not much here is really of any use to anyone.

Rating: 3/10 (2 June 2007)

I heard so many great things about Crash. It was one of the best reviewed of the year. actually, I hadn't heard anything bad about it at all. Everyone I talked to loved it. This turned out to be a big mistake on "everyone's" part. (I hadn't dug deep enough yet to realize that were plenty of people out there besides "everyone" who didn't like it. but that's besides the point of my introduction.)
I think the main problem I had with Crash was that it just wasn't believable, at all. A serious dramatic movie isn't worth crap if it isn't believable. If people really acted like they do in this film, LA would be in a state of war. I know there was the whole Rodney King thing in LA, but that got a LOT of attention. The events in Crash depict racism on a scale ridiculously close to that of the Rodney King incident. I'm never convinced at any point in the film that the events depicted really could happen. In fact, I was just in Los Angeles, and people of various ethnicities seemed to get along with each other just fine. sure, there's racism out there, but Crash is about as accurate on racism as Rambo is on war.
All the dialogue is pretty horrible, too. Totally unconvincing. I couldn't imagine a single character being an actual person in real life. Crash had too many of those oh-so-dramatic scenes where every line is something flowery and deep, and if you actually heard some one say it in real life you would laugh your head off. (Examples- the scene with the gun with blanks, and with Don Cheadle and his mom.) Some scenes were actually moving, like the car wreck, as hard to believe as it was. but these scenes were overshadowed by all the bad scenes.
In the first half of the movie, almost every character was portrayed as a stereotype. I think this was done on purpose... I don't know if the point of that was for them to overcome the stereotypes. Even if they do overcome them, you have an ugly, offensive, and extremely weak first half of the movie.
I didn't like the pretentious and over-used idea of having all the stories interweave. It's been done a lot, but it's never been done this bad. In other movies, the fact that there are coincidences is used to make a point of some sort, but not in Crash. I think this is the main weakness of Crash. they went to all this trouble to put a bunch of chance meetings into this film, and what did it mean that these insane coincidences happened? Nothing. The end.
There's a lot to like under the surface of Crash... sure, lots of characters overcoming their inner demons, and fun stuff like that. but almost nothing on the surface to like. And actually, I didn't really feel as if Crash had anything to say. (One of the impressions I had gotten from other people before I had seen it was that it had a lot to say.) What was the point? Did it really show us anything we don't already know? Was it trying to show us how harmful racism is? Wow, racism is harmful... Who knew. This film certainly didn't change any of my views. Honestly, I can't believe it has "changed people's lives"- give me a break. In order for it to change your life, I think you would have to knowingly be a racist before you saw it, and seeing it made you change your ways.
Despite all of these problems I had with Crash, I did find some good qualities in it. The music was good. I like Mark Isham. I had high hopes when the movie first started, because the credits had me mesmerized. The music really enhanced certain scenes of the film, too. And, I'll admit that a couple of scenes were moving, although perhaps not genuinely. There was even some pretty strong acting. Ludicrous and Don Cheadle were brilliant. Unfortunately, Crash was still a huge pile of crap. (hah, that's fun to say.) I'd find any John Woo movie to be more believable.