Crash vs. Magnolia vs. Short Cuts

I prefer the messy structure of Short Cuts, Magnolia in its expert crafting seems much more contrived. Not to say I didn't like Magnolia, and perhaps I should give it another viewing sometime in the near future, it's been awhile.

__________________
"Don't be so gloomy. After all it's not that awful. Like the fella says, in Italy for 30 years under the Borgias they had warfare, terror, murder, and bloodshed, but they produced Michelangelo, Leonardo da Vinci, and the Renaissance. In Switzerland they had brotherly love - they had 500 years of democracy and peace, and what did that produce? The cuckoo clock."

And the ending of Magnolia is incredibly pretentious...

Just a little. I prefer the other four films of Anderson's that I've seen. I think he's only done the five, am I right?

Yep and no word on a sixth yet

__________________

He does have 1 in-development credit on IMDB.

__________________
I used to be addicted to crystal meth, now I'm just addicted to Breaking Bad.

Oh didn't see that , so it's in development - but it's top secret ?

Well, if you don't have IMDB-Pro.

Here's what the movie i rumoured to be

PTA returns to the gambling scene with Jack Nicholson ? That I would love to see .

Anything he directs is certainly worthy of attention.

I've yet to see Short Cuts - DVD ordered and in transit as I type - so that title I must exclude as of yet from my argument. But moving on ..

I think while interweaving narrative structure immediately binds comparison between Crash and Magnolia, the two film are miles apart in their intentions, and I must conclusively say the latter is far more superior in many levels.

Crash is just the typical sugarcoated Hollywood picture that barks out hollow profundity. It's too obvious and blatant in what it wants to say, and the dialogue and script certainly doesn't help, regurgitating the same old racially aggravating phrases and set pieces throughout the entirety of the film, included in every scene. The resulting moral lesson and message is cliched and predictable at best.

What Crash does Magnolia tears it up and does it infinitely better. The interweaving relation of story lines between the characters are vital contributions to the progress of narrative (unlike Crash using just for the sake of eye candy - very brief with zero substance) and each individual stories are impossibly rich and detailed minding the number of stories involved. But more importantly is the context of the film. Is the film that doesn't fluff around matters such as Crash (Racism is bad, end of story. I knew that before walking into the film, and after watching it certainly didn't provide anything new on top of that). Magnolia asks you in the prologue to leave ALL preconceptions behind and essentially keep an open mind - toying with the idea of chance and coincidence while also completely disregarding the linear structures expected of in a feature length movie. It's gritty, baffling, technically brilliant and also conceptually challenging, and a whole, whole lot more. The better film? Without a shadow of a doubt.

Even if I agreed with everything you say about the movie, that doesn't mean that I believe it's better. I'm not saying that it isn't, but all those things put together don't prove it's better. For you it is, obviously, but your case needs more supporting evidence for certain non-yous.

__________________
It's what you learn after you know it all that counts. - John Wooden
My IMDb page

I'm going to try watching all three today.

Crash 2005



Part racist comedy, part hokey urban drama. The first hour is people being pissed off at other races, the second half is people of other races helping each other. It's simple, but it's got a few scatter shot comments to keep it from being straight "racism is bad".

The performances are mixed. Branden Fraiser and Sandra Bullock represent the dumb bunch. Don Cheadle, Matt Dillion, and Terrance Howard represent the good bunch.

For all this tension in the character's lives, there isn't a whole lot woven into the movie. The action teleports from person to person, always cleanly opening and closing their small dramatic arcs. It doesn't have the flow of the other two, it moves in chapters rather than pages.

Believability ? Crash is lucky when it rarely bumps into it. People blatantly call others out on their ethnicity to their face, which is often laugh out loud funny. The police hold a man at gunpoint for crappy driving. Sandra Bullock. Unlike Short Cuts the people don't just happen by each other, they're brought together by car crashes, robberies, and revenge missions. Most all of them end in happy endings for both parties.

It's not a terrible movie, but it's certainly the weakest of the three.

I agree completely.

__________________

I haven't seen short cuts, so will comment on the others. Crash, to me was a wonderful movie showcasing the difference between how we like to think we approach life, and how our actions sometimes betray that.

this post has plot points from the film, and so, if you haven't seen Crash, you may wish to skip past**

the inter-weaving tales are uneven for sure, but I do believe it did it served a greater purpose in taht it sparked discussion. ***





***
The gotcha scene between the disgruntled shop-keeper and the locksmiths daughter and her magic cloak worked for me, i thought the set-up was intelligent, and subtle enough as to not give it away.

*****

In our house, Crash was one of the movies, that touched on subjects that all too rarely are brushed under the carpet.

My wife and I caught this in the theatre and the discussions on a whole variety of social issues were happening all the way back to the parkinglot with folks of different stripes. It was excellent.

Viewing it at home, with our kids once it was on DVD, it impacted them on a much different level, and of course i got ribbed for the country music scene.

Magnolia, was enjoyable over-all, though i felt a little manipulated in that it appeared as though Tom Cruise was given an Oscar showcase moment because he's well, Tom Cruise. Any movie with Bill Macy pretty much is a Win. I really liked how he was used along with phillip hoffman compared to the earlier boogie nights.

