In Memoriam 1942 – 2013 “Roger Ebert loved movies.”

RogerEbert.com

Thumb_large_2j2jeurpvhqksybohmpsq01jil5

Listen Up Philip

The terrific cast all delves into the material full-bore, which contributes to its peculiar resonance. Perry may hate everyone and everything, but in making a…

Thumb_10687421_10152289281917007_4858446204490388004_o

Private Violence

A look at the complexity of domestic violence, especially when it comes to the difficulty of prosecuting abusers in a court of law, "Private Violence"…

Other Reviews
Review Archives
Thumb_xbepftvyieurxopaxyzgtgtkwgw

Ballad of Narayama

"The Ballad of Narayama" is a Japanese film of great beauty and elegant artifice, telling a story of startling cruelty. What a space it opens…

Thumb_jrluxpegcv11ostmz1fqha1bkxq

Monsieur Hire

Patrice Leconte's "Monsieur Hire" is a tragedy about loneliness and erotomania, told about two solitary people who have nothing else in common. It involves a…

Other Reviews
Great Movie Archives

For people who don't want to think

From: Kerry Bailey, Los Angeles, CA

I am in that camp of people who wanted "Brokeback Mountain" to win for Best Picture but more than any other film, did not want "Crash" to win. It's not because I felt "Crash" was a spoiler, but merely because since I saw "Crash," I've felt it was contrived, manipulative, self-righteous and preachy. "Crash," I feel, is designed to make you believe you're watching and learning something IMPORTANT (with a ridiculous "happy" ending, no less). There's no real thinking that accompanies watching "Crash" even though that's what all of its champions will tell you.

"This will get you thinking about race disparities in L.A." or "I loved how 'Crash' made me think about how different cultures in the U.S. have to deal with one another." I concur that "Crash" is a GREAT movie -- for people who like to be told how to think about those issues without actually having to do any thinking themselves. Maybe "Crash" is great because of its ability to sucker everyone into believing its "reality".

I don't understand how, time and time again, a movie like this gets passed off as one of the Best of the Year. The Academy has a great track record of naming something Best Picture without thinking about how it will play in the long run. I'm still somewhat pissed about when "Braveheart" beat out "Babe" a few years ago. I mean, really, how many times can you sit through "Braveheart" compared to" Babe"? A couple of years ago everyone was gaga over "Mystic River." Can you please tell me why? And if you were one of the people who loved it, have you watched it a second time? If you tell me that it holds up as a BEST PICTURE under a second viewing, I might have to stop reading your reviews.

As far as what my theory is on WHY "Crash" won...? I did read a prediction
early on that "Crash" would win for best picture because of the fact that it has such a large ensemble cast compared to Brokeback and also that it was shot in Los Angeles, with a Los Angeles crew. These factors gave it a greater base of friends (and friends of friends) that Academy members were acquainted with who worked on the film, and thus influenced them to vote for it. This theory, I think, makes a lot of sense.

I guess we'll see what the shelf-life of all of these movies are in a few years and which really stands the test of time. "Brokeback" may be dated and irrelevant more quickly than I expect... but I have no doubt that that will happen long after "Crash" fades from everyone's memory.

Popular Blog Posts

Who do you read? Good Roger, or Bad Roger?

This message came to me from a reader named Peter Svensland. He and a fr...

"1941": An Appreciation and Interview with Bob Gale

An appreciation of "1941" and interview with Bob Gale.

NYFF 2014: Paul Thomas Anderson’s “Inherent Vice”

A review of Paul Thomas Anderson's "Inherent Vice" from the 2014 New York Film Festival.

Interview: Cary Elwes on the Lasting Power of “The Princess Bride”

An interview with Cary Elwes about "The Princess Bride."

Reveal Comments
comments powered by Disqus