line from Crash.
Title: Re: CRASH
Post by: Pubrick on February 24, 2006, 08:53:32 AM
popular films that hate white people:
popular films that hate black ppl:

every fucking movie before 1950whatever and the majority from the next 50 years.

do you understand what i'm saying here? i hope it's not too armchair "psychiatry" or "logicy" or "truey".
Title: Re: CRASH
Post by: grand theft sparrow on February 24, 2006, 09:48:41 AM
but we have seen hundreds of films where white people=bad  and the african-americans=good.....crash, flipped that around..its fucked w/ the typical race relations bewtween whites and minorites...that is an original idea that i applaud haggis for.

That D.W. Griffith sure was ahead of his time, boy I'll tell ya.   :yabbse-undecided:
Title: Re: CRASH
Post by: pete on February 24, 2006, 10:36:44 AM
wow, still up to the same old tricks.
3 steps of Neon:
1) make an ignorant statement
2) skips other people's replies
3) repeat step 1

I'm trying to do this for you because I like you and because I wanna eat your sandwiches one day, but you're just making it really hard for the rest of us here by shutting your ears and going "lalalalalalanotlisteninglalalallala" everytime facts have been presented to you.  You can't even counter argue effectively, you can only repeat yourself until the next thread.


 :violin:

what is up w/ you?????  

all i'm saying is that this film was different..than the typical race relation genre in the fact that haggis made a statement saying minorites can suck just as much as white people do......you didnt need to go all armchair psychiatry on me...this film doesnt even deserve this much thought devoted to it...

oooh child..things are gonna get easier.....oooooooh, child things are gonna get brighter

  
Title: Re: CRASH
Post by: Ravi on February 24, 2006, 11:35:24 AM
Neon's response calls for an appearance from Tony Kaye:

(http://img154.imageshack.us/img154/6929/kaye2qf.gif)
Title: Re: CRASH
Post by: NEON MERCURY on February 24, 2006, 11:46:46 AM
all i'm saying is that this film was different..than the typical race relation genre in the fact that haggis made a statement saying minorites can suck just as much as white people do
That's a pretty stupid statement for a film to make, though.  Especially when done so obviously.  "Minorities can suck just as much as white people do" could almost be a line from Crash.

man, you guys take shit waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay to seriously...i am not trying to make this into a white-mans-burden-conservative-diatribe....but all i am saying is that THIS FUCKING FILM WAS DIFFERENT WHEN HANDELING RACE RELATIONS THEN WHAT WE NORMALLY SEE..um, thats all...

and as for as my lin eabout "monirities can suck as much as white people do".ahahahahaha, i was being  tongue and cheek....i was just [knowing my poor grammar skills] summing up my point quickly......i was hoping that soem of you guys woudl get  a laugh out of it......but...we are all anal internet film dorks.....so, i dug my own grave.......

popular films that hate white people:
popular films that hate black ppl:

every fucking movie before 1950whatever and the majority from the next 50 years.

do you understand what i'm saying here? i hope it's not too armchair "psychiatry" or "logicy" or "truey".

you just proved my point......

but we have seen hundreds of films where white people=bad  and the african-americans=good.....crash, flipped that around..its fucked w/ the typical race relations bewtween whites and minorites...that is an original idea that i applaud haggis for.

That D.W. Griffith sure was ahead of his time, boy I'll tell ya.   :yabbse-undecided:


 :yabbse-huh:

wow, still up to the same old tricks.
3 steps of Neon:
1) make an ignorant statement
2) skips other people's replies
3) repeat step 1

I'm trying to do this for you because I like you and because I wanna eat your sandwiches one day, but you're just making it really hard for the rest of us here by shutting your ears and going "lalalalalalanotlisteninglalalallala" everytime facts have been presented to you. You can't even counter argue effectively, you can only repeat yourself until the next thread.


 :violin:

what is up w/ you????? 

all i'm saying is that this film was different..than the typical race relation genre in the fact that haggis made a statement saying minorites can suck just as much as white people do......you didnt need to go all armchair psychiatry on me...this film doesnt even deserve this much thought devoted to it...

oooh child..things are gonna get easier.....oooooooh, child things are gonna get brighter

 

you guys again are the ones  not listening and taking shit too seriously/literally.....

here..lets try is like this:

NEON:
"HAVE THERE BEEN MANY FILMS THAT HANDLE RACE RELATIONS...........?"
XIXAX:
"WHY YES, THERE ARE ALOT OF THESE FILMS"
NEON:
"WOLD YOU SAY THAT IN MOST IF NOT ALL OF THOSE FILMS DEALs WITH THE WHITE PERSON BEING A VILLIANOUS CHARACTER..WHILE THE MINORITIES ARE THE HEROES?"
XIXAX:
"YES, THERE'S SLAVERY FILMS, SEGREGATION FILMS, SKIN HEAD FILMS, [so many more types too]ETC., AND NEON, YOU ARE RIGHT..IN MOST OF THOSE FILMS WHITES ARE ANTAGONISTS WHILE MINORITIES ARE PROTAGONISTS..."
NEON:
"KNOWING THIS..DO YOU THINK THAT CRASH WAS DIFFERENT IN THAT MINORITY CHARACTERS WERE ANTAGONISTS OR VILLIANOUS CHARACTERS INSTEAD OF THE TYPICAL WHITE ANTAGONIST CHARACTER IN RACE RELATION FILMS...?"
XIXAX:
___________________________ [fill in the blank]



neon 1
xixax 0
 
Title: Re: CRASH
Post by: Pubrick on February 24, 2006, 12:30:36 PM
popular films that hate white people:
popular films that hate black ppl:

every fucking movie before 1950whatever and the majority from the next 50 years.

do you understand what i'm saying here? i hope it's not too armchair "psychiatry" or "logicy" or "truey".

you just proved my point......
no, neon, i didn't. pay attention: blacks have historically been negatively presented in white popular culture, to put it lightly. by historically i mean since the beginning of media until say the last 40 years. there is no such thing as a "race relation genre", that's the joke pete was making. before the civil rights movement in america there was no question that whites were superior to black people.. IN POPULAR CULTURE we're talking about here. do you disagree with any of this so far? perhaps you didn't know this.

ok. so what i was implying was that what you call the typical "race relation genre" is actually the EXCEPTION, it's RADICAL. here's why: before a certain period in the 20th century it was taken for granted in the american media that blacks were inferior. yes i'm repeating myself, but do you understand what i'm saying? i don't think you're incapable of it. it wasn't a matter of one being the protagonist or the other being the bad guy, it was just a matter of fact that blacks were dumb and wrong and the bad guys and all that. they were not seen any other way in films.

the movies you see today about the KKK and your family are actually revisionist pics. this means that they show that world through the politically correct lens of today. back then it was normal to hate black people simply because everyone "knew" they were the bad guys, and that the white people were the good guys. this is the stuff your community never wanted you to know. (continued below)


but we have seen hundreds of films where white people=bad  and the african-americans=good.....crash, flipped that around..its fucked w/ the typical race relations bewtween whites and minorites...that is an original idea that i applaud haggis for.

