Crash (I) (2004) User Reviews

Roller-coaster of emotions

[Vitarai · 9/10 · 1 May 2005]

Like Altman's classic Short Cuts, and Anderson's Magnolia, Crash, by writer/director Paul Haggis weaves a tale of multiple characters through the web of streets we have come to know as Los Angeles. Unlike those other two films this one has a very specific theme to explore. From the opening line uttered by Don Cheadle we know this is to be a film about how people relate, and from the interchange that follows between Jennifer Esposito and Alexis Rhee (pretty sure she plays the Korean female driver who rear-ended her) how people relate tends to be ruled by first impressions or prejudice.

Race is paramount in this film, and all our preconceptions of who people are get twisted and turned through the intricate plot. With each new additional character we find another assumption, another stereotype, and then watch as that preconception is obliterated as the character develops. It is a credit to the deftly written script, tight direction and exceptional acting talent that every one of these many characters is fully realized on screen without ever feeling one-dimensional.

I would love to discuss some of the details of what happens to explain how well it is done, but part of the magic of this film is allowing yourself to be taken on this ride. Mind you, this isn't a ride of pleasure. The first half of this film is unrelentingly in its ferociousness. I could literally feel my rage at some of the characters forming to a fever pitch. The fear and hatred I was confronting wasn't just on the screen, but in the pit of my stomach. And in one absolutely brilliant moment I was literally sobbing at the expectation of horror unfolding, only to be cathartically released in a most unexpected way.

Mr. Haggis was in attendance at the screening I saw and explained that the idea for this film came to him one night sometime after 9/11 at about 2a.m. when his own memories of a car- jacking experience from 10 years before wouldn't leave him alone. Clearly this film was his way of relieving those demons of memory, using the catharsis of his art to unleash them and in doing so has given to all viewers of cinema an opportunity to examine our own preconceptions about race relations and how we treat each other and think of ourselves. He mentioned in the discussion after-wards that he likes to make films that force people to confront difficult issues. Films that ask people to think after the film has ended and not just leave saying: "that was a nice film".

This isn't a "nice" film, and I would expect that it will provoke many a discussion in the ensuing weeks when it opens nation-wide. It's a discussion long overdue for this country, and it took a Canadian to bring the issue to the fore in this brilliant, thought provoking film.

Bold and Compelling Treatise on Racism in Modern Society

[WriterDave · 9/10 · 7 May 2005]

Take the pop-cultured infused socio-political discourse of a Spike Lee movie, the glossy grit of a Michael Mann LA crime story, and the compelling mosaic story-telling technique of a Paul Thomas Anderson film, and you'll get the "feel" for Paul Haggis' stunning directorial debut. To boil a film like "Crash" down to such terms, however, would do it severe injustice. Powerful and thought provoking, this is the most accomplished and compelling film since "21 Grams" premiered back at the end of 2003.

"Crash" brilliantly shows through intertwining vignettes, that are often blazingly funny in their brutal honesty and fascinatingly gut-wrenching in their melodrama, how subtle racism (often guised in nervous humor) and overt prejudice (often exasperated by sudden irrational violence and an overabundance of readily available firearms) completely permeate our culture and everyday interactions within society. A hyper intelligent script showcases not characters, but brilliant representations of real people, people we know and pass in the street every day, people not unlike us. People who at first seem to be lost causes in the war against racism (witnessed in Matt Dillon's harried beat cop and Sandra Bulluck's spoiled District Attorney's wife) can often become the most unlikely solutions to the problem, while people who ride in on their high horse (witnessed in Ryan Phillipe's noble young police officer) can turn against the tide in the blink of an eye. No one is immune to it no matter how hard they try to rise above it (witnessed in Don Cheadle's quietly tragic detective).

In the end, everyone is flawed, the racism is inescapable, and the audience feels a twinge of sympathy for just about everyone. Perhaps that is what Haggis is hinting at to be our answer. Showing empathy and being able to relate even on the most remote level to every human being out there is the first step to that true brotherhood of man. Because the film offers no real solution, the discussion and discourse it creates in the minds of the viewers is the first step in solving society's ills. We can't tackle everything at once, but we can open a dialogue, and hopefully, one person conversing with another will be the first step to our salvation. It takes a bold film to raise such questions, and an even greater one to compel an audience to talk about the potential answers, and that is exactly what "Crash" accomplishes.

a realistic, gritty, no-nonsense look at the way life is for so many....

[acclar · 9/10 · 23 April 2005]

After seeing this movie, I was able to really understand what "Six Degrees of Separation" means. There is a thread that weaves its way through the landscape of life connecting, influencing, and defining all. This movie is certainly thought-provoking, one cannot watch it without feeling either privileged to have become part of the fabric, or like a fly on the wall - seeing, yet unable to influence or guide. There is almost a sense of frustration at ones inability to be no more than an observer in this movie since it compels you to want to shout in warning, gasp in shock, cry in sorrow, and hold in comfort. "Crash" is definitely not a movie to use as a venue to escape life for a couple of hours, but it is a movie that certainly makes you take a second and third look at who you are within yourself. The actors are surprising not only for their depth of performance, but also because they do not play characters you think you know. I would highly recommend this movie to anyone who likes drama, action, comedic relief, or just an appreciation for a well-thought out movie.

