How did this pretentious drivvel win an Oscar? [Insert Ali-G-ism here]

I have some pretty major issues with this film. I will try and set them out as clear as possible.

1. The high level of racist attitudes within this film- I found that every character in this film attributed an event to race. I.e. The black guys not getting served because they were black, the Asians getting raided because they were Asian. I don’t think this is a relevant attitude in modern day society. I don’t believe everyone attributes negative events solely to ethnic minorities. The only people who tend to do this, are the older generation who grew up with racist beliefs and the hardcore racists which make up a very very insignificant part of society.

2. The Ali G approach to racism- ‘is it cuz i is black’. Attributing other’s attitude to the colour of their skin, the black guys say they didn’t get served in the restaurant because they were black. I know its only a film but maybe the waitress was busy? Maybe she hadn’t seen them come in?

3. Stereotypes- each and every skin colour in this film was played up to in a relentless way
• If your white you must be a racist
• If your black you must be a criminal
• If your Asian you must be controlling and ignorant
• If your oriental you must be stupid
• If your Latino you must be in a gang
I hated the way people were portrayed to match their stereotype. Within 2minutes of the black men entering the film they had stolen a car and produced guns, all opinions aside, in America black men make up a large proportion of the crime. So why play to this stereotype? This film shows that the only way an ethnic minority man solves a problem is through violence (the black guys with the guns, the Asian shooting the Latino) yet another stereotype played up in this film. Why play up to the stereotype? Why not dispel them? Why not show a black man doing well in his life? Why not show a white man being nice to a black woman? Why not show an oriental woman in a high powered job?

4. Everything reduced to issue of race- the exploitation of race in Crash is unrelenting. There’s a part where a TV show or film is being made with one of the main black male characters. The producer/director talks to him about a fellow actor saying he’s speaking less ‘black’ so their worried about black people being able to relate=attributing success as an actor because of ‘how black’ he is. Realistically, this doesn’t really occur. I don’t attribute my success to the fact I’m white, or the fact that I got a job over a black person because I’m white. My success is down to my hard work, the fact I managed to get a job is because I possess the skills others didn’t.

5. Generalisation- shortly after Brendan Fraiser’s car is stolen, he is offered a media deal to show that he doesn’t have negative views of ethnic minorities, because of his car being stolen by a black man, is told all they can get is an ‘Iraqi’ called Saddam. And just because of Saddam Hussein, Fraiser decides that he won’t go near press like that because he doesn’t want anything to do with Hussein, therefore generalising the whole Asian population in with a vicious dictator. This generalisation is grossly unfair, it is also a very odd view to have. I don’t think views like that are evident in society today. Just because Al-Qaeda flew into the twin towers, doesn’t mean that the whole of Iran and Iraq is going to do the same.

Rick: Fuck! Why do these guys have to be black? I mean, why? No matter how we spin this thing, I'm either gonna lose the black vote or I'm gonna lose the law and order vote!
Karen: You know, I think you're worrying too much. You have a lot of support in the black community.
Rick: All right. If we can't duck this thing, we're gonna have to neutralize it. What we need is a picture of me pinning a medal on a black man. Bruce? The firefighter - the one that saved the camp or something - Northridge... what's his name?
Bruce: He's Iraqi.
Rick: He's Iraqi? Well, he looks black.
Bruce: He's dark-skinned, sir, but he's Iraqi, his name's Saddam Hassif.
Rick: Saddam? His name's Saddam? Oh, that's real good, Bruce. Yeah, I'm gonna pin a medal on an Iraqi named Saddam. Give yourself a raise, will you?

6. Thinking that most white people are owed something by black people- Matt Dillons character in an exchange with Shaniqua the HMO, says –

Officer Ryan: You don't like me, that's fine. I'm a prick. But my father doesn't deserve to suffer like this. He was a janitor. He struggled his whole life. Saved enough to start his own company. Twenty-three employees, all of them black. Paid 'em equal wages when no one else was doing that. For years he worked side by side with those men, sweeping and carrying garbage. Then the city council decides to give minority-owned companies preference in city contracts. And overnight, my father loses everything. His business, his home, his wife. Everything! Not once does he blame your people. I'm not asking you to help me. I'm asking that you do this small thing for a man who lost everything so people like yourself could reap the benefits. And do you know what it's gonna cost you? Nothing. Just a flick of your pen.
Shaniqua: Your father sounds like a good man. And if he'd come in here today, I probably would've approved this request. But he didn't come in. You did. And for his sake, it's a real shame! Get him the hell outta my office!
This was one of the most confusing things I found in this film, the stereotype that white people take the ‘glory’ of freeing black people. It’s just not relevant as a view because I don’t believe it exists.

Crash just creates fictional events, to manipulate people into thinking this is relevant. I found the whole thing extremely frustrating. I think it shows the power of the word ‘nigger’ in the film industry. The only reason this film is successful is because is shows racism in its most extreme form, and everyone admits to liking it because it is that, entirely fictional. If everyone agreed with the racist attitudes in the film they wouldn’t admit to liking it through fear of being persecuted by society. It frustrates me, because we saw it again this year at the Oscars. The Wrestler, Mickey Rourke’s comeback film, was the clear winner by a mile, personally its one of the best films I’ve ever seen, it was a dead cert. But Milk won it. Why? Milk wasn’t even that good a film. It won because it showed Homosexuals getting segregated from society and the fight of one man, not surprisingly, who was gay, fighting for gay rights. But oh god forbid, if the Academy ignored the fight of Gay Pride, all hell would break loose. I’m not saying that both Crash and Milk won purely based on their messages, but it has a lot to do with it. I find Crash pretentious and imposing, it portrays a completely fictional and insignificant attitude to racism that frustrated me. I hated the way stereotypes were rammed down my throat, I hated the way everything negative was reduced to race, I hated the way black were shown, white people and Asian people were shown. Asian people got it worse; they were shown with little or no redeeming qualities. I found the whole thing to be a massive racial slur against anyone of any colour. I felt incredibly insulted as I was watching it, I don’t need to be told there is racism in this world because I know it is, but its not as extreme as it makes out to be. I cant decide whether the director is racist or incredibly clever and manipulative, because he’s made enough money from it to merit a glorious retirement. It has began the trend of politically motivated films which frankly are no better than the next film, but win massive appraisal ‘because their showing it like it is’ and ’ its real and deep’. I don’t need this constantly flung at me all the live long day. I go to the cinema to enjoy it, not receive a lecture in social politics.