Is it genius? Is it crap?

Rating: 7/10 (13 May 2011)

Crash seems to be one of the most polarizing Best Picture winners ever. A quick browse through the IMDb forums will show you that some people view this film as an ingenious masterpiece while others despise it with every fiber of their body. I find myself somewhere in the middle of these two opposing sides. There's a lot of debate over what Crash is, what it all means, and what its true motivations are. So much of this film is subjective and can be looked at in a positive or a negative light so I'll just establish fact. Crash is a movie about an ensemble of people whose lives intertwine over the course of two days in Los Angeles. We have a racist white cop, a high society black couple, a Persian family that owns a pawn shop in downtown, a black hoodlum who preaches about racism and avoiding stereotypes all the while jacking cars, a Hispanic locksmith, and various others. Over these two days these people learn about themselves through dramatic encounters that all fuel a motif of racism and stereotyping. This movie certainly has masterpiece potential, and maybe thats why I am weary to solidify my opinion on this film at this point.
In theory Crash is amazing. The thought going into the story is intelligible and complex. It's a story about finding out who we are and what makes us human. It seeks to examine the effects of stereotyping and where this kind of human nature leads us and how it makes us feel. If you examine the film closely you find all of these things in many different ways, but the issue comes from what you have to dig through to discover this metaphoric treasure trove.
Virtually every character in this film is a racist. And some of the racism is just so forced and is crammed down your throat in such a rude and unsettling way that you start to lose sight of the magic potential this film was heading towards. There are just certain moments where, try as you might, you just can't buy into the fact that some people are actually like that. I'm not denying that racism exists because it does and it is a sad part of our everyday life, but I just don't believe it at this level of force fed cliché. Nearly every conversation in this film has to do with race and every bit of banter is racially motivated, so much so that it gets tiring and irritating to an extent.
Another place where I have some trouble connecting with this film is some of the characters. I said before, nearly every character in this film is racist and judgemental. The judgemental part goes back to the recurring themes of human nature but the racism is just too over the top for me to like any of these characters. Now I realized by the end of the film that the purpose of these unlikeable characters is that they are supposed to go through major revelations at the end of the film and learn who they are and where their own actions have led them. I know that at the end of the film they did all learn things, but I didn't feel like they learned anything. Obviously I saw it on screen. I saw Farhad part with his anger after almost killing a little girl. I saw Officer Ryan come to terms with himself and how his own bigotry was affecting his life. I saw Cameron realize who he was and that he still loved his wife in spite of everything. I saw all of these things, but I hardly felt any of them. There's a wall between me and the characters in this film that blocks all emotional connecting and this wall was built by the way in all these characters and their development were forcefully spoon fed to me.
But maybe Paul Haggis, director/writer of the film, is actually a genius for making Crash the way he did. Maybe he purposefully made the characters as blatant and cliché as he did to frustrate and confuse people. And once they are angry they vent these feelings of frustration and start to boast why the film is wrong and why they are above this kind of clichéd and predictable film. In doing so could they be proving Haggis' point about the people who think they are above racism and stereotypes? Are they just falling into another stereotype that Haggis actually addresses in Crash. We have the characters of Peter, Anthony's friend, and Officer Tom. These are the two characters who set themselves apart from all the racial tension and don't let it play a role in their lives. Of course, in the end, they are the most affected by it because of their own underlying stereotyping which they hadn't addressed in themselves until Tom shoots Peter. Are the haters of Crash just proving Haggis' point? This kind of meta filmmaking is a bit of a stretch, but one can never truly know, can they? I definitely have some issues with Crash, but it isn't necessarily a bad movie. However, its motives are too shrouded in subjective ambiguities for me to really connect with this film. I can see at least some of what it set out to accomplish, but the gray area is where much of the criticism, my own included, of this movie comes from. Of course as far as just pure filmmaking goes, Crash has a great cast and some powerful performances. Haggis' direction is also superb. Combined with the music it is even more powerful and dramatic and there are moments of this film where the visual quality is astounding and will not leave you. But when you take a long hard look at this film it is just really difficult to discern just what kind of a film Crash is.