Monday, October 09, 2006
Crash
How do you think your perception of the movie Crash would have been affected had they incorporated judgement and hatred based on disabilities as well as race? Would it have had the same emotional impact as before? How does your perception of someone vary based on whether or not they are disabled, either physically or mentally?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
13 comments:
Yes, I believe that the main point of this movie was to show us, the smug public, that we really haven't "solved the racism problem". Thus, by adding disabilities it would lose it's purpose, I would also like to point out that Discrimination against disabled people is not racism, but prejudice. Racism is purly for races, and disabled people come in all colors.
As for my own perception of the disabled, quite frankly I feel uncomfortable when I'm around them. Why? Because they are so vastly different from what I'm used to, to what I deem "normal". Whenever i see Brooke (the blind girl) or one of the mentally retarted people of our school, I try to stay out of their way and let them take their own course in life, mainly because I have no idea how to go about bringing on conversation (of course, this isn't much different than anybody else in school, however that's different). This being said, I have a great amount of respect for the people who lead Brooke around school, or take time to teach the mentally retarted people, etc. I really do find them interesting (mainly from my discomfort), but I just don't know how to approach it. Well, there, I've taken the first step. Post on the Love-Pancake theory.
Do you think a similar movie could be made based on problems of prejudice, but focusing on a topic other than just racism? Don't take this in the wrong way, but being born with a disability is the same as being born a different race- you have no control over it, yet people still judge you based on that alone. We all know that a little part of us is racist- that's why Crash hit home so potently as it did. But don't many of us judge those with disabilities in the same way (meaning here a snap judgement)- either positively or negatively? How would you deal with a film such as this- do you think it would be less disturbing or more so?
And to move it beyond issues of race and disabilities- traits we're born wth. How does it affect our snap judgements about people when they're wearing something that openly declares their religious faith, or lack thereof, or their political affiliation? Since these are choices made by the people, rather than something decided at birth for them, are we more likely or less likely to accept our initial impressions as valid? Is it still prejudice when we believe what they're trying to convey about themselves, without getting to know them?
I think the introduction of a new theme of prejudice would detract from the purpose of the movie. Yes, it would be interesting to see the impact the movie could have based on its interpretation of these traits, but there are so many scenarios. I think that racism is the easiest, and best, because it is something everyone can relate too, it is ever present, and it hasn't been solved yet. I think that something like disability takes away an aspect of familiarity for a large portion of the audience, and so the film would lose meaning.
Adrienne brings up a good point, being born with disabilities is something that you can't control and often have to learn to live with which is, in my mind, the same kind of concept as learning how to deal with the racial prejudices that are present throughout the movie Crash. I think the director made a decision with a specific purpose to involve only race, however if people with disabilites were included in the movie the message would have changed. I think the parallel between race judgements and judgements on people with disabilites is is similar, but the way that people cope and interact with disabled people is a different kind of fear. The inclusion of both cause a different kind of confusion, a different kind of relating to people. It may have aided the movie, but I think would just add to its complexity on a different level.
Alright, a few things:
First: Adrienne. I think that if another movie were to be made about other kinds of prejudices it would just be "another Crash", and quite frankly I would have alot less respect for Crash (especially if it was made by the same director and writer).
Second: K. Writer, the writer made the decision to include racism. Unless the director wrote and directed it, the director had NO say in the script.
Everything else I have is in my other post, and thanks for including how you guys judge people with disabilities, and not making it only me.
Earlier Vinni metnioned feeling discomfort when around the disabled. I agree (not in Brooke's case, however; she's a lot of fun)--I just feel so unspeakably sad around those that are disabled in general whether they perceive themselves as having a disadvantage or not. Adrienne specifically asked about those that are born with disablilities, but what about those that aren't? How does it change our perception of a person if they go through a major alteration of mental or physical state? For example, I have a friend that was paralyzed in a hang gliding accident almost ten years ago and I can't help feeling wistful when I think about having pillow fights with her and her old active lifestyle in comparison to her current situation and how she's bound to a wheel chair for life. I admit that I perceive her differently and almost wish for her old potential back--mostly for her, but I also want it on a more selfish level because it is a little depressing to see this drastic difference.
By the way--I agree that Crash did a good job depicting racial stereotypes and the issues that entails. However, I wish they would have incorporated a bi-racial character or a person of many different ethnicities and address the issues they face. How does that play into his or her perception of him or herself? Does he or she choose sides, deny a culture that is equally a part of them?
Noah, you need to meet an old friend of mine, it's name is SPELLING! My god, it's painful to read. R-A-C-E. Anyhoo, I've already posted twice on here, I just needed to get this out of my system.
Vvyynn--meet PUNCTUATION!! Jk. But really--"It's name"="ITS name". Okay, I'm done. I posted twice, too.
I think unfortunately for us that a movie portraying physical disabilites wouldn't have the same reaction as a Crash did with racism simply because our culture is now more understanding towards people with disabilities. It is no longer seen as a fault on behalf of the individual and we generally tend to have more sympathy towards the disabled. There has been a larger effort to help with funds going towards the research towards disabilities and people are no longer seen as cool for picking on those less physically fortunate then themselves. While finding our humanity with the disabled we have become more barbaric with racism even though we don't notice it. This is why Crash was so effective, especially when viewed by our generation because we are supposed to be so much more welcoming to other races, especially in I.B. I think that's part of the reason why we see this movie, not only does it fit in the curriculum, but it helps us realize what a sheltered part of the world we live in and how we don't actively see racism in our environment.
I find that interesting, Rachael. Two years ago there was a boy that attended Poudre that happened to be in a wheel chair who was constantly harrassed. Guys who were like three times his size stole his lunch money and taunted him in the halls on a regular basis, despite the protests of the SRO. He eventually disappeared. Maybe he graduated? I hope so. Any way, I think that there is still much discrimination toward the disabled. We just feel more inclined to address race because it affects everyone while disabilities do not, or they are not as obvious to the average on-looker so we don't feel that is as important to get out there. If you presented it in a public medium, people would label it "politically incorrect" because someone would have to depict a person taking advantage of someone physically weaker. No one wants to admit to cowardice, let alone watch another's humiliation when they are helpless. Especially in this culture. Because it would be deemed politically incorrect, it becomes taboo and no one can talk about it or produce blockbuster films about it. However, everyone is forced to deal with race and feels the pain when a racial slur is directed toward them so one person is at no more of a disadvantage than another when race is the issue of prejudice. Transcribing racial issues to film magnifies a universal problem.
On racial prejudice specifically--a little bit exists even at Poudre. There is no open hostility or anything but people don't really mix. This is not to sound racist, but the hispanic students and non-hispanic students kind of have their own cliques going on. Intermingling occurs on only a very small scale and is probably limited because of language barriers. But it's true that we definitely don't see as much as if we lived in LA or another big city.
i remember that kid, and yeah he did graduate. but people picking on him had nothing to do with his being handicapped. in every encounter i had with him, in school and outside, he never was a very pleasant person. i think therefore it shows an even greater ability of especially our generation to overlook physical disabilities and react to the person and attitude within the body no matter how different we view that body to be from ours. and on a side note, i find it interesting that if a person's race is given attention in a negative light then "all" people of that race will react negatively; however, if it is something with a more positive connotation like a scholarship based on minority then all the sudden everyone of that race is proud to be associated as such. does that make sense?
Post a Comment