Volatile Redemption

[mercybell · 10/10 · 13 May 2005]

"Crash" is a complex movie with a simple premise: set in Los Angeles it follows 8 main characters (and many, many more supporting) from all walks of life and races whose lives intersect at some point during one 24 hour period. These people are all different yet all alienated, to the point of breaking, so much so that when they come together, things explode.

The complexity of the film comes from the encounters between characters and their tangled lives and worlds. Haggis' screenplay is so intricate and delicately written I couldn't begin to try to summarize the actual plot line (which destines this article to be kind of vague), but everyone meets everyone else at some point in the film (and there are a whole lot of characters). Sufficed to say these meetings are variably intense, casual, fleeting, dangerous, but they all effect the participants in profound and provocative ways, causing lives to find enlightenment or swerve violently, and watching it all unfold is mesmerizing because Paul Haggis (Oscar Nominated writer of Million Dollar Baby) made the film meaty with messy characters and topics and stories to chew and hurtle along with.

The all-encompassing theme of the film is racism, and it is dealt with bluntly, honestly, and without reservation. Every single character participates in the perpetuation of the ugly cycle but also suffers because of it. Where racism makes for an interesting enough subject for an already provoking and fairly experimental film (I was surprised to see this get wide release), it's only the catalyst for a deeper, resounding story of redemption and the universality of our lonely situation which the movie becomes during its second hour (what you could call Act II). It switches from a somewhat depressing contemplative amalgamation of moments about racism in everyday life and how destructive it is, to a throbbing, intense web of choices and consequences -- life and death, vivifying or soul killing -- and the chance at redemption.

Following their actions in Act I, everyone meets a fork in the road or is given a second chance of some sort. Some take it, some don't, but regardless, by the end of the movie everyone has changed. This is what gives the movie wings during its second hour, makes it interesting, keeps you guessing and on knife's-edge. It also gives the characters depth and souls and shows that despite perceived and upheld differences, when it comes down to it we aren't different (which we see in a shattering scene between Ryan Philippe and Larenz Tate after Tate notices that he and Philippe have the same St. Christopher statue), in fact we desperately need each other. It's one of the few films I've seen where everyone is at fault somehow and yet there are no villains. It makes it hopeful, particularly with something as ugly as racism: everyone's fallible, but everyone has the capacity for good and nobility. That said, each of these character's inner struggles makes for all the conflict and resolution you need.

A talented ensemble drives the film, sharing almost equal amounts of screen time, but the folks who really stood out and had my full attention each time were Terrence Howard (plays a TV director), Matt Dillon (as a patrol cop), Sandra Bullock (a rich housewife), , Don Cheadle (a detective), and Michael Peña (a locksmith). These five gave deeply, deeply felt performances portraying a wide range of emotions and personal situations, giving souls -- alone, yearning, and searching in a world that doesn't seem to care -- to shells of imperfect people. But the actors triumph in little moments of human contact: a glance, an embrace, a pause, a smile, a wince, things that breath the film to life and with simple visuals give it profundity. This is beautifully illustrated in a small scene between the downward spiraling Jean (Sandra Bullock) and her maid after she's begun to realize all her problems may not be about the two black guys who car jacked her, but her own life.

Some closing notes: it's obvious it's a debut. At times the dialogue and acting can be stilted and unnatural; some of the initial "racial" situations seem forced; certain scenes could have used some editing or fine tuning, but by the end I didn't care. It also may be helpful to know that the first hour spends its time setting everything up for Act II, although it will seem more like a photo essay on racism than a setup. But by the time Act I ends you're ready for something substantial to happen, and at the perfect moment, stuff happens. I was entirely satisfied with this movie, I couldn't have asked for anything more. Still it's impressive, with his debut Haggis made a film that magically maintains a storytelling balancing act about people's lives that almost seamlessly flows, takes an honest look at racism with an understanding of mankind, a belief in redemption, and even hope. As I walked out of the theater into the rainy night it resonated with me and colored my thoughts as I made my way through the crowds of unknown fellow people filling the cinema. That's about all I can ask for in a film.

Review: Ensemble cast delivers top-notch performances in reflective drama

[Brambo · 10/10 · 11 September 2004]

In a drama strikingly reminiscent in style and tone of P.T. Anderson's film Magnolia (1999), the narrative in Crash shifts between 5 or 6 different groups of seemingly unconnected characters, whose relationships to each other are only revealed in the end.

Not to be confused with the David Cronenberg feature of the same name, this Crash is the feature-length, studio-released directorial debut of veteran Canadian TV writer/producer/director and two-time Emmy-winner Paul Haggis. An in-depth exploration on the themes of racism and prejudice, cause and effect, chance and coincidence, and tragedy, "crash" is a metaphor for the collisions between strangers in the course of day-to-day existence. Set over a 24-hour period in contemporary L.A., it is a social commentary on the interconnectedness of life in the big city.

Crash features a top-notch ensemble cast which includes: Sandra Bullock, Don Cheadle, Matt Dillon, Jennifer Esposito, Brendan Fraser, Chris "Ludacris" Bridges, Loretta Devine, Thandie Newton, Ryan Phillipe and Larenz Tate. All put in superb performances in a tight script which is at once gritty, heartwarming, shocking, tragic and witty, and which will ring true with viewers of all demographics.

