Siskel and Ebert debate Cronenberg's Crash
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 12 сен 2024
- Siskel and Ebert debate Cronenberg's Crash
never have I seen these two argue so vehemently over a movie!!!!!
David Cronenberg's film Crash was released in Europe in '96, was supposed to be released in the U.S. in the fall of '96, but Ted Turner personally tried to prevent the release of the film (the same weekend that the violent "Set it Off" with Queen Latifah was released by Turner's FineLine Pictures)
Crash finally got released Spring '97 in the U.S.
R.I.P. Gene!
R.I.P. J.G.!
R.I.P. Roger!
These are the moments that I love Ebert the most
Bless Ebert's soul, you don't need to respect his reviews but you have to respect his willingness to go out on a limb. In this case he really gets it.
What was really entertaining about seeing Crash in the theatre, was watching person after person get up and leave the theatre. I'd never witnessed that before!
What you had in 1997 during a theatrical showing of "Crash" IS EXACTLY what I had in April 2000 at a THX-screening of "American Psycho" on opening night.
I saw it at an afternoon matinee attended mostly by senior citizens, haha.
Same with me. However interesting the film is, people weren't up to it and one by one left the theater.
I saw it at the same theatre in Princeton as I did Showgirls. The college audience laughed through the whole campiness of Showgirls. More than a few walked out of Crash. I only recall people walking out of GoodFellas and Prospero's Books and The Last Emperor.
I saw that happen with The Thin Red Line. Which also featured Elias Koteas.
My mom told me last year that she pulled up "Crash" on DirecTV hoping to see the Sandra Bullock film, and told me she ended up getting "a porno movie with James Spader" instead.
Ik this comment is old, but this sounds similar to the time my mom wanted to watch a comedy on Netflix with Dev Patel and ended up accidentally watching the first half hour of my Blade Runner 2049 dvd
@@marcsoren7 Also commenting on this decade-old comment....
I recommended It's a Disaster to my parents since it was relevant to the quarantine. And they wound up watching Disaster Movie 😐
The inverse happened to me, I went out prepared to be weird out by Cronenberg and ended up with Sandra Bullock in somehow another movie I could only describe as "not quite racist, but..."
she watched a far better film
@@ghfudrs93uuu now that's truly terrible.
"He's trying to make a pornographic movie without pornography"
This is partly why Ebert is such a legendary film critic to the point where even people with little to no interest in film and cinema read his work and listen to his interviews. He had the amazing skill of being able to take ideas that are otherwise hard to digest or confusing and then describe them in ways that are eloquently put yet extremely simplistic. RIP.
2:30 brilliant
Except that he was wrong. This is one of the few times I agree with Siskel. And talking specifically about this point, yes, the scene with the main couple in bed is intended to be erotic and very erotic indeed.
Except he thought saving private Ryan was better than the thin red line when it was a sappy mess.
@@Hastur876 I fully get what he means, its the same kind of thing that John Cameron Mitchell tried to do with Short Bus, only I think neither Mitchell or Cronenberg got it right because they don't understand how suppressed the hoi polloi audience is, it made Siskel hot whereas Ebert had a better understanding of Cronenberg, nihilism, etc.
CRASH is Cronenbergs most perfectly executed film and the novel is utterly fearless and original.
No way Cronenberg has much better movies than Crash
I can't say it's my favorite chronenberg film (even if my judgement is very positive) but surely i must say that chronenberg os one of the bravest living film-maker. He also adapted "the naked lunch" by W.S. Borroughs, which was considered almost impossible.
@@johnc.wrigley6147 such as?
@@johnc.wrigley6147 I feel Eastern Promises is his magnum opus. A History of Violence and Existence are great too
Garbage
Crash was based on a book. They always miss this in their reviews. They talk as if the director or screenwriter made up the story from scratch.
otakurocklee such a great book
My Film studies professor used Crash for the discussion for censorship and she had read the book it was based on. She even used parts of the book the more notable scenes were based off as examples of where the book was more graphic and explicit.
The famous story is the reader at a publishing house who had the task of first reading Crash left a very strongly worded note on the manuscript saying that not only was the book extremely dangerous but the author should seek psychiatric help immediately. Lol!