That D.W. Griffith sure was ahead of his time, boy I'll tell ya.   :yabbse-undecided:


 :yabbse-huh:
the joke coxsparrow was making is in reference to director DW Griffith, who made Birth of a Nation. this movie was made very early in the 20th century and presents the KKK as sort of liberators of the nation, fighting the good fight as it were by hanging black ppl. it reflected the mentality of the time. DW didn't even think he was making a "race relations genre" type movie, and yet he showed white ppl to be the heroes against the blacks who were devils. 90 years before paul haggis. he was shunned soon after and the film is now viewed as having an extremely ignorant/naive view of race relations and it's depiction of negros. is he a hero to you cos he "broke the rules"?

if you are answering yes to the last question then you havn't understood what i've said. you are thinking of the world in the way fox news wants you to think.. that the "liberal media" has taken over, when in fact they have only just started to get their voice heard. for the longest time, before you were born, it was the racists who controlled the media.. but of course they weren't called racist, that's just the way everyone thought.

you think haggis is doing something new when he is actually doing the most retarded thing possible, he's appealing to people like you who think the world of the last 30 years is all that ever existed, and that showing a black person do bad is RADICAL just because no one remembers the hundreds of years when the image of evil black men was taken for granted.
Title: Re: CRASH
Post by: RegularKarate on February 24, 2006, 01:07:44 PM
I applaud your effort, P, but I don't think he's going to get it.

I don't think Neon even really watched a lot of the movies he listed as being about "the white man is the devil and the minorities are heroes" because I don't think he realized that he's wrong about a good deal of them.

I also don't think he's right about Crash... I think Crash tries to do what Do The Right Thing did well.  It just fails miserably.
Title: Re: CRASH
Post by: jigzaw on February 24, 2006, 05:00:52 PM
It's true, this is a white guilt movie, and not a particularly valuable one... if only because it doubles back continuously by removing some characters' dignity and redeeming others, especially the Matt Dillon and Sandra Bullock characters. And it's a little confusing that it decided to perpetuate most of the stereotypes it deals with... not especially helpful.

This movie strikes me as a pretty good litmus test, and the 77% at Rotten Tomatoes is a bit frightening.

I also didn't appreciate its cheap duplication of Magnolia (it even had a Wise Up moment and a climactic precipitation), or the horrifyingly bad music, or the fake slow motion.

It's refreshing to hear that Paul Haggis knows this movie is trash. I wonder if he's realized the same about Million Dollar Baby.

That song in the "look, unusual stuff falling from the sky, time for an epiphany!" scene even had a similar syncopated rhythm as "Wise Up" and an Aimee Mann sound-alike singing it. 

The one good thing I can say about this movie is that I was never bored during it.  It played like cheap trashy t.v. where you do want to know what happens next, but feel like a chump for enjoying it.  The writing was so bad.  The dialogue was laughable from beginning to end.  There was no subtext whatsoever.  It was like listening to people reading rejected letters to the editor at a newspaper.

Ok, about it's reception.  I thought maybe Ebert would convince me that there was some redeeming value, considering he says it's the best film of the year, but I'm coming away from his review just baffled..  Why does he love this film so much?  It is the worst type of dramatic writing I've seen in a mainstream film lately.  It deals with race relations at the level of a junior-high essay assignment.  I know, I know, he's married to a black woman, but he's not the only person in Hollywood who loves this film.  Jon Stewart on Howard Stern yesterday said he really thinks it'll win Best Picture.  If it does, I'll be laughing my ass off. 
Title: Re: CRASH
Post by: modage on February 24, 2006, 06:10:19 PM
yeah, it seems like if any film will upset Brokeback it will be this one.  if brokeback is too gay for older voters this will safely assure people they do care about young people issues like race.
Title: Re: CRASH
Post by: polkablues on February 24, 2006, 06:19:11 PM
yeah, it seems like if any film will upset Brokeback it will be this one.  if brokeback is too gay for older voters this will safely assure people they do care about young people issues like race.

I have a feeling you're right.  "I, too, feel guilty about believing that every black man I see is going to steal my car, even though he probably is," they will say, and their vote will shine forth, a beacon of hope... hope that someday, God willing, Hollywood will allow films in which white people are the good guys.

My fingers are crossed.
Title: Re: CRASH
Post by: NEON MERCURY on February 24, 2006, 08:45:23 PM
:bravo:....good post!!  one thing that i am not is a douche..you as i've alway said are a bright person and expresss yourself brilliantly.....i will try to work w/you by paragraph...



Quote
no, neon, i didn't. pay attention: blacks have historically been negatively presented in white popular culture, to put it lightly. by historically i mean since the beginning of media until say the last 40 years. there is no such thing as a "race relation genre", that's the joke pete was making. before the civil rights movement in america there was no question that whites were superior to black people.. IN POPULAR CULTURE we're talking about here. do you disagree with any of this so far? perhaps you didn't know this.

i agree w/ what you are saying here about "blacks have historically been negatively presented in white popular culture, to put it lightly. by historically i mean since the beginning of media until say the last 40 years"...but i am basing my arguement on films of my generation...70's-present......the age you are talking about was a different time...you have a good solid but it snot relevant to my arguement...i do however dissagree w/you saying that there is no race relation genre...in my opinion alot of those films that i mentioned as examples do have a common theme of race relations in their subject matter.....american history x, in the heat of the night, seperate but equal, men of honor, glory, a tiem to kill, etc....all of those films have a theme of racial relations.....can you argue aginst that?

