“Crash” ultimately upholds stereotypes about Asian-Americans
CVK
I haven’t seen “Crash” yet, but have heard good things about it. But blog Orient Extreme points out that while the film is great at skewering stereotypes of blacks, Latinos and whites, it is far less enlightened in its treatment of Asian-Americans:
The film “Crash” opened yesterday to raving reviews for its unflinching examination of racial relations in Los Angeles, where there are a significant number of Asians. In fact there are more Asians than blacks in Los Angeles County. So you would think that a film examining racial relations there would feature one or two prominent Asian actors, right? Wrong.
The film’s official website lists a cast of exactly five white actors, five blacks, two Latinos, and zero Asians. Count them, zero Asians. That doesn’t mean there are no Asians in the film; indeed there are a number, as we will see, just not any worth mentioning on the marquee, not even Daniel Dae Kim of “Lost” fame (about him later), and for good reason. Whereas the film offers rich and varied portraits of its white, black and Latino characters so as to ultimately debunk the racial stereotypes it presents, in the case of its few Asian characters, it merely presents the stereotypes, and what’s worse, presents them as entirely justified.
The movie begins, appropriately enough, with a car crash. Two cops, a black male played by Don Cheadle and a Latina played by Jennifer Esposito, who happen also to be lovers, are rear-ended by, yes, a middle-aged Asian woman, who proceeds to abuse the Esposito character in an unbearably shrill voice and ludicrous accent: “you no blake, you no blake”
Damien wrote:
I noticed that too. I thought it was odd that the movie ended with an “other side” perspective to each stereotype except for the asians featured.
Posted 11 May 2005 at 12:02 pm ¶
christine hong wrote:
i saw the film crash last night and was impressed by it. however, i was also left with a very unsettled feeling inside about the portrayal of asians in the film. every other character come full circle, gaining some measure of redemption, except for the asian couple. the audience sees no resolution to their sinfulness whereas the sins of the other characters have some sort of reason or explanation. i am so conflicted about this movie. i am saddened because once again asians are left to the wayside, left there to rot in the unfavorable context in which the writer and director as created for them. it is apparent that writers and directors who do these kinds of films don’t give a shit about the whole truth of asian american lives. by no means are we flawless, but damn it, i wish someone would give us some measure of respect as human beings.
Posted 21 May 2005 at 4:53 pm ¶
elijah wrote:
“The film’s official website lists a cast of exactly five white actors, five blacks, two Latinos, and zero Asians” — is that just based on looking at surnames and headshots?
Posted 25 May 2005 at 8:16 pm ¶
babyjaguar wrote:
listen, i am late in the game, i just saw crash over the weekend. i must say i agree with the main reviwer and user reviwers about the portrayal of asians.
first of all, to quote another user reviewer:
“it is apparent that writers and directors who do these kinds of films don’t give a shit about the whole truth of asian american lives. by no means are we flawless, but damn it, i wish someone would give us some measure of respect as human beings.”
although i can understand the furstation but hollywood does it to every group, i disagree that this movie that this movie “… offers rich and varied portraits of its white, black and Latino characters” with many visible latino/a, why the decision made to have jennifer esposito play a latina.
for futher recommendations, there has been in the past better filmmakers who had made films similar to the theme of crash. for example, john singleton’s “boyz in the hood” and “higher learning’ and ash’s “bang” which featured the main character as a japanese american, those these films are independent and low budget, they went unnoticed by the mainstream. these films were before their time, early 1990’s. far more superior and grabs you by the throat than the mainstream crash.
in other words, crash is very outdated, overrated and just plain safe.
nuff said.
Posted 06 Jun 2005 at 6:48 pm ¶
Jenn wrote:
ok. w/e>>what difference does the skin colour make? its who u are that really matters>>sO stop ur discriminating dumb shit>>it’s bull; we’re all equal and should be treated with equal respect.
mixed, asian, white, black>>whatever; we should all have equal rights and opportunities.
Posted 07 Jun 2005 at 6:43 pm ¶
Lila Pohl wrote:
I have never seen “Crash” nor do I ever wish to see it after reading these reviews. I actually have thought about this while I was listening to its trailer on the radio. Asian-Americans obviously mean nothing. I am so angry that AA are so under-appreciated even though we do so much and deserve so much more respect. I hope “Crash” rots in hell.
Posted 23 Jun 2005 at 4:09 pm ¶
faye wrote:
Well, I have only one more thing to add. “Chinaman” is actually a very condescending term. Imagine a non-black character in the movie repeatedly referred to a black person as a “Nigger.” There would have been another LA riot. So they think they should fairly portray all races except for Asians. It’s a new level of hypocracy, even from Hollywood.
