Posted by lon [ 69.28.6.12 ] on October 29, 2005 at 15:29:16:
While looking up info on David Cronenberg's "Crash" from 1996
or whenever it was, I spied this release on IMDb. It piqued
my curiosity with it's rave reviews.
The reviews are elsewhere and I'm not going to give away
much of the story as many net reviewers tend to do.
Crash contains a full range of emotions for the viewer to
experience from laughter to shock. A smaller picture like this
and ones such as _Monsters Ball_ (to which I think it has some
afinity) get recognized by the critics and the awards outfits
as a 'good taste' films. The good taste film is something that
H'wood is obiligated to do about once a year or so as a break
from making fantasies about killing the demons (the
war in iraq) or historical epics about Crusades into foreign
lands (the war in Iraq).
Crash has to be considered a good taste film, even though it deals
extensively with the important subject of modern-day racism.
My big beef with the film which is admirably written by
Paul Haggis (_Million Dollar Baby_, _Red Hot_ -- one of my faves--
and others) is that he has gone to the same well that other
H'wood good taste film makers have dipped in all too often.
The well in this example is a plot line in which all (too many)
characters are interweaved in a way that we, the audience,
are supposed to perceive as being clever.
Well, if *I* can spot this similarity, you probably will to.
Crash is a worthwhile film for the emotional content. Just be
advised that if it looks slightly familiar to other recent
releases, that's because it is.
[ MoviesAndMusic Forum ] [ Help ]