Quote
ok. so what i was implying was that what you call the typical "race relation genre" is actually the EXCEPTION, it's RADICAL. here's why: before a certain period in the 20th century it was taken for granted in the american media that blacks were inferior. yes i'm repeating myself, but do you understand what i'm saying? i don't think you're incapable of it. it wasn't a matter of one being the protagonist or the other being the bad guy, it was just a matter of fact that blacks were dumb and wrong and the bad guys and all that. they were not seen any other way in films.

i understand what you are saying, again...but everything in bold is true but has nothing to do w/ my arguement for crash. again, i am talkign about my generation....thats how i can compare to what i've seen vs. crash...


Quote
the movies you see today about the KKK and your family are actually revisionist pics. this means that they show that world through the politically correct lens of today. back then it was normal to hate black people simply because everyone "knew" they were the bad guys, and that the white people were the good guys. this is the stuff your community never wanted you to know. (continued below)

 :yabbse-huh:


Quote
the joke coxsparrow was making is in reference to director DW Griffith, who made Birth of a Nation. this movie was made very early in the 20th century and presents the KKK as sort of liberators of the nation, fighting the good fight as it were by hanging black ppl. it reflected the mentality of the time. DW didn't even think he was making a "race relations genre" type movie, and yet he showed white ppl to be the heroes against the blacks who were devils. 90 years before paul haggis. he was shunned soon after and the film is now viewed as having an extremely ignorant/naive view of race relations and it's depiction of negros. is he a hero to you cos he "broke the rules"?

again, different times...and of course he is not a hero to me..what i bolded is disturbing and fucked up...its not my thing..i guess birth of  a nation copuld eb considered a "race relation" film but its so irrelevant to my genration of films...anyone who would enjoy watching birth of a nation is a douche bag.....its seems like propaganda..

 
Quote
if you are answering yes to the last question then you havn't understood what i've said. you are thinking of the world in the way fox news wants you to think.. that the "liberal media" has taken over, when in fact they have only just started to get their voice heard. for the longest time, before you were born, it was the racists who controlled the media.. but of course they weren't called racist, that's just the way everyone thought.

explain how this relevant to my arguement for crash....

Quote
you think haggis is doing something new when he is actually doing the most retarded thing possible, he's appealing to people like you who think the world of the last 30 years is all that ever existed, and that showing a black person do bad is RADICAL just because no one remembers the hundreds of years when the image of evil black men was taken for granted.

hmm, ...in the 30 years of race relation cinema that i've seen -he IS doing something different....
Title: Re: CRASH
Post by: Ravi on February 25, 2006, 12:40:21 PM
It just keeps coming.  Did Ebert forget about Do the Right Thing?  His essay on it is even on the Criterion DVD.

http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060219/COMMENTARY/60217001

'Crash' owes a debt to Dickens
BY ROGER EBERT Film Critic / February 19, 2006

I was reading Charles Dickens the other day, and realized in a different way why "Crash" is such a good and useful film. Dickens is the best storyteller in the history of the novel, and although I've read him pretty much from end to end, I got into an argument about the character in "The Squid and the Whale" who tells his son that A Tale of Two Cities is "minor Dickens." I thought this opinion was correct, but I re-read it for the first time since I was a child, and found that it was not minor Dickens after all.

Dickens wrote melodramas and romances, comedies and tragedies, usually within the same story. He was a social reformer, filled with an anger that had its beginnings when his father was thrown into a debtors' prison and young Charles was yanked from a happy family into a precarious existence as a child laborer in a blacking factory.

His targets were corrupt educators, exploiters of children and defenseless women, windbags, cheats, hypocrites and toadies. He painted them with broad strokes, and assigned them names to reflect their weaknesses: Mr. Gradgrind was a cruel schoolmaster, Scrooge the archetypal tightwad, the Cheeryble Brothers saw the good side of everything, Miss Havisham got a sham instead of a husband, and I don't know why Uriah Heep's name makes me think of bodily wastes, but it does.

These characters had flaws that defined their personalities. They occupied plots in which coincidence was the bedrock of the story. It was absolutely necessary that characters turn up precisely when the plot required them, and that those with shady pasts turned out to be concealing the very secret that was needed in the present. "Masterpiece Theater" is currently serializing Bleak House, in which many scraps of paper are thrown out, but not the crucial one; in which a young woman's mother turns out to be the very person she is required to be; in which only those conversations are overheard that must be preserved; in which an orphan's protector fortuitously holds the key to her happiness.

Caricatures and coincidences are not weaknesses in Dickens but his method. And "Crash," one of this year's Oscar nominees and my choice as the best film of 2005, uses exactly the same tools. The film's critics believe its characters are caricatures and say its Los Angeles seems to be populated by 20 people who are always crossing paths. Surely life is not a nonstop series of racist confrontations and coincidences?

Well, of course not. But the movie is not about life in general. It is about how racism wounds and stings, and makes its victims feel worthless and its perpetrators ugly and vicious. All true enough, but the brilliance of the movie's method is that victims and victimizers change places, and "Crash" demonstrates how in a complex multiracial society there is enough guilt to go around.

The storylines involving the two cops (Matt Dillon and Ryan Phillippe) and the upper-crust black couple (Terrence Howard and Thandie Newton) have inspired the most discussion. On one day, Dillon stops Howard for DWB (driving while black) and commits a sexual assault against his wife, while the other two men stand by impotently -- Howard aware that if he challenges the cop, he could get arrested or killed; Phillippe a rookie who is intimidated by his brutal partner.

We follow the characters into their lives. Newton and Howard have a lacerating argument in which each says unforgivable things, and each blames the other for pain and ugliness that was certainly not either's fault. Dillon is seen in all the frustration of trying to care for his dying father in the face of heartless HMOs. Phillippe is seen as a decent cop trying to distance himself from Dillon's indecencies. And then, the next day ...