Posted 03 Aug 2005 at 5:33 pm ¶
kevin wrote:
i agree, after this movie, more people (including younger generation AAs) will think Chinaman is simply a descriptive term for asians.
At first, i wanted to give the movie the benefit of the doubt by thinking maybe they’re trying to protray us as being “invisible”, that we are transparent in the society…but after reading so many reviews and rampages from the AA community, i decided to scratch that thought out
fuck crash, this movie is really made for the pompous biggots who think their race is superior than others, and the movie just makes them feel “oh now i feel bad for being racist”…the whole idea of this movie is not revelation, but guilt trip people into buying the DVD for commentaries because those ignorant people can’t think on their own so they have to see the director’s commentaries…lol
Posted 29 Sep 2005 at 3:20 pm ¶
Will wrote:
I thought this movie was condescending toward Asians. Like another reviewer said, the Asian characters were the only ones that didn’t come full circle as human beings. Instead they speakee funny English, can’t drive and smuggle people into the country. Nah, I won’t recommnend it to any of my friends, white, black, latino or asian. nah mean?
Posted 30 Sep 2005 at 1:54 am ¶
Tim Naylor wrote:
Asian portrayal is not such a big issue. The film plain sucked. Implausible plot and such heavy handed peddling of its themes made me feel like I was being lectured to by a writer rather than feeling for the characters.
The only only other element I noticed as much as the writer was the music. Both are trying to tell me what’s important. No one seemed to me like real people - their dialogue seemed like it all came from the same person just delivered by different actors.
In the end, I feel the writer/director neither has experienced or understands the tensions and fallout of racism.
Posted 04 Nov 2005 at 2:24 am ¶
Andre wrote:
I’m coming really late in the game, considering I just saw the movie with my Korean mother a couple of hours ago.
Without having read any of these previous comments until now (I am visiting my parents from Los Angeles) I scoured the internet for anyone who noticed this weird Asian sterotype in Haggis’ Movie “Crash”. THANK GOD I FOUND YOU GUYS. I was a little perplexed at how Asians were portrayed in the movie. The portrayal of Blacks, Whites and Persians are seen as complex individuals who are motivated by fortunate/unfortunate circumstances, and assumptions about them are twisted throughout the movie. Mexicans are seen as nothing but good in the movie, and Asians are seen as nothing but bad. I can’t figure out what Haggis is saying about the ethnic groups in Los Angeles. That all black people are good, even if they do bad things? All white people are inherently racist? That really Mexicans are just loyal people? The majority of Asians do not go to Med or Law school or start an honest business but rather the Asian slave trade? Why is it alright to pick on Asians? because we don’t always steal, murder or harbor any threat when people pass us on the street. I sometimes get the feeling that other ethnic groups say to themselves “I shouldn’t be afraid of blacks”, “Latino’s will never steal from me”, “I shouldn’t always trust white people”, “I shouldn’t feel uneasy about getting on a plane with a Muslim”, “…but Asians, I’m always at ease around them…”
“…they must be a bunch of assholes.”
Posted 29 Dec 2005 at 2:10 am ¶
Merq wrote:
–Well, I have only one more thing to add. “Chinaman” is actually a very condescending term. Imagine a non-black character in the movie repeatedly referred to a black person as a “Nigger.” –
While I definitely agree that “Chinaman” is a very derogatory term, I resent your attempts to rewrite history here– recent history, at that. Look at any mob movie, or damn-near any non-KILL BILL Tarantino flick, and you’ll hear black characters referred to as just that… “Niggers.”
Sure, I wince whenever I hear it, but I understand that sadly enough, people really do say refer to us in such a way, and if you’re going to attempt a realistic depiction of people’s ugliness, then you can’t (or shouldn’t) pull punches.
Instead of trying to turn this into a black/Asian issue, you should probably be more concerned at the manner in which Asians are handled in the movie. Contrary to what many earlier posters said, I don’t think the filmmakers maliciously tried to keep the Asian characters in their “evil” states. Rather, I think they simply “forgot” or didn’t *bother* to develop the Asian characters’ storylines because they deemed anti-Asian racism to be less of an “appealing” hot-button issue.
That, my friend, is actually more frightening than good, old-fashioned malice
Posted 12 Jan 2006 at 1:13 am ¶
achel wrote:
the purpose of the film crash was to reexamine the fear that everyone in our society is shrouded in. It explores the prejudice that traps us and the xenophobia that has all members of this world gripped, so that no one trust anything or anyone apart from themselves. I am sorry to hear that many people seem to feel that some ethnic groups were mis-represented in this film. For me, this film was an uncomfortable yet necessary breath of fresh air, exploring how governments cramm individuals together yet fail to acknowledge that we are scared on the streets that we have to call our homes. It touches on the need for protection, for faith, for belief in others, and challenges its audience to rise above the stereotypes of ourselves and others.The film also questions the happy trigger culture who carry guns, because they feel oppressed bythe society they live in, that no one will listen that only actions can free them. I found this film to be beautifully crafted and i feel upset that not more people share this view.