Centering around two disturbing car accidents, a carjacking, vicious workplace vandalism, and the suspicious shooting death of one police officer by another, the drama is set against the backdrop of a racist LAPD and Los Angeles justice system. Action shifts between the various characters, whose lives collide with each other in unpredictable ways as each faces their own moral dilemma, and tries to cope with the consequences of their resulting decision made or action taken. Each of the dozen or so main characters undergoes some type of a personal metamorphosis as the various story lines head toward a striking, common conclusion, which succeeds at being both cathartic and unsettling.

Crash is backed by a solid and varied, original soundtrack and excellent cinematography. Sweeping, wider shots alternate with disjointed camera angles which convey the chaos and confusion of the characters and the unpredictability of life. Occasional lingering close-ups -- on occasion without sound -- capture the actors' facial expressions, which suitably detail key moments of the characters' aching pain, fear, anger, bitter anguish, remorse or grief, far better than any dialogue could.

This breathtaking film is destined to be a critical smash and box-office hit. Five stars.

There is Good and Bad in All of Us

[[e-mail] · 10/10 · 23 April 2005]

There is good and bad in all of us. This movie explores this like no other. It will make you think about the nature of bigotry and stereotypes. The characters switch from heavy to hero in a way that is deeply moving and exhilarating. It is TV drama style writing where several different groups of characters and plots interweave (Paul Haggis) but with none of the limits of TV, it reminded me of "Hill Street Blues" which from me is a big compliment. I am a Don Cheadle fan and he captures the role. Sandra Bullock plays against character and pulls it off with ease. The most impressive performance to me was Ryan Phillippe's. Almost every nationality in LA was represented and they all were interesting and realistic. The ensemble cast and various plots blend together and keep your interest. Cast is great, music is haunting, writing is superb. Go see this movie.

The #2 Feel Bad Movie of the 2000s

[rooprect · 2 October 2019]

"Crash" is a superbly made film. The actors are first rate, the camera style is engaging, and production value is tops. And despite all this, I would never recommend it to anyone. Why? I'll explain in my 4th paragraph but first let's talk about the story.

This film follows the lives of a dozen or so people over the course of 2 days all living in Los Angeles. The opening scene gives us the aftermath of some ambiguous tragedy (the titular "crash"), and the next scene flashes back to "yesterday" and shows us the events in these people's seemingly unrelated lives, leading up to that opening moment. If you've seen "House of Sand and Fog" (the #1 Feel Bad Movie of the 2000s), you'll recognize an identical sort of chronology and foreboding tone--so similar that I wonder if the Crash filmmakers were somehow involved in House as well. Both films are very powerful and effective at what they aim to do, and that is, simply put, to disturb us.

Disturb us it does. Within the first 15 minutes, we see things that are so disturbing to the pit of our souls that I almost shut the movie off twice. Racism, hate, justified racism, justified hate, brutal stereotypes. The film masterfully shows us not only the worst quality of humankind but it scrutinizes the reasons why humans are this way. There's no good guy/bad guy; it's all bad guys. The first 15 mins is designed to make us hate almost every character, if not every race. By showing the atrocity that each race supposedly inflicts on the other, it paints us a Hatfield-McCoy cycle of hatred that has no known origin. It just exists and burns hotter. Non-whites are subverted by white society, so they exact revenge by committing crimes against white people which in turn causes the white police to hate and abuse non-white people who in turn become criminals against white people. The cycle of hate is not only explained but validated in a well-crafted, brutally told, highly disturbing way.

Which leads me to the 4th paragraph where I explain why I would never recommend this film. It's because IT JUST MAKES YOU FEEL BAD. For nearly 2 hours you get the same feeling you get when you watch too much cable news. And just as psychologists warn that watching too much news leads to depression, I would say the same can be said of films like this which, like the news, expose and scrutinize the absolute worst of humanity.

But then one might say that films like this are necessary to inspire change. Normally I would agree, and I'm sure that that's the intent of the filmmakers here. But let me ask you: who needs to change? Answer: racists and bigots. But are racists and bigots really going to be watching "Crash", stroking their beards and saying "Golly, I need to stop being a racist"? Probably not. And that is the film's undoing. By taking a heavy, ponderous, complex look at racism and hate, it alienates the fury-driven haters who most need to grasp this message. And instead "Crash" merely preaches to the choir, making the choir feel gawd awful lousy about the state of the world.

The film attempts to lead us to redemption, and there is at least 1 truly powerful scene of triumph that's worth the price of admission. However, other subplot resolutions seem a bit contrived, if not completely unnecessary, such as one character's climactic tragedy & epiphany which was so random I literally burst out laughing (the moral of the story being: don't wear socks indoors!). Ultimately "Crash" tries to tie things up neatly with a positive message, but it's precisely this neat tie-up, simultaneously with every sub-plot, that feels a bit contrived and ultimately unbelievable. At the risk of cutting out half the award-winning cast, perhaps the film should have focused on just 1 story & resolution, rather than pulling the "Fantasy Island" formula of having half a dozen stories wrap up neatly in the last 10 minutes.

Ultimately, despite its excellent presentation and first class acting, "Crash" couldn't sell me on its optimistic spin and instead left me feeling pretty horrible about the reality of living in a world where racists don't often have magical transformations. If you understand what I'm saying, you might want to skip this flick because, regardless of how it ends, the subject will just make you feel bad.