Well, either you know what happens, or I should not tell you. The point is made that in different situations the same people behave in different ways. One life is saved, another lost, not in the way we anticipate. The film does not forgive Dillon's character or excuse his crime; it simply shows that on both days, he has done what it is in his nature to do. The film deals here and elsewhere in irony, in the bitter truth that human nature doesn't divide us into heroes and villains, but gives us situations in which we behave badly, or well.

Many of the film's scenes involve misunderstandings. Many of the racist assumptions are incorrectly aimed; a man of Iranian (i.e., Persian) descent is infuriated that anyone would think he is an Arab, but he leaps to immediate suspicions about the ethnic identity of the young man changing his lock. And then the locksmith ...

I get in a lot of discussions about films with strangers. "Crash" is the one that keeps coming up. Those who dislike it assume it should be more "realistic," reflect "the Los Angeles I know," be less "manipulative," "not celebrate paranoia," not be so "facile."

Those who admire it have a different tone in their voice. They say the movie made them think, made them look within themselves, made them realize that society has shuffled the packs of good and evil and made it more difficult for the good to always be Us and the evil to always be Them. The movie invited them to see that everyone has a story -- a story that does not excuse or justify their actions but places them in a context.

People wrote me. I heard from a black woman who was surprised to find herself sympathizing with the Sandra Bullock character. Well, why shouldn't she? You don't have to be white to be paranoid after a carjacking (to think you do is racist).

I heard from a Canadian with a North American Indian background ("First Nation," as they say in Canada). Because of his appearance, people can't immediately identify him by race, but sometimes they think they can, and he is treated in different ways by those who think he is Asian, Latino, Arabic or African-Canadian; he learns at first hand about the subtleties of racial prejudice.

"Crash" is not a movie with answers, and maybe not even with questions. Maybe it is all made of observations. In a time when we are encouraged to draw sharp lines and leap to immediate conclusions, here is a movie that asks us to think twice, to look again, to look also within ourselves. "It made me think," a lot of people say.

Yes, you can dismiss it, deplore its contrivances, think that by exposing its methods, you have invalidated the film. You can demolish Dickens in the same way. But social arguments are not won by drawing subtle logical distinctions. He brought about actual changes in British laws involving education, child labor, bankruptcy, insanity and legalized theft from estates.

Dickens did it with caricature, coincidence, exaggeration, honesty, passion and truth. "Crash" is using the same methods with the same hopes. It is not an unworthy undertaking.
Title: Re: CRASH
Post by: JG on February 25, 2006, 02:42:15 PM
yeah i read this.  makes me sick.  and he predicts that it will win the oscars. 
Title: Re: CRASH
Post by: xerxes on February 25, 2006, 02:59:01 PM
i understand what you are saying, again...but everything in bold is true but has nothing to do w/ my arguement for crash. again, i am talkign about my generation....thats how i can compare to what i've seen vs. crash...

ignoring and discounting the films, and the history, that came before the 1970s seems to be the basis for many of the problems with your stance. how can you reply to that by just saying that that's not the time period you're looking at. i think that was the whole problem.
Title: Re: CRASH
Post by: NEON MERCURY on February 26, 2006, 10:05:38 PM
i understand what you are saying, again...but everything in bold is true but has nothing to do w/ my arguement for crash. again, i am talkign about my generation....thats how i can compare to what i've seen vs. crash...

ignoring and discounting the films, and the history, that came before the 1970s seems to be the basis for many of the problems with your stance. how can you reply to that by just saying that that's not the time period you're looking at. i think that was the whole problem.

b/c its not relevant to my point...i am basing my arguement on what [films] i've seen dealing w/ race relations...   
Title: Re: CRASH
Post by: hedwig on February 26, 2006, 10:09:04 PM
i understand what you are saying, again...but everything in bold is true but has nothing to do w/ my arguement for crash. again, i am talkign about my generation....thats how i can compare to what i've seen vs. crash...

ignoring and discounting the films, and the history, that came before the 1970s seems to be the basis for many of the problems with your stance. how can you reply to that by just saying that that's not the time period you're looking at. i think that was the whole problem.

b/c its not relevant to my point...i am basing my arguement on what [films] i've seen dealing w/ race relations...   

Then you are disqualified from discussing the ways "Crash" does or doesn't subvert the conventions of films dealing with race relations, because you're only talking about the select few that you've seen and consider all others to be "irrelevant."

Dead argument.
Title: Re: CRASH
Post by: ᾦɐļᵲʊʂ on February 28, 2006, 12:42:23 AM
Dead argument.

If only it were that easy.
Title: Re: CRASH
Post by: The Red Vine on February 28, 2006, 12:55:55 AM
It just keeps coming.  Did Ebert forget about Do the Right Thing?  His essay on it is even on the Criterion DVD.

Ebert of course is a strong supporter of movies about racism - Do the Right Thing - best movie of the year. Monster's Ball - best movie of the year. Crash - best movie of the year. It gets a little ridiculous cuz every time a racially charged movie comes out, I know he'll give it 3 1/2 or 4 stars.

But the weird thing is that he seemed to be kinda silent about Crash until now. He gave it 4 stars when it first came out, but I didn't hear him say much about it until 7 months later. I was a little more than surprised when he put it at #1.
Title: Re: CRASH
Post by: pete on February 28, 2006, 01:03:12 AM
I don't remember the specifics--but I think he's been talking about Crash since it came out.  I mean, he stopped for a few months but when Crash first came out he did mention it quite a few times in his columns and his interviews and maybe even in other reviews.
Title: Re: CRASH
Post by: The Red Vine on February 28, 2006, 01:20:04 AM
actually, I do remember a couple of articles about it later. my mistake.

at any rate, I figured he'd go for Syriana or maybe even The New World (which didn't even make his top ten) for best of the year. I liked Crash better than most on here, but it's not the best movie of the year. I'll be rooting for Brokeback Mountain at the Oscars.
Title: Re: CRASH
Post by: meatwad on February 28, 2006, 01:24:03 AM
in my opinion alot of those films that i mentioned as examples do have a common theme of race relations in their subject matter.....american history x, in the heat of the night, seperate but equal, men of honor, glory, a tiem to kill, etc....all of those films have a theme of racial relations.....can you argue aginst that?

common themes and a genre are two seperate things.
Title: Re: CRASH
Post by: NEON MERCURY on March 01, 2006, 12:43:55 PM
i understand what you are saying, again...but everything in bold is true but has nothing to do w/ my arguement for crash. again, i am talkign about my generation....thats how i can compare to what i've seen vs. crash...

ignoring and discounting the films, and the history, that came before the 1970s seems to be the basis for many of the problems with your stance. how can you reply to that by just saying that that's not the time period you're looking at. i think that was the whole problem.

b/c its not relevant to my point...i am basing my arguement on what [films] i've seen dealing w/ race relations...   