Posted 13 Feb 2006 at 12:56 pm ¶
Leo wrote:
The “breath of fresh air” that I experienced is finding this collective of folks that share a similar experience of disapproval toward what I consider to be opportunistic, anti-Asian racism in this pretentious, trite and exploitative movie.
As many have stated, the stereotypes of all ethnic groups portrayed were challenged, humanized and reversed–except for the Asian’s. The one-dimensional, negative stereotyping and mean-spirited treatment of Asians were not only reinforced and justified, but also used in many instances as laughing stocks–i.e. how the first and last appearances of Asian characters in the movie are centered around car accidents.
Then there is the calloused and money-hungry Asian woman’s irrational and awkward use of profane, derogatory and racist verbiage that at one point serves as cinematic justification for a non-Asian character to make a racist but clever come-back and get the upper hand.
Not to mention the comically timed and continuous use of the word ‘chinaman’, by non-Asian characters who are treating the half-dead body of an Asian man (whom they have unknowingly run over) with a kind of droll heartlessness. That scene was set up to be humorous.
I could go on and on, but will conclude by bringing up three more issues that I experienced with the film.
The first one has to do with the use of the one forgettable Asian American character who for about one minute was the rep from the insurance company that tells the claimants that the extensive damage from vandalism and theft to their store will not be covered by the policy due to the negligence of the owner. Given the context of the movie, it is obvious that the use of an Asian actor for that part was deliberate.
Next, is the whole human trafficking portrayal. Here, we have Asians victimizing other Asians (because whites never do that?) and then to top it all off the kidnapped Asian victims are set free by a non-Asian (as if we don’t have the means to save our Selves) who incidentally was part of the aforementioned hit-and-run collusion but redeems himself with this good deed. That, by the way, is a recurring theme in many mainstream American movies–Asians who are victimized by other Asians and then are rescued by “real Americans” who do the bad Asians in.
My third and last issue is not about anti-Asian racism but involves the white cop who sexually assaults the African American woman in front of her husband. The cop then redeems himself later in the movie by saving her life. She also appears to be redeemed by that experience. I want to say to the filmmaker and writer (who is white and male), that that is the most self-congratulatory and insensitive bullshit piece of propaganda I’ve seen in long time. I wonder how survivors of rape and hate crimes would feel about the idea of their perps having an opportunity to redeem themselves at the expense of their victim’s powerlessness and dependence on them.
The representation that this movie rides on as some kind of important, courageous and innovative commentary on the subject of “race” in America is in my opinion, a white-male, middleclass fantasy.
Posted 25 Feb 2006 at 2:39 am ¶
Helan wrote:
I was reading AngryAsianMan.com this morning and he had a an update on the Movie crash. He had nothing positive to say about the movie’s portrayal of Asians. After doing a search on the web I found you guys. I am infuriated from hearing the reviewer’s comments here a lone. This makes me just want to watch the movie even more.
Posted 07 Mar 2006 at 4:32 pm ¶
Tony wrote:
AND…the winner for Best picture goes to…..CRASH!!!!!!!!
it’s time to start getting some real asian american’s in film dammit!!!!!!!
Posted 07 Mar 2006 at 7:16 pm ¶
luckyfatima wrote:
um yeah, i had the same opinion. see: http://www.muslimmoviereview.blogspot.com
crash. whatevah!
Posted 07 Mar 2006 at 11:54 pm ¶
Ben wrote:
For Best Picture 2005, the Academy picked the Asian-stereotyping “Crash” over Ang Lee’s “Brokeback Mountain”. However, the Academy redeemed itself by giving the Best Director award to the Asian director.
I believe I have just seen “Crash 2″.
Posted 09 Mar 2006 at 1:40 am ¶
Chiron wrote:
Leo Says:
February 25th, 2006 at 2:39 am
I want to say to the filmmaker and writer (who is white and male), that that is the most self-congratulatory and insensitive bullshit piece of propaganda I’ve seen in long time. I wonder how survivors of rape and hate crimes would feel about the idea of their perps having an opportunity to redeem themselves at the expense of their victim’s powerlessness and dependence on them.
Well said Leo, for pointing out what it really is. I am glad someone else noticed this.
Posted 09 Mar 2006 at 3:46 am ¶