Shockingly Overrated

[skopera · 6/10 · 13 June 2005]

I can't believe all the reviews I'm reading. And not just on IMDb but in the printed press too. People seem to love this movie, and I don't understand.

I felt it was a solid movie with excellent music and cinematography. Yet, if that was all that mattered, Phantom Menace would be an Oscar winner.

It seemed to me that there were very few original ideas in the script. The racial plot lines were done better in "Grand Canyon", "Do the Right Thing" and "Boyz n the Hood".

If you haven't seen any of the above movies, perhaps "Crash" will open up your eyes to the depths of the racial divide in this country. Otherwise, you're better off with something a little more subtle and original.

Lives in change

[mmcneil007 · 10/10 · 25 April 2005]

The film does not allow any character to fall into a stereotype despite the initial appearances. Everyone is redeeming, in a greater or lessor degree, in their own world, despite their frailties and prejudices. The writing is crisp and no easy turns are taken. The film has unexpected twists but none of them are contrived. Each character is developed just enough for us to develop our opinions of them and then things change. Those of us familiar with LA will recognize the icons of the city and the mix of cultures. Each character has enough prejudice or hate in his/her repertoire of life to demonstrate we had better not be too quick to judge without exploring what might in us be similar to the characters' flaws. A must see just for the pacing and script. Malcolm

a breathtaking film

[aenigma-3 · 8/10 · 12 September 2004]

Although the isolation and interconnectedness of automobiles and traffic are (forgive me) one of the driving metaphors of Paul Haggis's film Crash, the experience of the film's characters is more like a roller-coaster, where random strangers are thrown together through twisters and turns of a journey out of there control. A harrowing travail for them, but an impressive thrill for the audience. Equally impressive, perhaps, is the way the large cast quickly and completely inhabit their roles. This film isn't perfect. Haggis relays a bit too aggressively on coincidence, and the over the top emotionalism of a few key characters is a bit grating, Nevertheless, this is a good film that you won't want to miss.

Hollywood at it's BEST!

[Ferencz33 · 10/10 · 10 June 2005]

CrAsH is a movie you simply must see. Not only is it the best movie ever written out of Hollywood, it's direction and ensemble acting are second to none. Prior to this, I thought "American Beauty" was the bomb...Crash explodes on the screen in nuclear proportions and will BLOW YOU AWAY. So hard to watch in some scenes, but so redeeming in its many facets and layers of complexity without ever becoming cliché' or boring.

One moment, you are laughing from comedy that can only be described as "uncomfortable" at best...the next moment, you are breathless in wondering if what you are watching will have redemption in the end. If you can just sit still long enough, keep an open heart AND mind, and realize you might just be watching yourself at times...you might leave the theater with something this movie imparts in one: That we are ALL human...we ALL hold our own prejudices's...and that if we try to respect each other on a DAILY basis, we can live in a world in peace and harmony together.

Crash is a morality tail in the BEST sense of the word...Just GO see it, and take everyone you love along for the bumpy ride!

If you're big on superhero movies, good for you, but try this

[billkitcher · 9/10 · 9 March 2023]

A truly remarkable film. Inspiring in a very dark brilliant way. Don't believe anyone who says this film is about "racial tension". The ethnicities of the characters are a background and somewhat a catalyst for events, but this is a film about humans. Hypocrisy. Selfishness. Opportunism. Randomness. Subtlety. Forced compromise. Foolhardiness due to anger. And it's about hope and the goodness in people when the occasion arises. The little girl with her cloak of invincibility. Sandra Bullock hugging her housekeeper with a certain realization. Don Cheadle allowing his mother to believe something that's untrue. The examples of people trying and failing are paramount, so it's genuinely heartwarming when they succeed. There are no false notes in this film, only the occasional coincidence that doesn't detract. It's an indictment of American culture - whatever are the trafficked people supposed to do now?

Outstanding performances, cinematography, script. An amazing Stereophonics song, "Maybe Tomorrow" as extro music.

This film should have changed the way we look at other people. Somehow it didn't. Maybe not enough people have seen it.

L.A., A Caldron Ready to Blow

[claudio_carvalho · 10/10 · 27 August 2006]

"Crash" is certainly the best recent American movie that I have seen for many years. The contemporary story of intolerance, racism, fear and redemption for some characters is disclosed along two days of this important American city through the lives of different ethnical and economical groups, which interacts with the others. The most important, the interface between their lives happens most of the times in an unexpected way.

When I see in IMDb that Paul Haggis wrote also "Million Dollar Baby", I include him as one of the best contemporary American writers. In my point of view, it is very difficult to successfully develop several characters along 113 minutes running time through several stories and in a very sensitive way as he did. I felt touched by the story of the Iraquian immigrant that buys a gun to protect his shop and the Latin locksmith that tells a fairytale to his daughter. I confess that I cried when the girl used her invisible mantle to protect her father, and that I jumped over the couch when I saw that the guy actually shot blankets instead of bullets. I can not judge the life of people that lives in Los Angeles, and I do not know whether this movie represents a sample of American society, but honestly it seems to be scary for minorities to live in USA in the present days of intolerance. My vote is ten.