@@dinastiachowfan1401 - What?! Why not exactly? It's relevant here because people review Crash as if Cronenberg is insane for coming up with this concept, but he didn't. JG Ballard came up with the concept for his 1973 novel.
Baudrillard brings up the book Crash in ' simulacra and simulation'
No one is going to say anything about the great score? I think the music in this movie is magnificent...
Fernando Gonzalez finally!! Someone agrees with me
I’m going through most of Cronenberg’s films and I just finished this one. The score and cinematography are what stood out to me the most. Howard Shore nailed this dark and bleak underground world with those riffs. It really highlighted the atmosphere for me. Very good score.
Agreed. One of the all time great scores.
Howard Shore’s score was unique and terrific.
Exactly. The music is genius. Totally perfect for this movie. Howard Shore is just brilliant to the nth degree.
Fascinating to see Ebert's reaction to this compared to his review of Blue Velvet.
Yeah, it was hard to get a handle on Ebert.
And Taxi driver for that matter
character development
I think that's because it also depends on how much they have discussed it with other critics. Also, some of the points made by Ebert on Blue Velvet are correct. Also, I consider Ebert to be the better critic as even when he was wrong,he explained his rationale clearly unlike Siskel.
Well Blue Velvet was so comedic in one half but then serious when it comes to Rosellinis torture from Frank Booth that it was hard to distinguish what it wanted to be. Crash is on a one note essence of strange but fascinating.
Roger Ebert sounded like a college professor when he explained what this movie was about... 2:30
Old-Guy-Rants I miss Ebert!
So do l....
He certainly felt passionate about this movie. Its the most heated I've ever seen him. But I think Siskel wound him up when he said..' I'll review the movie then i'll review your review..' Cheeky. Think the movies great, weird but great.
@Durins Bane ...I agree 100%
Ebert was right... though he rarely was.
I think this was a great study of people so jaded only increasing levels of violence provides them any pleasure. As someone who struggles with depression this movie really spoke to me. The way everyone was so muted emotionally is spot on. The ending where Spader whispers " maybe next time" when his wife says she thinks she's okay and then it transitions into passionless sex. I've been there, trying to fuck the pain away only to realize that even one of the most intimate acts humand can experience doesnt offer any solace. Im wonder how many other depressed people related to this film.
Depression is a bitch, you are correct. Somehow, for me, dark cinematic experiences and gloomy music like Joy Division actually helps. And Cronenberg missed an opportunity to use that Peaches song that you alluded too! Thanks for your comment, friend!
@Miss Droplette true-the song that belonged actually is Warm Leatherette by The Normal. But Howard Shore’s score is phenomenal.
"You've never seen anyone like this before" is probably the best way to convince your friends to watch Crash. Please do.
I think that like David Lynch's Blue Velvet, this film is kind of a litmus test as to how you define sex internally. With both of those films, I feel that you either love it, or hate it. It definitely makes you think deeply into yourself, and are terrific excursions into sex. Personally, I loved Blue Velvet and Crash (1996). These films certainly don't treat it's audience like a moron, and are great examples of auteur filmmaking. Could you imagine Michael Bay making such movies?
@@710blodgett74 Lol, except for Lynch and Cronenberg!
No but I can imagine him making a real film like Armageddon, not this muck
@@tus2521 lol. Bay is a shit director
@@tus2521 he's only good for kid's movies
Ironically, Gene loved Blue Velvet, Roger found it offensive
I was not shocked nor offended by anything in Crash. I have come to understand it's premise (which was actually quite prescient at the time) to be the exploration of a culture addicted to exhibitionism, both as participants and as spectators. ironically, my only objection is that every time I watch it, I fall asleep in the middle of the third act.
ted norton Mayne that should rell you something.
Falling asleep during the third act of Gilliam's Brazil has happened to me too many times. Eventually I saw the whole film and liked it
"THE MOVIE THINKS SO TOO GENE!!!!!" 3:30 lol he went ham
"I'm gonna review the movie and then I'm gonna review your review" - one of the best things Siskel has ever said.
