Monday, February 14, 2011

CRASH Review

Check out these reviews of the movie we watched in class, Crash:
Which review do you think does the best job of interpreting the film? Why? What did the reviewer get right, and what did they get wrong? What would you add to the review? Post your response as a comment below.

20 comments:

  1. Roger Ebert hits this review just right. He details each character as they are portrayed. Each character has built-in negative assumption about people of other races. Prejudice and racism are the two major flaws exploited. Starting from the carjacking and ending with the asian family being released from the back of a van as if they were being let out of prison, you can read this review and almost know the whole movie. I personally could not add anything to make this review better.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I believe that Roger Ebert is the only review that depicts the film as I seen it. He got it right, that the film had many twist and turns but he was also correct in saying that the director did a good job of making it all plausable. I wouldnt say he got anything wrong he did a fine job as was fair with his critisms. I wouldnt add anything because he gave a wide variety in his description and did not favor any characters more than others.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Anonymous said .... is brandon rice sorry

    ReplyDelete
  4. Russia's commentFebruary 14, 2011 at 8:10 PM

    Roger Ebert had one of the best reviews, he gave negative and positive view. He described each character by race and gender. His review kept me interested. He described Crash as a movie with free will and pointed out how anything can happen. Roger Ebert made a statement, "we understand quickly enough who the characters are and what their lives are like, but we have no idea how they will behave, because so much depends on accident". With this statement in mind I would have added, we have no idea how people will behave once they are cornered into a situation. And some of the characters were cornered into a situation thats why they behaved the way they did.

    Ken Tucker's review gave me new insight on the beginning of the movie. When he said the audience would assume this movie was about car accidents. By reviewing his statements, I do recall thinking this movie was about car crashes. He also gave a good observation of the characters and the role they played.

    A. O. Scott's review compared the movie Crash to other movies. His written review was not allowing the audience to understand the movie Crash, but to concentrate on other movies that compared to Crash. He gave a negative view of this movie and then tried to make up by stating "it is not necessarily bad, and some of these movies are very good indeed". I felt that statement he made could have been left out.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I like Roger Ebert’s review because he gave an overall detail of what the film was about. Especially when he described how Matt Dillon’s character played a cop doing that horrible act to Thandie Newton’s character and also showing him as a caring son to his sick father. I don’t agree that Matt Dillon’s character was the strongest performance. I would have to say it was Terrance Howard’s character performance was the strongest. Not only does he face racism from the cop; but, on the job and he was also belittled in front of his wife. All of his frustration blew-up on that day when he was getting car-jacked by the two characters played by Ludacris and Larenz Tate. I would add to this review that it is a must-see film in order to move forward in this world of hidden racism.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Kourtney Vance

    I agree with Roger Ebert's review because he seems to fully analyize and understand the theme and meaning of the movie. He also sees that there are many types of rasicim and that they all can take place in 1 city/state. There are two different sides to eah character and how they were displayed is a reaction to the wrong that was done to them. Mr. Ebert gave a real deal review with all the negative that goes on within that movie, and there really isnt anything else i would add to his review.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I commend Roger Ebert for such a great review. He looks at the big picture of what people (including himself) actually think about differnt races. His discription lets me know that we (people) are quick to judge a book by the cover and not by the contents. His quote that "people assumptions prevent them from seeing the acutal person standing before them". This is such a true quote, it happens all the time. I did not find anything wrong with Roger Ebert's review, I actually view the movie in the same manner.

    I read the other reviewers comments, but was not in agreement with the way the story was told. I think the comparisons should not have been used in the text in a manner that minimizes the intent of the movie.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Chanta Beard
    Roger Ebert hits this review just right. His details each character was right on. Eavery character has negative assumption about people of other races. Which all of the characters end interacting with one another in a negative or postive.

    ReplyDelete
  9. The movie was a good movie showing that some people let their positions go to far. The officer mistreated the lady when he pulled them over, not knowing that he was going to have to save the lady’s life. In my view there is still black and white views that are still out there. When the two gentleman were in the dinner, and commented on not getting their coffee refilled in the same manner. That incident was blamed on them being colored.