Title (Brazil): "Crash – No Limite" ("Crash – In the Limit")

Clashing Crash In Devil's City

[marcosaguado · 7/10 · 4 December 2005]

Lives, ordinary lives, vital part of a city where, I'm sure, the devil has him home. Contradictory, awful, enlightened, confused. There are so many good moments in "Crash" that I felt the need to see it again less than 24 hours later. Matt Dillon lead us through his own contradiction with the humanity of someone who knows he carries something rotten inside. The explosive dissatisfaction that permeates Sandra Bullock's life is ferociously real and the frustration of Thandie Newton's character is a first on the screen. We've never seen it quite like that and her performance will stay with me. Larenz Tate personifies both sides of the equation, the one who understands but goes against his instincts, and still there are chilling flashes of innocence in his eyes -- his performance reminded me of the wonderful "Seeds Of Tragedy" were his innocence was intact. The problem with "Crash" and it is problem is that remains a rather shallow affair. Cleverly put together but epidermic at best.

Such A Fine Line Between Oscar and Lifetime Channel Movie...

[BobM-08731 · 6/10 · 19 March 2006]

While this film was well done, I am stunned at both the average voter rating on IMDb and it earning the Best Film for 2005. This is a 'tidy' account of racial conditions in the USA, but no more cutting edge than the content found in any 'All In The Family' sitcom from the 70s. There is little character development, with each being one-dimensional regarding their personal discriminations. If this film is supposed to deliver a message, it was lost in my viewing. It appeared that every character's racial subjectivity was influenced and primarily based on the most recent event with that race. In my opinion, racial conditions have improved and evolved in our country further than this film suggests. Personal discriminations in the film are not subtle and are stereotypical to a fault. It was void of subtleties and wit that truly represent an individual's approach and reaction in real life. Comparing this to the other nominees this year, I wonder what criteria the voters based their vote upon to select Crash as the winner. This would be a 'surf-through' movie if you passed over it on the Lifetime Channel (only A-list cameo appearances save it from this deserved placement). This is a 'one-watch' movie and will likely date itself quickly. I am sure the idea for the film came out of a graduate student's thesis and would work well in stage form with an ethnic cross-section of serious undergraduate drama majors.

Emotional, moving, insightful and beautiful

[luke-a-mcgowan · 10/10 · 19 September 2014]

What Paul Haggis has achieved with Crash is nothing short of remarkable. The brilliant script and expert direction ties together dozens of seemingly separate characters as they live 36 hours of their lives. One character might happen to be the nurse for another set of characters, and whilst nothing comes of their interaction, it shows us how easily we can be touched by the lives of strangers.

Each character, despite having to share Crash's short run time quite sparsely, is deep, well- developed and the viewers never lose sight of their motivations. Racism is shown not to be a purely vile trait, but motivated by ignorance and our interactions with others. A Persian family are called Arabs, Koreans are called Chinese. African-American Graham Waters tells his mother he's in bed with a white woman, who is in reality Latino. Not only does Crash strip back the violence and hate, but also the small misunderstandings that we have in our own lives.

There are some poor lines that ignorant viewers might think of as Haggis' poor attempt at demonstrating negative behaviour. However, a deeper understanding will show why the characters are acting in this way. William Fichtner's Flanagan swears off black people for failing to be an upstanding members of the community who he could set up as a hero. His line "f*cking black people" may shock audience members, but a deeper understanding will prove otherwise.

The acting is very good, especially by some standout performances from Sandra Bullock as a fearfully racist housewife whose xenophobia is reinforced when she is carjacked in her first scene; Terrence Howard as a successful TV director who is forced to direct his black lead into a more stereotypical fashion and gets sick of being pushed around and Thandie Newton in an Oscar-worthy performance as Howard's wife, a black woman mistaken for white and then intimidated by the police for talking back. Michael Pena steals the film in one of the most heartbreaking and emotional scenes I have ever seen.

Paul Haggis' direction is superb, his screenplay is sublime and the editing is so superb that eight interwoven story lines fits into a 2 hour film seamlessly and without leaving any character underdeveloped.

For opponents of Crash, try to put the controversy of the 2005 Oscars out of your head and watch it with an open mind. You might just be surprised.

Poorly constructed morality tale

[xirzon · 6/10 · 14 March 2006]

The film tells several extraordinary stories happening over the scope of a few days and connects them using implausible coincidences. This makes it difficult to suspend disbelief during the entire film. All the stories share the same motif: There is good and bad in all of us, and racism has complex causes. There is little variation and little originality in the presentation of this theme.

I think the makers of the film were aware of this, and tried to make the film more interesting by arranging it chronologically in such a way that the process of the different pieces of the puzzle coming together is meant to be interesting. Both the film title and the introductory dialogue allude to this, but to me it seemed like a poor excuse not to tell rich, conclusive and well-developed stories.

I do appreciate movies that do not follow a simplistic good/evil pattern; I would have liked to see a more developed and refined story of Officer Ryan (Matt Dillon) and his interaction with Shaniqua and his father, for example. But there are too many plot lines to make any single one stand out, and as a consequence, the characters seem artificial rather than realistic. (As a European, I cannot judge whether the individual subcultures portrayed at all resemble reality.) The movie is not "trash" as some reviewers have called it, but it is forgettable and certainly not deserving of an Academy Award. As opposed to "Brokeback Mountain", I doubt anyone will talk much about "Crash" in 20 years.