Elias Koteas' character was one of the strangest ive ever seen in a film
Roger is spot on, and Gene is so missing the point of this great film. It is a Masterpiece and one of my favourite films.
Bored Now fucking awful movie
watched it over and over to see if I missed something... result: pure rubbish...
@@harryiglesias it's ok to not get something
@@DimAngelProductions What was the movies message?
@@lizicadumitru9683 Essentially how some kinks aren't that great and may end in death, and with cars and smart phones as we've integrated them into our life.
If you view it as an erotic noir horror I think you'd like it more.
There's something about James Spader that scares me terribly. There's also something that makes me crave his validation and approval. I don't think I can go on with my life unless I'm validated by him. That scares me. I like it.
Maybe I'll begin praying to him like Carlin prayed to Joe Pesci?
Ontologically Stephen You need to watch Tuff Turf 5 times and say 10 Hail Marys
whatever floats yer boat
Oh brother...
I'm totally agree with Ebert on this. probably one of his best reviews. Liked the movie but it's not really for everyone.
No reviewer ever to date has mentioned the monumentally important "Crash" score by Howard Shore. Unbeatable dark guitar music.
+urckrecords BBC's Mark Kermode did
I keep reading his name. I'll have to investigate. Thank you!
It's on Crash's Wikipedia page. Also, look up Kermode's favorite Cronenberg films. He mention's the score there too.
+urckrecords The score by Howard Shore is haunting and really puts the mood to the story. Great film by Cronenberg and one of the most weird experience watching a movie like this.
have you read the book?
This movie used to be on tv after midnight when I was a kid. I saw it when I was only 13 years old. I remember being so confused but entranced by it.
I'm surprised they didn't mention that CRASH is based on a novel, of the same name, by JG Ballard, who also wrote the novel EMPIRE OF THE SUN -- which Spielberg made into a movie -- based on his childhood in a Japanese WW2 internment camp in Shanghai.
Elias Koteas looks like Quentin Tarantino without the foot fetish.
hahahhaa
Yeah, His fetish is cars.
Wait... do you mean Quentin or David?
Most people won't agree with me, but I believe that Howard Shore's Crash score is the greatest music ever written for a film, in second place is Silence of the Lambs, then Dead Ringers!
This is one of those reviews that's pretty much the epitome of how Gene Siskel and Roger Ebert viewed certain movies. Gene Siskel took this movie completely literally and hated it whilst Roger Ebert saw something more to the film and explained it in a clear way - but then some of the finer details (none of the sex scenes are directed in a way to be erotic) are a bit inaccurate, which Gene grills him for.
This is a great segment, although I think Crash is just one of those movies that's built in a way where it's really difficult to talk about it in a comprehensive way just a week after you've seen it.
Scorsese had this on his top 10 of the 90s
No. 9.
@@I_am_Dane_Youssef actually it was 8
@@randywhite3947 no 7
@@soobratteebilaal1258 nah, i'm thinking 6
Number 4
I love these guys, and I miss the hell out of the both of them, together. I love their debates, because it's hard to pick a side at times because they both bring to the table interesting points.
man, i miss that pairing. always lively debate and unique insight.
Still better than 2004's Crash (that film stunk AND it won Best Picture over four superior nominees).
Arthur Penn Maybe to you. But I couldn't even get through the whole movie the first time because it pissed me off so much. All four of the other Best Picture nominees (Brokeback Mountain, Capote, Good Night and Good Luck, Munich) were far superior films.
C.J. O'Dell You're wrong.
Crash aka White Guilt: The Movie.
Well, apparently Haggis turned out to be another “Me Too” asshole.
@@urrrccckostan And wasn't he recently accused of sexual assault too ? His Crash was just awful. An ivory tower view of real life amounting to something so far from real life that it was laughable, and aggravating. The characters are all stereotypes. Watching that movie and knowing it won a slew of awards made me angry. Each scene was more annoying than the last.
damn I wish this discussion could have gone on a bit longer. Roger really seemed like he had a lot more to say and then he has to go to commercial.
Roger smashed it on this one; one of his best moments on the show.
i read about this movie and didn't understand the premise or why people might enjoy it until i got into a crash on the freeway. i watched it today and loved it
So Ebert hated Blue Velvet and loved Crash? That's weird...
