Crash-Bashing Revisited

You know, this rant seemed fresh and interesting when I began writing it. But there has developed a serious case of Crash-Bash since I began this and it is a phenomenon almost as interesting as the bashing itself. I know it seems a little after the fact, but it was rather relevant when I started it. The thing that is so interesting is how the debate as to whether Crash deserved to win the Best Picture has become such a toxic and venomous affair when the debate has no chance of changing what happened. There seem to be two camps to this debate.

Annie Proulx, the writer of the original short story from which Brokeback Mountain was adapted fired the first shot by publishing an editorial in the Guardian calling ‘conservative heffalump academy voters’ out for selecting Crash over Brokeback. Despite two endearing references to Winnie the Pooh’s imaginary monsters the commentary was scathing. She spoke of the ‘cloistered lives’ of the voters and how they are out of touch with the city of Los Angeles living in highly segregated lives. It is perhaps true that the rich and famous shelter themselves from the rest of the world, but it is also to be imagined that the writer is very close to her material and her characters and has a duty to protect and defend her creation. Added to this commentary has been a furious outpouring of similar vitrious from others in the Crash-bashing club. Judging from what I had written previously it could be said that I am a mild mannered member of this camp.

The second group believes that Crash was a great picture, the Academy voters are very fair minded, and that the Brokeback fans are just suffering a case of sour grapes. They have gotten significantly less press but obviously a majority of the Academy of Motion Pictures voters voted for Crash as the best picture of the year. If they hadn’t there wouldn’t be an issue here. Now they have to defend why they voted for Crash instead of Brokeback, whether they are closet homophobes, and whether they are isolated elitists out of touch with mainstream America. Whether this is fair or not I could not begin to define but it is what has happened.

My personal opinion was that the best picture Oscar would go to Brokeback Mountain on the basis that it was the best film of they year. I admit that I got it wrong, along with most of the rest of the Hollywood press. Not that Crash was a bad film, it was definitely one of the ten best films of the year, maybe one of the top five, but it certainly wasn’t number one. My first thoughts were: 1. Brokeback was overexposed and it had already won so many awards that everyone just expected it to win and voted for something else. 2. Academy members are more afraid of being called racist than they are homophobic. Of course

Now that last one might be a bit harsh but what it really means is that Hollywood has already made abundantly clear how accepting and permissive it is about sexual orientation. It has to be, much of the talent both in front of and behind the cameras is gay. However, race is still a prevalent and often obscured issue in Hollywood. True racial equality is still elusive and the best way to make a bunch of overpaid entertainers / part-time social activists feel better is to give a token award that shows how open-minded and fair they are. It is a sad fact that the circles back on itself, the film Crash is right, race is still a huge issue in America today.

But none of this is the point. The point of the Academy Awards is not to give civic award to a timely and important subject. If the Academy were really fair they would recognize art for art’s sake and give the award to the best picture made that year. No one really argued that Brokeback Mountain was the best picture of the year; they just chose to honor something else. This lack of logic is why Crash winning the best picture Oscar is such a surprise and why there has been such a vehement backlash against Crash. We expect groups of people to act in a ration and fair manner and when they don’t we are surprised. Why we are surprised I am not sure since history is rife with riots and mobs doing the most unseemly things in large groups.

Another tradition that seems to be completely broken is the unwritten law that the best picture and best director awards rarely split. Remember when it was a big deal when those two split? Now it is a fairly regular occurrence like the Olympics. Surprisingly, the award went to a film that received almost no wins in the category during the rest of the awards season. The important thing to note here is that the one other best picture award that it did win was the SAG award. That makes this another example of the Screen Actor’s Guild flexing its muscle. Because the actors make up the largest bloc of voters in the Academy they can essentially swing any category they want.

Proulx’s savaging of the Academy of Motion Pictures Awards may be most notable because it broke a cardinal rule. She called out the awards tactics of Lion’s Gate sending out DVDs of Crash, I won’t demean it so far as to call it Trash, in what is an often unspoken gorilla tactic during the awards season. Not since Shakespeare in Love has it been hinted that an Oscar was bought though there is certainly campaigning every year. It should not be forgotten that as with any vote the Academy Awards are a popularity contest and should be viewed accordingly. This might prove to generate the most hostility for those within entertainment circles.

I have to disagree with Proulx that race issues belong in the past with ‘runaway slaves, and the debate over free silver’ it is a very pervasive issue. My problem with Crash is that it treats this very difficult subject in a very inappropriate manner. Racism is about offense and being offended and about power and things that are there but are not spoken. Crash pulls this all out into the foreground and treats everyone as a racist; it is an evenhanded approach that belies the very material it focuses on. The problem with racism is its insidious manner. It sneaks and offends and that is why it is such a pervasive problem that has lasted so long. In Crash every person expressed their racist tendencies; they call people all of the epithets that we may think but would never speak. This does not speak to the reality of racism but to an idealized film version of a complex issue. What is surprising is that this quiet reflexion and internalization may be what damned Brokeback Mountain and its star Heath Ledger. Ennis is an almost totally interior character and it is so hard to perform much less to appreciate and award.

The Academy Awards may well be filled with ‘an atmosphere of insufferable self-importance’ but it is still the biggest awards show of the year and that is also part of the reason that the backlash has been so significant. Because the Oscars matter to the entertainment industry and to the audience who enjoy these films. Perhaps it is because the Academy voters take themselves so seriously that they are moving beyond recognizing the best film of the year and attempting to add social commentary to their voting. Personally I think that the social commentary should stay on the screen and not in the aisles.

While I think that the Crash-bash phenomenon is interesting I do see that it is already waning. Regardless of the self-importance of voters Hollywood often has a short memory and the industry is already moving on to the next big argument. It seems unlikely that anyone is going to learn anything from this experience. There will still be campaigning for awards shows and there will still be unfairness in the process. People often get swept up in the moment and get carried away. As I look back that is the only reason I can think of that a film with a script as insipid as Titanic not only won best film of the year but is also the highest grossing film of all time.

Related posts:

1. Oscar Review 2006
2. Golden Globes Review 2006