Then you are disqualified from discussing the ways "Crash" does or doesn't subvert the conventions of films dealing with race relations, because you're only talking about the select few that you've seen and consider all others to be "irrelevant."

Dead argument.

whats "dead" is the point of view of those older films...its stupid, ignorant white people propaganda...the "birth of a nation" views on race is....um....so stupid you cant even compare it to the newer "social awarenes" type films that flood the industry now...the idiots who buy into and think that those "birth of a nation" type films where the philosophy is that of "black folk are the devil" are the same people who still think that the world is flat......

irrelevant.....to my point about crash...

in my opinion alot of those films that i mentioned as examples do have a common theme of race relations in their subject matter.....american history x, in the heat of the night, seperate but equal, men of honor, glory, a tiem to kill, etc....all of those films have a theme of racial relations.....can you argue aginst that?

common themes and a genre are two seperate things.


i apologize..you are right..i should have said these films encompass:

genre: drama
common themes:  race relations

...well, i didnt want to come to this but you guys are forcing me to make me quote ebert of all people to hammer down my point...maybe you guys will listen to a "respected" film critic rather than a hick from the south who thinks david lynch is a genius...

Quote
All true enough, but the brilliance of the movie's method is that victims and victimizers change places, and "Crash" demonstrates how in a complex multiracial society there is enough guilt to go around

Quote
Many of the racist assumptions are incorrectly aimed; a man of Iranian (i.e., Persian) descent is infuriated that anyone would think he is an Arab, but he leaps to immediate suspicions about the ethnic identity of the young man changing his lock. And then the locksmith ...

Quote
made them realize that society has shuffled the packs of good and evil and made it more difficult for the good to always be Us and the evil to always be Them. The movie invited them to see that everyone has a story -- a story that does not excuse or justify their actions but places them in a context.

Quote
I heard from a black woman who was surprised to find herself sympathizing with the Sandra Bullock character. Well, why shouldn't she? You don't have to be white to be paranoid after a carjacking (to think you do is racist).


Title: Re: CRASH
Post by: JG on March 01, 2006, 02:11:02 PM
the formula for this movie:  show the character do something bad/racist, show the character do something good/be a victim.   wow, so people can be good and bad? that's complex. 
Title: Re: CRASH
Post by: hedwig on March 01, 2006, 03:48:30 PM
the formula for this movie:  show the character do something bad/racist, show the character do something good/be a victim.   wow, so people can be good and bad? that's complex. 

Exactly.

pyramid machine, the argument that the film subverts American cinema's historically conventional depictions of race relations is a dead one not only because you're dismissing plenty of other films but 'cause you're also WRONG about some of them..  Seriously, you listed DO THE RIGHT THING? Were you paying ANY attention when you watched that movie, assuming you've actually even seen it? And Ebert's column was already posted in this thread, not particularly convincing: his arguments are more coherent than yours, true, but equally baseless. The Dickens comparison is pretty weak. I love Ebert but he's wrong on this one, the same way he was wrong on Blue Velvet and Lost Highway (http://messenger.msn.com/MMM2005-10-25_17.33/Resource/emoticons/omg_smile.gif)

This was a movie about personal racism, not institutional racism, and that distinction has to be made whenever people discuss the "statement" being made about how there's enough "guilt" to go around, how whites and blacks can 'share the blame' or some other hogwash. Do The Right Thing, on the other hand, was rare and important because it explored personal AND institutional racism in a way that resulted in a rich and empathetic portrait of a truly "complex multiracial society," and Ebert's essay included in the Criterion DVD is actually pretty fucking great, so it's weird to see him saying these things..
Title: Re: CRASH
Post by: grand theft sparrow on March 08, 2006, 08:17:35 AM
According to this coming weekend's release schedule on boxofficemojo.com, Crash appears to be getting a 150 theatre "victory lap" re-release.  Now, I'm not just mentioning this because I'm annoyed that it won but what's the logic here?  Is this release to make it easier for all those poor bastards in major cities who haven't been able to get it from Blockbuster or netflix in the seven months it's been out on DVD? 
Title: Re: CRASH
Post by: matt35mm on March 08, 2006, 08:38:25 AM
According to this coming weekend's release schedule on boxofficemojo.com, Crash appears to be getting a 150 theatre "victory lap" re-release.  Now, I'm not just mentioning this because I'm annoyed that it won but what's the logic here?  Is this release to make it easier for all those poor bastards in major cities who haven't been able to get it from Blockbuster or netflix in the seven months it's been out on DVD? 
No.  It's just to make more money, as well as to promote the upcoming director's cut DVD.  Actually... it might possibly BE the director's cut being played in theaters?
Title: Re: CRASH
Post by: grand theft sparrow on March 08, 2006, 08:49:02 AM
According to this coming weekend's release schedule on boxofficemojo.com, Crash appears to be getting a 150 theatre "victory lap" re-release.  Now, I'm not just mentioning this because I'm annoyed that it won but what's the logic here?  Is this release to make it easier for all those poor bastards in major cities who haven't been able to get it from Blockbuster or netflix in the seven months it's been out on DVD? 
No. It's just to make more money, as well as to promote the upcoming director's cut DVD. Actually... it might possibly BE the director's cut being played in theaters?

(http://xixax.com/index.php?action=dlattach;id=641;type=avatar)
Title: Re: CRASH
Post by: matt35mm on March 08, 2006, 09:03:43 AM
It's true.

http://www.dvdtown.com/discdetails/crashdirectorscutedition/18240/
Title: Re: CRASH
Post by: MacGuffin on March 08, 2006, 12:29:35 PM
According to this coming weekend's release schedule on boxofficemojo.com, Crash appears to be getting a 150 theatre "victory lap" re-release.  Now, I'm not just mentioning this because I'm annoyed that it won but what's the logic here?  Is this release to make it easier for all those poor bastards in major cities who haven't been able to get it from Blockbuster or netflix in the seven months it's been out on DVD? 