MisterAZS Not really. They're different movies by different directors. The reasons for liking and disliking things are too complicated to be generalized. "How come you liked this but didn't like this?" It doesn't matter. The honest reaction is what counts, and it's a good thing that Roger gave his own opinion on both Crash and Blue Velvet without trying to appeal to everyone.
MisterAZS I was surprised myself. Siskel loved Blue Velvet.
LIKED it?!? He put it on his list on the 10 Best Films of 1986--most critics did.
What's weird is That he loved Last Tango in Paris (A film whose female protagonist was hummiliated) and he hated Blue velvet
He had his reasons.
I would recommend listening to Howard Shore's Crash score whilst reading the book. A perfect combination! Best guitar music ever recorded.
Cue Up "Warm Leatherette" by The Normal. It is all the musical score you need.
@@P00katube yeah I thought Cronenberg missed an opportunity to use that track in this film. I feel the same way about Videodrome: he should have used Blondie’s “In the Flesh”.
I thought this film was absolutely perfect. I love it. Ebert gets it, totally.
For such a divisive, controversial film, Crash has a pretty good score on Rotten Tomatoes.
One of my favorite films.
Read the book while listening to the soundtrack: best of both worlds.
For me the best experience of J.G. Ballard's Crash is to read the book while listening to Howard Shore's Crash soundtrack on full blast on repeat!!!!!
I have to agree with Ebert. Cronenberg is one of my favorite directors, and he did a very good job with Crash.
Yep. The late Eugene Siskel and Rodge Ebert were a definitive "cranky and snarky" odd couple frequently =).
Only seen this film once, but holy shit it was a very unusual experience for me.
I relate. After it was over, I was feeling tripy.
I saw this movie on IFC when I was fourteen. I didn’t have Internet on my computer in my room I only used it for typing scripts and stories and to play computer games and had no way of seeing internet porn but I did use lots of movie scenes and soft core films on late night tv. When I discovered this movie I understood immediately what Cronenberg was trying to do. There are some scenes that are ironically more sexy than any internet porn video.
OMG I just finally realized who Angus Deayton looked like to me; I've been watching some "Have I Got News for You?" episodes while under this quarantine thing, introducing the show to myself, and I kept wondering why the host of it looked so familiar to me. He's basically the British Gene Siskel!
I've seen it a few times. It's more interesting each time.
I really enjoyed this movie. It was so off the wall, I was riveted. The James Dean re enactment was weird and wonderful!
you're welcome, I've been wanting to share this with Cronenberg fans since '97
just found the vhs tape in the closet last week
Wow, I usually thought Gene made mincemeat of Roj in arguments but Roger clearly thought about and understood this flick and Gene clearly didn't, his arguments are weak ("I just didn't like it," basically) and Roger finally won a round, ha ha. R.I.P. miss these guys a lot. :( Thanks for posting
Ebert’s comments on this film are brilliant
Crash was great. The score was fantastic, I loved how deep it can get, and I really liked it.
Ebert is right to defend it as a great film, but Siskel is right that it’s supposed to be erotic- Ebert seems to take the position that the film’s quality is contingent on Cronenberg‘s supposed authorial intention not to titillate, which in the end means Ebert is moralizing as much as Siskel. it’s a great film, and an obviously erotic film, and they’re not mutually exclusive! tl;dr Siskel prudishly dislikes it, and Ebert prudishly likes it.
I’m with Roger on this one. But I gotta say that, as a speaker of English as a second language, I loved learning the expression “hooey”.
It’s a bizarre idea. “A bunch of hooey” as Gene says, which I agree. Does that make the film bad, however? Ebert always said that you can not judge a film on “what it’s about” but instead “how it’s about it,” which is a great perspective and means therefore no subject is off limits. This film? I disagree with Roger that Cronenberg also thought it was all “hooey.” According to interviews I’ve heard, Cronenberg believes meaning in life is a complete psychological construct (I.e, what we decide it to be) and that applies to our relationship with the erotic. The extremes of this notion is what this film explores, so Ebert is only partially right. The possibility of car crashes being erotic is no more “crazy” than anything else we find erotic, that is, if one chooses to make them so. This is what Cronenberg is getting at and I think Ebert is in denial if he believes it was about “crazy people.” I do think Gene understood that and finds it absurd if not appalling. Many may be inclined to give Roger points here because he’s more passionate than Gene, but this does not an argument make. His analysis is close, but is incomplete in its conclusion.