__________________
"The greatest danger for most of us is not that our aim is too high and we miss it, but that it is too low and we reach it." - Michelangelo.

Wha... what? You felt manipulated in the sense that Tom Cruise was given an Oscar nomination because he is Tom Cruise? I will go so far as to say that TJ Mackey is Tom Cruise's best performance ever and this was most definitely an Oscar-worthy performance.

All of his scenes are memorable. When he starts his workshop, he seems to be high on testosterone. Was it over the top? Perhaps, but this was to demostrate Mackey's unswerving belief in the theory he teaches. Cruise had to portray a (seemingly) supremely confident character who believed he could get into bed with any woman in the world. He is disgusting and funny at the same time.

This is his advice for a guy who has just told him that the woman he loves "does not feel that way about him":

What I say is: Denise, Denis the Piece, I mark it down, HO HO, I write it up, and you have been warned. Because I have my lasers, I have my tasers, I have my ICBM's, I have my bazooka's, I have my jets pointed right at you, because me and my brothers we like to celebrate. And one the first of May, we celebrate V-day. And come June, ohh baby, it is the lick of my spoon. Come August, we like to celebrate Saint Suck-My-Big-Fat-Sausage! I set goals for myself and what I say I do not wanna take it anymore. I will not take it anymore. You think she's your friend, Geoff, but they're not your friends. Do you really think that she's gonna be there when things go bad? Huh guys? When things go wrong, do you think they're gonna be there for us? Hoho, you think again. No, ****ing Denise, Denise the Piece, you are gonna give me that cherry pie, sweet momma baby.

Even if you don't agree with what the character is saying (and no one in his right mind does), you cannot deny that Cruise's acting is very convincing in the sense that he is portraying his character to perfection.

Then there's the interview which he starts off super confident, swiftly answering every question. This seems to be a man who cannot be led astray from his beliefs. But then the tricky questions come. The journalist is confronting him with uneasy questions and in doing so, is confronting TJ Mackey with his father issues he hides behind his super confident, female-dominating persona. The way in which Cruise alters his mannerisms and facial expression during that interview is world-class acting. You should watch how his non-verbal behaviour is no longer corresponding to his verbal communication. It's not until the very end that he actually verbally expresses how emotionally damaging these questions are to him.

Then after the interview he continues with his workshop but the interview messed him up so much that he has a meltdown. Much like all the guys sitting there to learn from him, he still has a lot of lessons to learn in life.

And then he finally goes to his see his dying father and his emotional meltdown is very realistic. Here is a man who absolutely loathes his own father, yet cannot keep himself from crying bitter tears, sobbing "don't go you **********". If that is not Oscar-worthy acting, then I don't know what is...

No, that isn't what i meant. I have no problem whatsoever with Cruise being nominated, Actually i believe he could have just as easily won for Born on the 4th of July, and imo excelled in the less showy part in Rain Man.

What i meant was, Magnolia is loaded to the nines with character actors, and i felt as though Cruise as a big name mega star was given the over-the-top showcase. thats all.

He's just fit for the part. In real life, Tom Cruise is a lot like TJ Mackey in that he is super confident in everything he does. At least, that's what I've read.

Brod - I think the performances in Magnolia are one of its stronger facets, and yes, Cruise turns in a believable and rather sad performance. Robards and Reilly are the real gems for me, though. I will also say I think the writing/direction are technically strong...but not original. Not only does the structure mimic Short Cuts, all the way up to an almost identical "act of God" ending, but the camerawork and direction in some spots are so blatantly Scorsese, I am pulled out of the film every time. That steady-cam business on the way into the studio is very well done, but it screams Scorsese to me every damn time I see it.

Magnolia is the film it is because it stands of the shoulders of giants, a perch without which it wouldn't exist.

Of course, I own Magnolia and Short Cuts, and will continue to watch them both, I presume. Crash can kiss my balloon knot.

Short Cuts
Magnolia
Crash

I mean really, comparing a couple of films like Magnolia, which feature very strong performances from a gifted ensemble, to Crash, a film with a relatively weak ensemble seems a bit silly. Crash has a couple of good performaces in a field of mediocrity.

I also see some trademark Scorsese shots, but to say that PT Anderson blatantly copied Scorsese seems a bit strong to me.

I've not seen Short Cuts yet, but will try to see it as soon as my exams are over. Altman always inspired PT, I think PT even helped him direct A Prairie Home Companion.

But it's one thing to mimic a story or ending, to get away with it is another thing. As you said, the writing and directing is solid. I think the dialogue is very realistic and funny, and the wonderful score by Aimée Man accompanies the story very well. Remember that wonderfully unique scene where all the main characters sing Aimee Man's Wise Up. That was a stroke of genius by PT.

Also, it doesn't bother me that he uses some of Scorsese's techniques. Obviously, this served as an inspiration to Anderson, who learned the directing trait from watching loads of movies, much like Quentin Tarantino btw. I don't blame a director for copying, mimicing or taking inspiration from the work of others. Each and every one of Tarantino's movies are inspired by other films. And how much did Akira Kurosawa inspire Scorsese and so many other great filmmakers.

I see where you're coming from, but I guess it doesn't bother me as much as it does you...