Crash...and burn

Today i got to see Crash in the theatre. Sorry,not a theatre but in a multiplex(yes there is a difference). I had been interested in watching this film for some time and seeing it win the Best Picture Oscar over other heavyweights only heightened my interest in the film. At first two things surprised me- one that we got to see the film uncut. I guess my surprise is due to the fact that I have gotten used to seeing even ordinary scenes being cut in the hall let alone scenes of an adult nature. The first problem I had was the print of the film.The print it seems was extremely scratched which made watching some scenes quite irritating. The other thing was seeing the hall fill up only to its 1/8th capacity.If Crash is drawing such a small crowd then what hopes does Brokeback have?Must watch it soon before it goes.
The first thing that I liked about the film was its music. It set the tone for the intended subject matter. Crash talks about racism thorugh the lives of around a dozen different characters. It started off quite well, making sure that the audience related to the right characters.But somewhere down the line,the film started reeling under its own weight. I had a little problem believing a few things. Some aspects of the film bothered me more,so lets get all of them out of the way.
First and foremost I must warn you that from here onwards I will be revealing plot details which are potential spoilers. Read at your own discretion. The first thing that was flawed about the film was a scene where a little girl is accidentally shot from a distance of less than 3 feet and escapes unharmed. The logic given,was of course that the gun was loaded with blanks. Now even my limited knowledge of ballictics tells me that blanks fired within a range of less than 4 feet can be fatal. Even if somehow the victim escapes a fatal wound, there will be some kind of flash burn or shrapnel injury. Yet the girl escapes unhurt. The director wanted to add the element of fairytale to this particular scene but for me that did not work out well. This being a technical fault, I can overlook. The other two major points that I have against the film hurts the film and cripples it fatally.
The character of the Iranian shopkeeper who had very limited grasp of english was the one which took the worst hit. In a story where significant misunderstandings and language barrier are the essence of escalating tension and drama,this man's understanding of english varies to such an extent that by the end of his story he was forming full sentences and speaking english with a thick american accent,and that too without any visible effort. The most crucial misunderstanding of the shopkeeper's story relies solely on his extremely limited command over a language foreign to him and yet his vocabulary increases tenfold in a matter of hours.That particluar bit stuck out like a sore thumb.
Now for my final grudge against the film. Paul Haggis' story uses the slick idea of multiple stories running simultaneously to recount different peoples lives and their encounters with racism.But rather than talk about racism itself, it just uses it as a launchpad to cruise through different situations. Like I said before, I got the distinct feeling that inspite of the strong start the film had started reeling under its own weight by the middle. The film had started of with a study of characters with their fair shades of grey in them,like the D.A.'s wife who is openly racist,or like the cop who ,excuse the pun- cops a generous feel of a woman in front of her black husband to humiliate him. But right around the interval the film did a volte face. Suddenly we saw one character who was negative up until now doing something nice. Then another character followed suit. So basically one after the other each character got their screen time where through various acts they sort of redeemed themselves in the audience's eyes. The final straw was seeing Sandra Bullock's character hugging her spanish housekeeper. What was Haggis thinking? I for one couldnt for the life of me figure out. My main grouse is that it felt like Haggis was talking about redemption through their acts. I wonder, if he ever intended anything more than a cursory glance into this subject matter.In the end his ham handed er, handling of such serious subject matters is what killed the film.The film felt like it was divided neatly into two parts-till the rescue of Thandie Newton's character was the first half followed by the "look ma!There is good in me too!" fest.I did not have any trouble believing all the conincidences and the chance meetings. What I could not believe was this crude treatment of a subject matter that has such serious implications.
You must be thinking by now why I am being so harsh in judging this film. Considering that many people have adjudged this film to be the best of last year's lot this film came with high expectations. A film that won the Best Picture,Best Screenplay and Best Editing Oscar ,I thought had a lot to offer.I was initially sceptic of the film since this was written and directed by the same guy who wrote Million Dollar Baby. I expected it to be as predictable. Nevertheless,i think another problem of the film was its unusually short running time. Ensemble films generally need more time to give breathing space to the characters. Movies like Magnolia is a better example of ensemble films. The few good things about the film were the performances of Thandie Newton,Don Cheadle and Matt Dillon. Don Cheadle's story in particular stood out for me at least. The last scene between Cheadle's character and his mom was quite impressive. Crash had won the Best Picture Oscar over heavy weights like Brokeback Mountain,Munich,Capote and Goodnight and Good Luck. Of these I have already seen Good night and I rather liked it. Let's hope I get to see the other nominees soon enough. Before I bid you goodnight,I must say again that Crash by no means is unwatchable.It is in fact a nice film. Certainly much better than the likes of Gladiator, Unforgiven, Shakespeare in Love or Million Dollar Baby-all Best Picture winners coincidentally.