One of my favorite films…. Saw it in the theater and still watch it at least twice a year
Are you seeing anyone?
Back then I usually found Siskel to be the more insightful reviewer, but I think he's way off on this one, Ebert got it.
Yes, Gene, you're not hip enough
"It's hooey!"
One of Cronenberg's best, alongside with Naked lunch and Eastern Promises.
The majority of his movies are fucking great tbh
Along with "Dead Ringers", "Crash" is one of his best films. A lot of credit should go to J.G. Ballard for his novel but Cronenberg really succeeded in reproducing the cold steely poetry and icy clinical tone of the book. Ebert gets it perfectly.
Howard Shore was the crucial factor involved with bringing some of the tone of the book.
@@urrrccckostan Absolutely. Loved his metallic-based atmospheres, an interesting change from his usual string-based textures.
I think it was the cold colour palette of the film (all those blues and greys) and of course Spader's jaded performance.
Now on Criterion Blu-ray 📀
#ratedNC17
Ebert chomping at the bit for his friend to finish the intro just so he can fervently dunk on him
I always liked how that other Crash movie came out a few years later and people had to clarify which one!
I'm watching Crash right now for the first time, and I still don't know how to feel. It's fascinating, but oh so disturbing and uncomfortable and a bit absurd.
The best thing about these two always is that you can just tell right away which one will love the movie and which one will hate the movie
This is really civil compared to some of their really heated arguments. I think the review of Full Metal Jacket is the worst one that I've seen.
Read Ebert’s full-length review. He totally got this movie and it makes me appreciate it and him even more.
For the most part I couldn't stand these two but Ebert was on point here.
@dnasty312 I would also recommend two books published by RE/Search (they did the Industrial Culture Handbook as well as Modern Primitives):
"J.G. Ballard - Quotes"
"J.G. Ballard - Interviews"
one can see the influence of Ballard in Fight Club, almost everything by David Cronenberg, not to mention the music of Joy Division.
Ballard was a prophet in my opinion.
Roger Ebert was right. The movie is a character study about people whose lives are so empty and jaded that the idea of death turns them on. They're so turned on by it that tempting fate through car crashes is the height of sexual release for them.
Cronenberg is actually one of my favourite directors, VideoDrome is a genuine nightmare albeit an interesting and smart one, The Fly was equal parts great sci-fi/horror monster-flick and actually kind of tragic and sad in its own gross weird little way, Naked Lunch is... Naked Lunch but I happen to find the movie very entertaining in a way I can't really explain any better than I can explain WTF the movie is about, Dead Ringers is creepy and just plain odd albeit in a more down to earth sort of way (Which actually makes it one of Cronenberg's most disturbing films, honestly), etc. etc. but I just can't sit through this one. I somehow made it through ONCE, but I don't know why.
But he seems to make sexual weird movies...
And that's a problem why?
Well that can turn off some people
Dead Ringers is a masterpiece. After reading William S. Burroughs work (author of Naked Lunch) I feel that the last section of Dead Ringers really captures the feel of someone in the confusion and hallucination and darkness of addiction. This was the main focus of Burroughs' writing. Cronenberg mentions Burroughs again and again in interviews.
urckrecords I detested *DEAD RINGERS.* It lost me about halfway through and never got me back. By the truly disgusting ending of it, I literally stated, "Now what the *fuck* was that?!?" Jeremy Irons *was* great in it, but so what?
"I disagreed with a character so the movie was bad" -Siskel. Lol
Ohhh, Cronenberg hit the spot with these two.
Crash it a masterpiece, whether you like it or not.
Roger is really getting to the story that the film is about and the way in which Cronenberg executes it, arguably....ARGUABLY an objective enough viewpoint of the nuts and bolts of the film. He's so on point and Siskel doesn't seem so at all.
I have to admit....James Spader's intro in this film was beautiful.....
