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

RogerEbert.com

Thumb after everything

After Everything

As long as the focus is on Mia and Elliot, the film is involving and moving.

Thumb first man

First Man

If you want to get an almost first-person sense of what it felt like to ride a rocket into orbit and beyond, "First Man" is…

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…

Other Reviews
Great Movie Archives

On 'Crash' from Chile

From: Carlos Gonzalez Aburto, Concepcion, VIII Region, Chile

I' m a 20 year old sociology student from Chile. Having seen "Crash" only a couple of weeks ago (we don't have the same release dates as in USA), I must say I am impressed on the many attacks the movie has received, mostly mocking it for possessing a liberal tone, being based on stereotypes and a typical moralizing Hollywood movie. I think by living so far away from the Hollywood reality and the perception of a movie industry, I can see the film for what it is without, observe the irony, being determined by prejudices, like thinking that this is a typical "racism is very, very, very bad" kind of Hollywood produced film.

Advertisement

On the stereotypes, what Haggis and Moresco where trying to do was to, in a first approach, show the characters as archetypes and let us, the spectators, make a judgment (oh, this cop is a bastard), and then, on a second approach, break those already constructed archetypes and judgments (oh, he is that way because of his father's problem), to make a third moment, in which the spectator judges critically his own judgments. It's like Hegel’s dialectic or Eisenstein's montage: point, counterpoint, fusion.

Using this process, let's analyze the scene where the Sandra Bullock character is waiting for the Michael Pena character to change the locks. She is stressed, nervous, altered, etc. Her husband asks her to calm, she erupts because nobody seems to understand her. She makes statements based on prejudice ("prison tattoos"). We can understand her up to a point, but we immediately judge her for these statements. But then she explains the way of her behavior, and we question our first judgment, and understand her.

Which brings us to the topic of the movie. The racism is just a tool that Haggis and Moresco use to make us think about our judgments and prejudices. They don't say that prejudices are bad, they say that we should be careful. Although many people would never admit it, prejudices help us arrange our world. Now do we dare judge prejudices so lightly?

If a movie that leads to these conclusions is downright mediocre, then I must say I don't know heck about films.

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...

Why The Godfather, Part II is the Best of the Trilogy

A look back at one of the best films of all time.

Netflix’s Terrifying, Moving The Haunting of Hill House is Essential Viewing

A review of Mike Flanagan's new horror series based on the Shirley Jackson novel, The Haunting of Hill House.

Once Upon a Time in Haddonfield: Revisiting John Carpenter's Halloween

Far Flung Correspondent Seongyong Cho revisits John Carpenter's classic Halloween.

Reveal Comments
comments powered by Disqus