Melodramatic nonsense

[davidmvining · 5/10 · 16 February 2024]

I have a serious issue with how most ensemble films come together. Most of them take an ensemble approach to go in a variety of different directions that never really connect in anything more than the most basic of mechanical manners, making the films feel like they go off in random directions without any real central point (this is the James Gunn approach). That's not what Paul Haggis does in Crash, his Best Picture winning film. Everything is interconnected with the same central ideas of racism, communication, and redemption. However, Haggis leans heavily into the melodrama of everything which, combined with the sheer number of characters going on, makes the final hour or so just outright ridiculous.

It's the story of a roughly twenty-four hour period that primarily views Los Angeles (not America, the milieu is far too specific to LA) through the lens of race, beginning with a car crash involving a black man, Graham (Don Cheadle), a Hispanic woman, Ria (Jennifer Esposito), and a Korean woman, Kim (Alexis Rhee) where racial epithets fly free and clear between Ria and Kim. This should be enough, but Haggis puts an aimless little soliloquy into Graham's mouth about how we crash into each other for contact in our enclosed little lives, and it's just this obvious bit of explanation, right at the beginning of the film, that the obvious main inspiration for the film, Robert Altman's Short Cuts, eluded because it was more confident in trying to convey through dramatics.

This sort of thing really does rely entirely on the strength of the characters, and there are simply too many, especially when Haggis is trying to paint a complex portrait of human experience filtered through race as he's doing here. I genuinely do appreciate the effort at a complex portrait (I thought it was working for a while, perhaps the first half of the film), but it's when he starts having the actual and eponymous crashes occur that the thinness of character betrays the film's overall point. Where the film works best is when it actually gives us time with a character to get to know them beyond caricature. The worst of these is probably the Los Angeles DA played by Brendan Fraser and his wife played by Sandra Bullock, especially her. She has a grand five minutes of screentime, but she goes through this grand change to realize that she's always mad, but it somehow relates to her gripping her purse when passing two black men on the street, and ends up manifesting that her maid is her best friend? It's simply too much in too little time to actually make an effect.

The film's strongest point is probably Michael Pena's character of Daniel, a locksmith who crashes into Farhad (Shaun Toub), a Persian shop owner who starts the film by buying a guy because of a break-in. Farhad isn't a great character himself (he's fine but doesn't really rise above caricature), but Daniel has this very nice moment with his daughter where he gives her an invisible cloak that has protected him from the violence of the world around them. It's a quiet moment of gentle humanity that is probably the best thing in the whole film. And then Daniel has the worst moment in the film as Haggis goes fully ridiculous melodrama when Farhad tracks him down because he blames Daniel for a second break-in. I mean, this is the stuff of parody, especially in terms of its execution.

One of the most tortured pieces of narrative is around a pair of cops, Matt Dillon's John and Ryan Phillipe's Tom. John is a racist who has a father with a chronic disease that leads John to having to call the representative at his HMO who is a black woman, Shaniqua (Loretta Devine). He also stops a car with Cameron (Terrence Howard) and his wife Christine (Thandie Newton) where he molests Christine during a pat down and gets Cameron to act subservient to him while he does it. He then has some great redemption when he rescues Christine the next day (how many people live in LA and how big is it?, this is Home Alone 2 levels of ridiculous coincidence) despite having...not grown? I dunno. It's too short. Tom, on the other hand, also, independently, runs into Cameron (seriously?) and talks him down from having a suicide by cop because...Cameron is having trouble with his black identity as a studio executive?

And then there's the two black men who scared Sandra Bullock, Anthony (Ludacris) and Peter (Larenz Tate). Anthony rambles constantly about the state of the black man in Los Angeles, pining for the days of the intellectual black activist from the 60s, while justifying stealing from white people all while Peter hangs on and just kind of laughs through the whole thing. I suspect that this was Haggis' effort at pointing the finger at some element of the black community for contributing to the overall racial strife, but it's such a messy portrait at the same time. Throw in the fact that there's an accidental hit and run involving a Korean man, Choi Chin (Greg Joung Paik), who ends up married to Kim from the beginning and was...transporting Chinese slaves in his van? This is a mess.

So, I appreciate some of what Haggis is doing. He's doing a lot, and the embrace of complexity around human interactions works decently well for about the first half, and then the melodrama kicks in, revealing all of the major flaws with the thin portraits who are working through what's going on. The majorly heightened events are so far above the angry phone calls of the baker in Short Cuts (which is also about an hour longer), revealing that Haggis's efforts trended much more towards the thinly melodramatic rather than the meatily humanistic. It makes me glad that Clint Eastwood denied him a second draft on Million Dollar Baby.

This isn't The English Patient bad, but it's not really good either. It feels like the serious version of Love Actually that Inarritu would manage much better the following year with Babel.

here's your yearly dose of tripe, lap it up

[templeofthebull · 24 January 2007]

This movie is bad on so many levels, it's hard to know where to begin and could never all be covered in one review. Never mind the fact that only an amateur audience mistakes forced melodrama and abundant clichés for award winning acting, writing, or directing for now.

This movie proposes that everyone acts and reacts to everyone according to race. It pushes and stomps the idea that white people are always rich, racist, and afraid of other races. And a few non-whites aren't always perfect. If there was such a thing as politically correct police in the world, this would be the movie people would be forced to watch in prison.

Movies that do peoples thinking for them sure get old. And this kind of movie doesn't unite anyone. It sparks issues that people who know how to speak for themselves and have their own brain, have already gotten past.