Wow....l made this childish comment 5 years ago..??
Where was my head at..??
the film is like a dark romance, the ending shocked me even though most of the movie didnt
Fucking awsome watching Ebert defending this film. Love it. Love these goobers
Wow. They get so passionate about it. Ebert's such a subversive cat. He cowrote "Beyond the Valley of the Dolls" with Russ Meyer several decades ago.
The only thing I like about the newer Crash is that someone might accidentally see the Cronenberg one. Heh.
Sick movie.
What about Scanners? That soundtrack alone was the best when I first heard it. Although yeah, I absolutely adore Crash's soundtrack, so much so that I got the CD!
The whole CRASH movie had been downloaded on RUclips at one point. What ever happened to it? Was it a trademark thing? Or did it just go past it's allowed posting time? After a while, RUclips takes it off...
I have to know, somebody tell me...
I agree with both. The film is both fascinating and ridiculous. It's an outrageous concept directed and performed with a straight face; it refuses to wink at the audience. Easy to admire, equally easy to dismiss, damn near impossible to enjoy or like. JG Ballard and David Cronenberg were a match made in heaven (or hell). If only Cronenberg had done High-Rise (which, by his own admission, he already sort of did with Shivers).
They argued pretty heavily over "Barfly" as well. "Benji the Hunted" also has a really good argument as well.
@Superfreaxx Ha, that is interesting. I like both of these guys. I've always been partial to Siskel though. I just always seemed to agree with him more. They are very insightful and interesting to listen to. Shame that Siskel is gone.
Oh these guys are the best !
Film was banned in Westminster in London but not all over England
I'm with Gene on this. I didn't like Crash either.
You need a near death experience or someone you have sexual desire for to die a tragic death. Then come back.
@@grizzlyaddams3606 Nope
@@elisem1912i have getting off to car accident. This movie is my dream
Definitely try to read the written review on his site. I agree with him. It abstracts the process away from it's usual content and thus comes up with a method to explore the process that one wouldn't have access to otherwise. Interesting movie.
I don't always agree with Roger Ebert (and VERY rarely agreed with Gene Siskel), but he is right on the money with his assessment of CRASH. Great movie.
Gene didn't get It.. even when Roger explained It to him
this review (and these comments) don't acknowledge that this is based on the book "crash" by the futurist writer JG Ballard.
It's fiercely brilliant, the work of a genuine auteur. I can't articulate it any better than that, sorry! 🤔
Better than I ever could, thank you!
@urckrecords
I find it interesting that Ebert likes this movie, but Blue Velvet is too much for him. I don't hate Crash by any means, and I love Cronenberg, but I have to agree with Siskel on the characters lacked the kind of thing you want to see from them and at times could come off as stupid. And while we don't have to look at people who are morally correct, at the same time if they don't experience any character arc that we might want to see out of them, we might not like the product.
Agreed but this is meant to be highly driven and focused by one thing... Sex and death and yes, they are often times intertwined as one thing.
NC-17 a year after Showgirls which studio was this
It was owned by Ted Turner, not sure which studio
And sorry folks, but rating my comment negatively doesnt change the fact that Im right and youre wrong. Deal with it. ;)
Steve Jobs said "Good artists copy, great artists steal". DC is a great thief.
Stephen Gill haha! Two great human beings, you just mentioned!
William S. Burroughs, Nabokov
These were exactly the kinds of exchanges that made the show worthwhile, where you felt like you got a well rounded idea of whether you were interested in seeing the film. Gene talks about how unbearable a movie is on nearly every level, while Roger claims moral superiority and explains the depth he saw in it. Oh, wait, I'm thinking of "Cop and a Half". Never mind.
Hahahaha!!!
@urckrecords
Of course there was like 20 movies titles Crash before this one.
I found it disturbing yet fascinating but i also like David Lynch. What? Were not watching Crash and Blue Velvet Christmas eve?
I'm surprised that neither of them mentioned the author J.G. Ballard. HE was the guy that wrote the story. They keep talking about Cronenberg like it was all his idea.
Neither of them had read the book-you can tell!
I've seen the film a few times. I could never get into it. I will say though that Howard Shore's score is fantastic.