"Crash" Hits Theaters Again

Audiences are getting another chance to see a big-screen Crash.

Fresh off its Best Picture Oscar, the film is heading to more than 150 theaters Friday for an encore run. The length of the engagement is "open-ended" pending its performance, says Steve Rothenberg, president of theatrical distribution at Lionsgate.

Crash, set over the course of 36 hours in a Los Angeles teeming with tension and deep-rooted prejudices, originally opened in May 2005 and grossed $53.4 million domestically. The film was released on DVD in September and sold 3.8 million copies by Feb. 1, according to Lionsgate.

Some 17,500 copies of the DVD were sold Monday, more than half of last week's tally of 33,000 copies, and it currently ranks number two on Amazon.com's top sellers list in the wake of its three Academy Award wins, including Best Original Screenplay and Best Editing, and earlier accolades, such as the Screen Actors Guild Award for its ensemble cast.

Whether the film's awards will translate into ticket sales is iffy. Large theater chains such as Regal, AMC and Century have a policy against playing films that are available on video.

And even hugely popular films do not necessarily attract repeat theatergoers, especially when people can be at home watching the same thing from their living rooms. Gladiator, which grossed $187 million in theaters and then went on to win Best Picture at the Oscars, was rereleased afterward but only scraped up $1 million on 577 screens, according to Variety.

Crash does have shock value in its favor. The racially charged drama scored the evening's biggest upset Sunday when it beat out frontrunner Brokeback Mountain for the top award. The film has also made headlines for the behind-the-scenes legal wranglings of its producers.

For the homebodies out there, a special edition DVD of Crash is scheduled to hit stores in April. Lionsgate has also said that there are talks for an FX series based on the film that will reprise the roles of its major characters.

Now that's quite a pileup.
Title: Re: CRASH
Post by: Ravi on March 08, 2006, 12:49:24 PM
Please kill this film already.
Title: Re: CRASH
Post by: ᾦɐļᵲʊʂ on March 08, 2006, 01:19:44 PM
You racist.
Title: Re: CRASH
Post by: grand theft sparrow on March 08, 2006, 01:32:31 PM
You're racist for implying that he's racist.
Title: Re: CRASH
Post by: xerxes on March 08, 2006, 03:38:57 PM
http://www.mcsweeneys.net/2006/2/6lloyd.html
Title: Re: CRASH
Post by: MacGuffin on March 09, 2006, 11:12:33 AM
'Crash' DVD Sales Spike After Oscar Gold

Oscar gold became real gold for best-picture winner "Crash" its DVD sales spiked after Sunday's Academy Awards. On Monday, Lionsgate, the film's distributor, sold 17,500 copies of "Crash," more than half the previous week's entire total of 33,000.

The DVD was No. 19 on Amazon.com's top-sellers list on Wednesday, up more than 80 places from last week.

"Crash," which was released on DVD on Sept. 6, 2005, has sold about 4 million copies to date, a spokeswoman said Wednesday. Sales also spiked after the Oscar nominations were announced on Jan. 31.
 
A two-disc "director's cut" edition of the film will be released on April 4.

"Crash" opened in theaters in May 2005.
Title: Re: CRASH
Post by: modage on March 09, 2006, 03:38:21 PM
this is 2 months old, but i'm not sure if it was posted...

http://www.laweekly.com/film/12416/roger-and-me/
Title: Re: CRASH
Post by: polkablues on March 09, 2006, 04:32:13 PM
this is 2 months old, but i'm not sure if it was posted...

http://www.laweekly.com/film/12416/roger-and-me/

Excellent.  I immediately emailed it to my dad, who otherwise has excellent taste in movies, but doesn't understand what my problem with Crash is.
Title: Re: CRASH
Post by: JG on March 09, 2006, 04:41:23 PM
Do you know how much trouble I've had with my people this week, soley because I am upset about Crash winning?  It's been a hella week.  It's tough to explain myself without getting heated, so I've promised everyone I know that I will write an article on why I hate Crash and pass it to everyone I know.  Especially my history teacher who plans on showing the movie to the class. 
Title: Re: CRASH
Post by: hedwig on March 09, 2006, 04:43:08 PM
polka your dad's not the only one. It seems like Crash is the most popular stupid movie ever among many otherwise intelligent people. I've honestly only met ONE person who didn't like it, and here was his reason..

"The guy feels up the girl and then like, saves her from the fire. THAT MOVIE WAS STUPID!"   :ponder:

JG, I feel your pain. today I even met an Honors English teacher who's screening the movie for his class. And not under the heading of "Shitty Writing 101."

They should all be fired and banned from the profession for life.
Title: Re: CRASH
Post by: JG on March 09, 2006, 04:52:44 PM
i convinced my mom why it was terrible before she saw it, so when she did see it she didn't like it either.  other than that, one of my best friends is the only one who didn't like it.  he has pretty good taste in movies, just that he hasn't seen as many as me.  But it seems like all of the most intelligent people in my life are falling for this movie.  my "TV Production" teacher, a man I truly respect and is one of the smartest men I've ever met, said it "changed him."  Like I said, its going to be show in my AP History Class (instead of Do the Right Thing, because according to my teacher, Crash is more "powerful").  today in my math class, a kid said to me:  "Hey Sean, thoughts on the oscar picks?"  I said, "not too happy with 'em."  a bunch of girls looked at me and literally gasped.  "you didn't like that?!"  i simply replied "no."  everyone in the class stared at me like i just said a racial slur.  then everyone goes quiet and one girl says, "so, didn't like the message?!?"   Which confirmed for me that a lot of people associate the message of the movie (albeit a trite and obvious one) with the quality of the movie.   

Ah, I hate people. 
Title: Re: CRASH
Post by: ©brad on March 09, 2006, 04:55:52 PM
the best thing any of us can do is to stop talking about this movie.
Title: Re: CRASH
Post by: Tryskadekafobia on March 09, 2006, 07:28:06 PM
And the nominees for most hated movie besides "The Boondock Saints" are...
Title: Re: CRASH
Post by: squints on March 09, 2006, 09:22:58 PM
the best thing any of us can do is to stop talking about this movie.
:bravo:
Title: Re: CRASH
Post by: grand theft sparrow on March 09, 2006, 09:34:18 PM
the best thing any of us can do is to stop talking about this movie.