Whatever tired p.c. ideological point this garbage tries to make, it's been done to death. This bludgeons the dead horse, mutilates the carcass, then spoon feeds the rest of it down the throat of anyone who happened to watch.

Different lives intertwine in this brilliantly thought-provoking film.

[nicolechan916 · 8/10 · 11 October 2014]

We are shown many different characters in LA and never seem to focus on one, but rather the whole film focuses on the diverse cast. What first seems to be a film about racial prejudice and discrimination further develops into how people can change, and that sometimes the people who overtly show discrimination might not be as dangerous as those who keep silent.

There is a great cast in this who did an incredible job. But because there are so many main characters, we don't really get so in depth into their characters, that I honestly don't even know their character's names. However, we see enough of them to get a basic snapshot of their character and this is enough to gain our sympathy when something happens to them.

There was this tone that was consistent throughout this film which was established right from the start. This tone had me expecting a really surprising ending or something of that sort and though I did get surprised, I think I was more confused. And though I got what this film was about after thinking about it for awhile, it just feels like it fell short of what it had me expecting.

Or maybe it's because that there are a few characters who I don't know what happens to. The characters are split into two groups, those who redeem themselves and those who cross over and does something we wouldn't suspect of them. We are shown a few examples of both but there are some characters who don't really fit into either categories so it has me wondering what their role in the film was. I understand that this film thrives on the different lives intertwining but I feel that a few less characters would have made it much better.

The song "In the Deep" by Bird York (Kathleen York), that is played near the end of the film is a kind of epilogue which fits the story perfectly. This film was really well written, acted and edited.

My final thought is that I don't know if this film is just so brilliant that my brain can't register or whether I'm so confused as to what I just watched. So I'll take it as a confusingly brilliant film. OK wait, I've got the word for this now. It's a heavy drama. There we go. I think I've got a headache from thinking about this too much.

Read more movie reviews at championangels.wordpress.com

Powerful

[Mike_the_Critic · 10/10 · 7 June 2005]

Wow, what else can be said. This movie is sheer power not only in language but visuals. Picture life and the world we live in, most people live their lives through their own lives. Thinking their story is the movie being played out. But in fact this movies breaks down that barrier and shoots the the story from so many angles and fills in the wholes with imagery. In a perfect world I am sure we would not look at each other with different views and opinions, but we do not live in a perfect world.

The cuts of racism run deep in our culture and our lives that we automatically assume. The movie was a movie where people are shown the lives of so many people and their views and practically overnight it is radically changed.

"You think you know who you are. You have no idea." This is the perfect tagline in the movie, and the perfect phrase coming from Matt Dillon.

When we are first introduced to these people we can only see first impressions. But, who they think they are is not truly who they are. This movie speaks wonderful messages and it was shot beautifully.

Paul Haggis did a wonderful job. The cast was also wonderful, and believable in being real people. I say this because people like Don Cheadle take the role and give it to the audience in a way that they would understand it. They would accept and see the social implications it brings within their own life.

The transitions in the movie from beginning to the end gave the movie itself a real credible front. The art of storytelling went beyond telling a story but delved deep into the audiences soul prodding forth some sort of emotional understand of the deep message.

Evil is not always evil, and good and not always good. sometimes it is hard to tell which is which. Or even prove that either really exist.

I hope everyone takes the time to watch this movie but take it for what it truly is. Not entertainment, but a factual and honest take of modern day attitudes and ignorance about racism and stereotypes.

Potpourri For Prejudice

[dataconflossmoor-1 · 10/10 · 15 February 2010]

"Crash" was one big citadel for disseminated catastrophe! The film, "Crash" habitually purported the unnecessarily ruthless aspects to the questions of: "What about this?" "What about that?" Fatal consequences are incurred just because people find everything around them to be just a little too irksome to stomach! The premise being; "Make it easier on me, let me hate my neighbor!!" The penchant for belligerence is very widespread in this movie. The characters in "Crash" possess a callousness which is assertively second nature to them. Their attitudes manifest themselves by perpetually saying: "I'm always angry, why? No real reason!" The film's racial unrest was so ubiquitous that some seemingly normal individuals would ask this question with a very cavalier disposition: "Is he black, or is he white? Yeah! It definitely matters!!" The scenario is situated accordingly whereby all parties concerned perceive money to be everything, and a lack of money to be the only thing!! Such a collage of pejorative proclivities has manufactured a myriad of emotional hang ups with this film. So why did this flick win for best picture? My guess; Because of the film's originality. "Crash" was a movie which was comprised of these ingredients: A dash of violence, a pinch of sexually depraved behavior, a bevy of great actors and actresses, (Including Sandra Bullock and Matt Dillon) and finally, it was topped off with wonderful directing. Galvanize all of these attributes, and it is not surprising that "Crash" was selected to be recipient of the proverbial and extremely coveted Academy Award Oscar for best film, above all other flicks that were competing for this honor in '2005! I personally liked "Good Night and Good Luck" better! This film was a runner up academy award nominee which was produced during the same year as "Crash" was! While "Good Night and Good Luck" was an intensely intellectual film, "Crash" however, was a much more elaborate production. The movie, "Crash", became the precarious purveyor of non justifiably violent responses which served as a subterfuge for camouflaging grotesque human indulgences. Mannerisms of this nature correlated to the wry vindication of everybody's personal misunderstandings! "Crash" can best be categorized as a sagacity for sinners. This film was a creative doggerel that became a reflection of the dark and psychologically unnerving criminal antics which concurrently prevailed! This plethora of felonious atrocities victimized everyone in the film in one way or another! These nefarious escapades eventually snowballed into an onslaught of cumbersome afflictions that wound up burdening the value system by which many typical Americans live! The film "Crash" is a demented depiction of how the truth is offensive because the truth is also stubborn, hence, it is simply the truth! Basically being a cunningly creative homogenization for hatred, it stands to reason that "Crash" should have won the academy award!! Indeed, "Crash" deservedly won for best picture! Okay!! So, what's the bottom line here? We have acquired a painstaking realization of just how deplorable our fixations on discriminating judgment really are!! Are we going to do anything about it? NO!!

