Crash, alongside Driving Miss Daisy and Shakespeare in Love, is often cited as one of the least deserving Best Picture winners of all time. In 2006 Paul Haggis' drama about intersecting lives and prejudices in LA was a surprise Best Picture winner (Haggis also scooped Best Director), much to the chagrin of many who felt the alternate options (namely Brokeback Mountain and Munich) were stronger. Now, almost a decade after his greatest triumph, Haggis is willing to concede that opinion might be valid. Talking to Hitfix, the director admitted the other movies exhibited superior artistry:
"Was it the best film of the year? I dont think so. There were great films that year. "Good Night and Good Luck," amazing film. "Capote," terrific film. Ang Lees "Brokeback Mountain," great film. And Spielbergs "Munich." I mean please, what a year. "
Haggis sees Crash more as "social experiment" than a "great film". Although in the interview he indicates that Crash maintains a huge fan-base affected by its narrative, even if it didn't match up to the excellence of others in competition. I haven't seen Crash in many years, although my memories of it are positive. It's tremendously hard to construct a sprawling story woven together by coherent thematic undercurrents, but Haggis' execution was exemplary. Yes, it's possibly a little melodramatic and morally simplistic in spots, but it also achieves a decent level of emotional catharsis. I can totally empathize with people who consider it a touching and important part of the modern cinematic canon. However, is Munich a better film? Maybe. Is Brokeback Mountain a better film? Without a doubt. Ang Lee's love story remains my pick of that year's contenders (which also featured Capote and Good Night and Good Luck - hardly a bum selection), as it finds a level of emotional nuance that Crash never accomplishes. But for the record, Crash definitely isn't a bad movie. Just maybe not the best of that year.