If only it were that easy.
Title: Re: CRASH
Post by: Ravi on March 09, 2006, 11:28:27 PM
the best thing any of us can do is to stop talking about this movie.

Crash?  Oh, I loved that movie...
Title: Re: CRASH
Post by: ᾦɐļᵲʊʂ on March 11, 2006, 01:25:04 AM
Cronenberg's finest!
Title: Re: CRASH
Post by: mogwai on March 11, 2006, 03:46:05 PM
crash didn't much for me, the story and the concept falls flat. i liked all the scenes with the mexican and his daughter, that could've been a movie of its own.

it's like if michael bay wanted to do a serious movie and this would've been it. and that he specifically wrote his own real life character into the cop played by matt dillon.
Title: Re: CRASH
Post by: Sigur Rós on March 15, 2006, 05:53:13 PM
I didn't like this film at all. Mainly because it doesn't bring anything new to both the genre and the subject and because I think it looks a little to black and white on things. Maybe I just have more faith in mankind then to think that we are still in a stage where only judge people by their color. No doubt that people like the ones in the movie exists but I don't want to see a movie about them. I believe in order to make a good movie it has to be based on a original story and original characters. I found neither in this film..... So let me have my Short Cuts and  my Magnolia and throw in a little gay cowboys and I'm happy. Crash my ass!
Title: Re: CRASH
Post by: Ravi on March 15, 2006, 11:37:57 PM
blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah little gay cowboys blah blah blah Crash my ass
Title: Re: CRASH
Post by: elpablo on March 16, 2006, 04:21:35 AM
For a film that's trying to expose the subtle prejudices in our society, it's awfully obvious. However, I did enjoy the scenes with Matt Dillion saving the girl in the car and Don Cheadle letting his mom think it was his brother that brought the groceries. But now that I think about it, I liked those scenes because they were the exact opposite of the rest of the movie: they were silent (for the most part) -  they were more subtle.
Title: Re: CRASH
Post by: Sigur Rós on March 16, 2006, 05:17:40 AM
blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah little gay cowboys blah blah blah Crash my ass
I'll kick your ass pretty boy!  :yabbse-angry:
Title: Re: CRASH
Post by: Reinhold on March 16, 2006, 05:47:26 PM
i finally saw this at a $3 theater last night.

i don't think the bulk of this will be news.

i think the dialogue was terrible, and i think that the action was hyperbolized and packaged to the point of removing any legitimacy with which it was trying to carry a message. it left absolutely nothing to the viewer, and was executed with an enraging degree of predictability.

it was a disgustingly safe bet for best picture. this just in: the academy is gutless.

all that being said, i don't think it was necessarily the worst movie ever. i'm willing to bet that the people involved made the movie they wanted to make, and it's just something that, as a matter of style, i don't like. definitely not one of my picks for favorite, but i don't think it's as awful and easy to hate as everybody says it is when you just look at it as an intentionally preachy melodrama.  sure, it views like a church service, but isn't that what it tries to be from beginning to end?

 it's a just a movie that beats the age old "don't be a shithead" message to death. it could only ever be mediocre-- so don't hate it for being kinda sucky.
Title: Re: CRASH
Post by: Sigur Rós on March 17, 2006, 02:02:43 AM
The thing I really hate about moves like Crash, Good night, and good luck, Syriana etc
is that the only reason why they are made is because Hollywood feels bad for all the money they make. But in reality they don't give a fuck about these movies because they still make their money on big apes, little wizards and spaceships. This new so called "political Hollywood" is like Bono trying to be Jesus...wtf! blablabla
Title: Re: CRASH
Post by: killafilm on March 17, 2006, 01:51:02 PM
The thing I really hate about moves like Crash, Good night, and good luck, Syriana etc
is that the only reason why they are made is because Hollywood feels bad for all the money they make. But in reality they don't give a fuck about these movies because they still make their money on big apes, little wizards and spaceships. This new so called "political Hollywood" is like Bono trying to be Jesus...wtf! blablabla

Cloony of 1997 was so much better.  Cloony was still being awesome in ER and Batman & Robin.  Making movies about something you care about  :laughing: 
Title: Re: CRASH
Post by: Sigur Rós on March 20, 2006, 06:39:12 AM
The thing I really hate about moves like Crash, Good night, and good luck, Syriana etc
is that the only reason why they are made is because Hollywood feels bad for all the money they make. But in reality they don't give a fuck about these movies because they still make their money on big apes, little wizards and spaceships. This new so called "political Hollywood" is like Bono trying to be Jesus...wtf! blablabla

Cloony of 1997 was so much better.  Cloony was still being awesome in ER and Batman & Robin.  Making movies about something you care about  :laughing: 

excactly!
Title: Re: CRASH
Post by: I Love a Magician on March 21, 2006, 03:35:36 AM
so is this thread about dave matthews band or what.
Title: Re: CRASH
Post by: grand theft sparrow on April 06, 2006, 10:16:45 AM
I promised myself I wouldn't post in this thread again.

http://www.timeout.com/film/news/1058.html

'Crash' set for TV treatment
 Chris Tilly | Apr  6 2006

Oscar-winner 'Crash' is set to hit the small screen next year in the shape of a high-profile mini-series, which is great news if you're a fan of the film, and not so good if, like me, you think it was a heavy-handed, clumsy and condescending two hours of Hollywood bullshit.

It won the Best Picture Academy Award in May however, and producer Cathy Shulman says that several of the 'Crash' stars are set to appear in the series.

'The actors from the film will show up' she told IMDB. 'Don Cheadle is a producer and will also be on at least a few episodes. We'll see about everyone else'.

