Since we're on the whole appearance thing, Ebert does not look well in that picture. I mean, like, sickly not well, with no commentary about his disposition implied.
Well the lighting in that shot is far from Oscar worthy.
Yeah, I'm getting more and more fed up with the thought of Crash cleaning up (and I still haven't seen Brokeback Mountain, just to be clear).
Ebert writes: "'Crash' stands back. It has scenes of powerful emotion, but because of its large cast, it is more about ideas than lives, especially the idea that in a multicultural society, racism is more complex than we like to think, and doesn't sort its victims into the good and the evil but finds everyone can be a little of both."
My whole problem with the movie is that it doesn't show racism as being all that complex, unless complex equals nothing more than pervasiveness and brazenness. I'll grant that it doesn't play heavy favorites, but it also uses a bunch of extreme archetypes to supposedly hem at the more subtle, insidious stuff that really plagues us. The racists you can see aren't nearly as problematic as the ones you can't. Everyone's racism in Crash was on such display that they might have been drug using jocks in an afterschool special, and though the movie had its moments overall it felt like nothing so much as an afterschool special for adults: hectoring, pedantic, and predictable.
I hope he's right about Amy Adams, though.
I've got a weird question for the movie aficianadi here: was Upside of Anger eligible this time around? Has anyone seen it. I caught it last night, randomly, on HBO (it's credited 2005, which is why I ask). Aside from being one of Costner's strongest performances, and an understated one at that. I am just continually floored by Joan Allen. The movie wasn't, in itself, anything spectacular, although it was surprisingly thoughtful and unapologetic. But Allen, the things she can do with her face, and her willingness to find real depth in a role that could have been caricature. . . . Really, I was just completely blown away by the film in general (in part, I'm sure, due to low expectations), but I was floored time and again by the subtleties of Allen's performance. A surprising little gem.
Yes, Upside of Anger was a 2005 film, so it could have been nominated - and a lot of people who saw it though Allen should have gotten an Oscar nomination (particularly in this year when there was a paucity of good leading roles/performances of/by women). On your recommendation I'll have to put that in my Netflix cue.
And yeah - I REALLY hope he's right about Amy Adams. And the idea that Crash treats racism in a complex way is absurd or an extraordinary lowering of the bar as to the meaning of "complex". I mean wow, a racist white guy might not leave a black woman to be burned to death. That's deep. Some black people are embarrassed by other black people. Who knew?
Roger Ebert use to be a good film critic and then it seems his picks for favorite movies seemed to be too about a high moralism that few humans can achieve. His taste has become geriatric. I think Brokeback Mountain will win and I believe Ebert has his ego and pride too invested in "Crash" to even consider the gravity, complexity, and profound simplicity of Brokeback Moutnain. Crash is a political choice when a Hollywood or film critic has to go public about it because the actors who volunteered to do the movie, etc. If the Academy puts their money where there mouth of their complaints against the Neocons and how they Bush-whacked and racked our great nation. behind close doors, the faceless Academy will vote for Brokeback Mountain. If they choose Crash, then it will simply mean Hollywood is just as Neocon as the rest.