    ReplyDelete
  10. I think the review by Robert Ebert does the best job of interpreting the film. He seemed to be the only one to grasp the full concept of racism in the film instead of simply describing it. He also makes great points by adding examples from the movie. In my opinion, the reviewer got everything right about the film. Especially when he says that " we all leap to conclusions based on race -- yes, all of us, of all races, and however fair-minded we may try to be -- and we pay a price for that." I wouldn't add anything to his review, i think its good just the way it is.

    ReplyDelete
  11. I think that Roger Ebert's review was the best at explaining what was the movie made of and how the people starring it acted. This movie show how people just look at the color of your skin or ethnicity and make assumptions without looking inside. Also, this review talks about how anger can force you to do something that you don't really want to do. Roger Elbert's review hit the facts and I dont have information that's false. Life is still like this and it can change if people would let themselves open up.. I wouldn't change any information in this review. The movie Crash represents change.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Shawn Coleman

    I feel that roger ebert gave the best review overall out of the three sites as he explains the meanings behind the actions of the characters in the movie and promotes the message of a change in racial thoughts that the movie conveys. His full detailed description of Ryan makes a convincing argument that he could be the main character of the movie although there are many different storylines as he goes from the "bad guy" role to you being more sympathetic with him in the end.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Di'Shun MelbertFebruary 16, 2011 at 1:42 PM

    A.O. Scott

    I feel Scott's review gave a good representation of the movie. This review tells us that the Mr. Haggis is not trying to be complex, but taking a blunt approach toward the racism that effects our society today. Also in the review, Scott believes that the events are realistic, but a little to unrealistic to happen. I would add that the style in which he introduces the characters allows us to understand that for every action there is a reaction. In my opinion, the reviewer was incorrect when he said the movie was fustrating.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Roger Ebert's review does the best job of interpreting the film, Crash. He quickly captures the interest of the reader by giving background information such as the race, class, and professions of the characters. Mr. Ebert makes the point that no matter their race, class, profession, strength, or weakness all of them are defined in one way or another by racism. Though he had many things right, the portion of the review that stood out most for me is that he believes anyone seeing the movie is likely to be moved to have more sympathy for persons different than themselves. This was a well written review and I would not add a thing.

    ReplyDelete
  15. I give the up most respect to Roger Ebert. He actually gave the true meaning of the movie. He did not make no one seem better than another. He seems to be the only one to get the full understanding and point across about rascism.He did not try to judge no one.I waould not add anything to the review. He did a great job, i wouldn't say he did anything wrong.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Morgan Brenton

    The review by A.O. Scott was good. He fully understood the movie and what it represented. He explained how the events are unrealistic to happen between the same group of people but is real problems today. Smith also understood the complexities of the characters which helped explain the basic idea of the movie. The problem with the review is that Smith slightly discredits the movie saying it has clumsy reversals and that Smith spent too much time explaining the genre of the movie.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Robert Ebert explanation of the film is very accurate and i liked how he related the film to real life. Most of the stuff that he wrote in his review is occuring in our society today. his review was more sound than the other two reviews. He did not write the review on a bias standing but he wrote it on exactly what happened in the movie he took nobody's side in terms of race.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Roger ebert gave the best review interpreting the film crash .I feel he have the best interpretion because he equally described all the characters and plots in the film. He made me feel like I was watching the movie again the way he expressed what happened.I loved how he spoke on everything that truly happened in crash like race,class, and if you had power or not . I wouldn't change anything I agree totally.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Raykita Coleman

    Robert Ebert interprets the film the best. She explains what its about and makes you onnect with it. I would not change anything if i had the chance

    ReplyDelete
  20. Roger Ebert review of the movie Crash was very good.Terrance Howard and his wife played a part in racism,when the officer asked the couple to get out of the car and started touching on his wife.And there was another scene where a couple was going for a walk and the wife notice two guys,and suddenly got cold and asked that her husband hold here closer.I wouldn't change anything in the movie it was very interesting.

    ReplyDelete