I'll bring you more news on this one as and when it breaks, although as you've probably guessed, this is one show I won't be tuning in to!
Title: Re: CRASH
Post by: modage on April 06, 2006, 01:01:24 PM
actually, the idea is much better suited to a series.  it could even be good.  :shock:
Title: Re: CRASH
Post by: Ravi on April 06, 2006, 01:25:49 PM
Hopefully this TV series will have some good writers who will use the TV format to develop character and story arcs better than the film did.  If its just hour after hour of, well, Crash, then its going to suck.
Title: Re: CRASH
Post by: MacGuffin on January 28, 2008, 03:48:16 PM
Starz Developing Crash Series
Source: Starz Entertainment

"Crash," a new original drama series based on the Academy Award®-winning Best Picture will debut exclusively on Starz in 2008. The 13-episode, one-hour series, co-produced with Lionsgate, will be Starz's first ever original drama. The announcement was made today by Stephan Shelanski, executive vice president, programming of Starz Entertainment.

Key members of the Oscar-winning theatrical production team are onboard for the series, including the film's director, co-writer and producer Paul Haggis, co-writer and producer Bobby Moresco, producer Bob Yari, producer Don Cheadle, producer Mark R. Harris and executive producer Tom Nunan.

Crash, which was distributed by Lionsgate, marks only the second time a Best Picture Oscar®-winner has been turned into a series. In the Heat of the Night was the first. Production on the drama is scheduled to begin in the spring.

"'Crash' introduced a whole range of fascinating characters and engrossing, intertwined stories that are ideally suited for developing into a TV series," commented Shelanski. "Starz is the premium channel for movies so it's appropriate that this Best Picture-winner is providing the basis for our first dramatic series. The fact that key members of the film's production team are involved will ensure that our series maintains the high level of talent and creativity captured in the film."

"An important part of our strategy is to create franchises across our company's divisions," said Kevin Beggs, Lionsgate's President of Programming and Production, "and early in our involvement with this extraordinary film, we recognized its enormous potential to be successfully adapted for television. In Starz, we have found partners who share our vision and we anticipate a great collaboration."

"I'm very happy that Lionsgate and Starz have decided to develop 'Crash' into a series," said Haggis. "Ironically, my initial impulse was to present the material in a format for television. I am thrilled it's coming full circle and can't wait to see how it expands and transforms."

"For me, exploring the characters and conflicts in 'Crash' was a great experience," said Moresco. "The idea of doing it again in a weekly series is tremendously exciting."

"This series will present an opportunity to delve into many subjects, not just race relations in LA," said Cheadle. "I don't think you can do 13 episodes on that subject and keep people interested. The challenge will be to craft the series characters in such a way as to get beneath the skin that supposedly differentiates them and create entertaining story lines that show the hurdles and obstacles we all struggle to overcome day to day."

Challenging and daring, Crash took a provocative, unflinching look at the complexities of racial tolerance in contemporary America. The film featured an all-star cast including Don Cheadle, Sandra Bullock, Matt Dillon, Jennifer Esposito, Brendan Fraser, Terrence Howard, Chris "Ludacris" Bridges, Thandie Newton and Ryan Philippe. It was directed by Haggis and co-written by Haggis and Moresco.

In addition to Best Picture, it also scored Oscars® for Haggis and Moresco's original screenplay, as well as Hughes Winborne's editing. Crash also earned a Screen Actors Guild Award for Best Ensemble Cast in a Motion Picture, a Producers Guild nomination for Best Picture, a Directors Guild feature film nomination for Haggis, a Writers Guild nomination for Best Original Screenplay (Haggis and Moresco), nine BAFTA nominations (including Best Film and Best Director) and six NAACP Image Award nominations (including Best Film).

Starz Media's Anchor Bay Entertainment will hold exclusive U.S. distribution rights, including home entertainment, to the "Crash" series, while Lionsgate will retain international distribution.

The announcement of Crash comes on the heels of the launch of Starz' first two original half-hour comedy series, "Head Case" and "Hollywood Residential," which premiered last week. "Head Case," stars Alexandra Wentworth and the new comedy series "Hollywood Residential," stars Adam Paul and is executive produced by Cheryl Hines. Starz also features "Starz Inside," a new monthly series of original specials examining people, trends and culture in movie entertainment hosted by film critic Richard Roeper.
Title: Re: CRASH
Post by: polkablues on January 28, 2008, 05:04:44 PM
I've never been happier to have basic cable.
Title: Re: CRASH
Post by: Alexandro on January 28, 2008, 06:04:17 PM
 :drool: :drool: :drool: :drool:
Title: Re: CRASH
Post by: ElPandaRoyal on January 28, 2008, 06:06:15 PM
"Crash," a new original drama series based on the Academy Award®-winning Best Picture will debut exclusively on Starz in 2008. The 13-episode, one-hour series, co-produced with Lionsgate, will be Starz's first ever original drama.
Title: Re: CRASH
Post by: Reelist on April 16, 2018, 12:23:59 AM
there's one shot in CRASH that lasts for only 3 seconds (maybe) that the editor should have taken out.  if they did take this shot out then CRASH would have been a much much better movie (imo).  can anyone guess which shot i'm talking about?  (probably not)

(http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/5076/1092/1600/crash001.jpg)
Title: Re: CRASH
Post by: Reelist on April 16, 2018, 02:37:23 AM
The best thing to come out of our "Movie of the Week" idea thus far:

Just Withnail [30|Mar 08:14 PM]:   also crash = a great choice
Reelist [30|Mar 08:24 PM]:   Yeah its kind of perfect for us because it so badly wants to be magnolia
Just Withnail [30|Mar 08:28 PM]:   at the end, when all the cast starts singing "crash into me", every xixaxer watching has to do a a video of themselves with their arms opening wide

Well we pinpointed the exact scene that's trying to do 'Wise Up' from Magnolia to NO effect. Sync these vids together for a laff

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zyoy6fKd73M

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JU2E1lX1geY
Title: Re: CRASH
Post by: polkablues on April 16, 2018, 03:23:45 AM
Sync these vids together for a laff

It's 1:00 on Monday morning, and this already made my whole week.
Title: Re: CRASH
Post by: Sleepless on April 16, 2018, 08:49:06 AM
Ditto. Also, I totally forgot Brendan Frasier was in that piece of shit. I now blame Crash for 90% of everything bad that's ever happened to him.
Title: Re: CRASH
Post by: Just Withnail on April 22, 2018, 01:14:17 PM
That was an amazing sync. I could easily imagine the actors singing along.