My Crash Review-Controversy

I had not seen Crash before monday despite it being released in UK cinemas' in 2005. The film stunned me and I rarely felt like I knew what was coming next, it wasnt that predictable for me which i feel is a one of the biggest dangers facing these type of scenario films. I think Crash shows a worst case scenario built on racial prejudice, stereo types where general reputation precedes itself, extrodinary co-incidence that shows a story that comes full cirlce. However it is none the less a haunting reality of everyday life where situations occurr by chance and the storys of individuals told are intertwined.

With the world we live in today, given contemporary global issues, touchy subjects, insecurities etc... The film Crash is a bould move by Paul Haggis given the former concerns. I think the casting was unbelievablely good in choice, many of them I think are underated in the past and present, I agree with Ebert on the "strong performances". The level in popularity of the film I believe is largely based on Crash's confrontation with the contemporary issues addressed in the film; such as racism, ethnicity, image/identity and prejudice. Also it is dependant on the audiences and critics views on the delicate issues and their comfort to this exposure.

I didnt get a sense of being minipulated by the scenarios' or the characters' therefore I dont recognise too much controversy myself. I thought the film was farely seemless but still able and did leave questions in my mind. Furthermore the film did make me think, but I disagree that the film is so that you can only watch it once, afterall that theory can apply to many films, however I believe that argument is beyond the point. I think the construction of the narrative is also well done but im not saying that I think the film is untouchable.

Im mainly agree with Ebert rather than Foundas, the film does make me watch with the feeling of "Intense Facination". I am attracted by the way the character behaviour depends so much on "accident". I like the way in which the characters' assumptions of each other are shown. Crash attracts me and I agree with Ebert that the film shows characters saying ".... exactly what they are thinking, without the filters of political correctness" I further agree that the film serves a deeper meaning than "manipulative storytelling", more a parable on morals and behaviour. On the otherhand I have to disagree with Ebert where he states that the characters become "better people because of what has happend to them".The state in which the film leaves some of the characters is far from ideal in comparison to others. Even though Foundas disagrees with the way the film was made or the message it percieved, I have to agree with him in saying that Crash is not wholly representitive of the people their views or behaviour and the social problems in contemporary L.A. However Like Ebert I believe that Crash is a film about progress I would add that perhaps this can be seen as a subtle message that Haggis wants to see implimented with the films contentious issues in todays wider society?

Overall I would agree it could be one of the best films of 2005, personably Crash is an enjoyable yet thought provoking film.