Superficial

[ihash · 6/10 · 19 March 2006]

Crash is in essence a glossed up remake of Grand Canyon. The premise is the same: a racially diverse group of people in Los Angeles who live separate lives are thrown together by coincidence. But for these coincidences, their lives would never intersect. Every interaction in Crash is racial in a way that hits the audience over the head with the movie's theme. Racism in Crash is a matter of not being treated with sensitivity. People are meant to endure the "tryanny" of being insulted. The people in Crash, like Grand Canyon, live lives of unremitting grimness that seems gratuitous. The movie suggests that if only people would be more racially sensitive, life would not be so grim. The oppression of having to actual endure racial insensitivity is unintentionally juxtaposed with lives that don't seem that bad. I definitely got the impression that the film writer (who can stand in for most of the Hollywood establishment) projects his own personal racial isolation on the world at large. This accounts for the film's superficial take on the subject. People who actually interact with people from other racial and socio-economic backgrounds know that life is not so gratuitously race-obsessed. The Magnolia-like editing of the film means that the characterizations in the film are not nuanced. We see only a sliver of their lives. The one exception is Dillon's character, but none of the other actors did anything remarkable. The film does have some decent plot twists. The film is well done, but is style over substance. A decent film, but not an Oscar-worthy one.

Tough Racial and Psychodrama Picture

[Jakealope · 6/10 · 24 February 2006]

It had all the modern premier film touches: great shooting, good acting, but a flawed, cheesy script and theme with that annoying ethereal emo music. I was not impressed with the same old racial stereotypes, but they did change them up a bit. Even the black punks in the beginning, who babble on about imaginary racial conspiracies while proving the black negative stereotype correct, felt flat. For instance, the bigoted gun store owner, not a far out stereotype from my experience, would probably put business ahead of bigotry and not tick off his Iranian customers. Though to it's credit it showed everyone being racist to everyone else. There was even a subplot where two undercover cops crash into each other then shoot it out, a dead black the surviving white. The LAPD wants to hang the white survivor out as a scapegoat to the black power mob while the black investigator assigned to the case has serious doubts.One of the saddest scenes was when the black investigator's junkie mother was ranting about how "his people" killed her other criminal carjacking son. Well, technically it was true. But if anyone led to her dead criminal son turning out how he did, it was his worthless junkie mom. In a sad way that is so real, the people who do the most complaining cause the most damage.

Basically, this was a B level melodrama that would have been dynamite in the 60's but in the 2000's, it sounds worn out, exploitative and tinny. But it did try to tackle a serious issue and is probably one of the best of its type. I went back to this because of all the racial tensions created by the media and the black power race baiting mob in these days. The latest racial nonsense like the Oscars are too white really grind my gears, not to mention such rubbish as making a total punk lowlife like Michael Brown into an innocent victim, replete with lies about how he was holding his hands up when he was shot. Compared to all the garbage like I mentioned, this movie was almost documentary and objective. AND IT WON THE Oscars, yet the race baiters like Jada Pinkett seem to forget that. As well as having some good twists.

An intense cinematographic experience

[andriaj78 · 10/10 · 27 April 2006]

With all these comments, both negative and positive, about Crash, I had to participate and present my point of view. Not that do people from the US care about a Mexican's opinion, and I'm really from Mexico, not from Puerto Rico nor any other Latin American country.

I almost missed the incredible experience of seeing it on theater. Wow! It's been one of the best cinematographic experiences I've had. And yes, it has its flaws, but I think we all go to the movies to enjoy the experience, not to criticize every scene, every technical detail.

For those who say the film is predictable, well, you were not involved in the movie, then. And it must be boring for you to go to the movies and know what's going next. I pity you.

For those who say all characters are stereotyped, well, think about this. We see stereotypes in people we don't know. Yeah, we have friends who are black, Latin, Asian, or other race, and we know they are not like they are shown in the film. But what about the people we don't know? we refuse to have contact with them, due to the stereotypes we have. Think really about it. That's what the movie is about, how we treat the people we don't know, how we reject them without really knowing them, avoiding contact, and this because of our prejudices.

Too many coincidences? well, it's a movie, it's a fable. it had to be like that. And you're not paying attention to the people around you, but it happens in big cities. People are not that distant from each other.

The music, the editing, the acting, and the writing were simply superb. I really can't understand why some people don't appreciate all of that.

I loved this film! and it really hurts to see how some people treats it like trash... as they surely treat people they don't know similarly.

Crash.... a truly deserving Oscar winner.