I confess I haven't seen Crash, but more than a few people have mentioned to me that the film echoes all the Sleeper Curve values of complex, multithreaded storytelling that I talked about in Everything Bad Is Good For You. Though of course, my emphasis in that book was on the new complexity of television programming -- 24, Sopranos, Alias, The Wire, etc. I actually made the point that film was lagging behind TV where the Sleeper Curve was concerned. But this year's Best Picture nominees make me wonder if the tide is turning in film as well, particularly as the underlying economics shifts towards DVD sales and away from theatrical release. We'll see...

Comments

[Michael Sippey]

Leaving the economics aside for a moment, shat I found really great about last night's Oscars was that the year that Crash won for best pic, Robert Altman won the lifetime achievement award. Crash owes its plot mechanics to Altman films like Nashville, The Player and Shortcuts...

I wonder if The Academy is a fan of Sleeper Curve TV, and is signaling that they want more Sopranos-style storytelling in their movies...

[Michael Sippey]

Wow, that's a lousy typo in the first line.

[Andrew Heller]

What’s even more amazing about Crash is its demonstration of the complex social network within the Hollywood community. I didn’t think Crash was the best film of the year. It was barely released across the country and didn’t have nearly the culturally impact that Brokeback Mountain enjoys.

What it did have was a huge roster of major Hollywood players ready to be lobbyists for the political race known as the Oscars. If you know Brendan Frasier or Sandra Bullock, you’ll probably vote for Crash for best whatever-the-category-is. What’s more, Lion’s Gate Films sent a DVD copy of the movie to every member of the SAG (Screen Actors Guild) to get the film to the “voters”.

This all makes perfect economic sense. Without having to pay for a huge distribution across the nation or a large marketing campaign, the film now gets FREE promotion as Best Film of the Year, getting more people to buy the DVD and talk about it amongst co-workers/friends, and expose them to the film’s complex threads (the Sleeper Curve getting steeper).

Of course, this is just my opinion. And I’d have to research other films that help prove this thesis. But that’s a different blog…

[jkottke]

Syriana had zero flashing arrows.

[FriendsterForum.com]

Nice Blog :)

www.FriendsterForum.com

[Kathy Cheng]

Prison Break, probably the most absorbing storyline I've ever seen unfold on TV. It's so painful and yet completely satisfying to watch. I don't doubt that I'm a lot more sneaky now, and also a better judge of character -- at least when it comes to prison populations.

[Michael Kovnat]

I'm not a fan of Crash, and would argue that it is not a good example of the Sleeper Curve. The film's apparent complexity decorates a rather mundane and reductive theme. While there may be more characters than are typical in a Hollywood feature, those characters are really just expressions of the film's single-minded (even simple-minded?)point of view.

[Peter Johnson]

Unfortunately, I don't see Crash's Oscar win as an example of Hollywood catching up on the Sleeper Curve. Not because the film's not complex enough, but because it's not popular enough. What I find so interesting about Steven's analysis is that some of the most popular shows on TV, shows with the absolute highest ratings are the most complex. Crash is just not the pop culture equivalent of Lost or 24 or the Sopranos. It's a relatively small film made, essentially, over the studio's dead body. Films with this pedigree are not getting more complex, they have always been complex. Just pop in Nashville if you want to give your brain a workout.

If anything, i think this year's crop of Oscar nominees and winners shows that Hollywood (or the Studios) still doesn't get the Sleeper Curve. Just look at the nominees. They are all "smaller" films made, for the most part, outside the system. While the rest of entertainment has grown more complex and interactive, the movies produced by the studios have just gotten dumber and dumber.

[Bruce Hutchinson]

Yes, unlike TV, movies have a much longer history of multi-threading. Altman is a big part of this, but even Grand Hotel (1932) is based on multi-threading. It seems TV is simply catching up to movies (at least a certain strain of movies).

While it's really tough to compare movie and TV audiences it's worth noting that the Top 10 TV shows tend to still be shows like CSI and American Idol. On the other hand, Crash (despite might my agreement that it is a simple-minded film and not necessarily a great example of multi-threading) has made well over $100 million in theatrical/rental/DVD and VHS sales. Not sure what this means exactly, but I think that translating what is happening in TV to movies and vice versa is much more complicated than it seems.

[Garrie Burr]

Speaking of the Sleeper curve...

Have you ever considered the complexity of old-time radio shows? I'm thinking of something like the Jack Benny show where, from the examples I've heard, there are a lot of references to previous shows and many of the jokes (especially those pertaining to Benny's persona) rely on the audience being familiar with the ongoing character's traits.

There's the famous bit where a Mel Blanc mugger points a gun at Benny and says "Your money or your life!" The roars of laughter come about during the long long subsequent silence between the two characters -- the audience knows "Benny" and knows what a tough choice he's been given.

Burns & Allen, Edgar Bergen and others also made use of their popular familiarity with the crowds to enhance the humor.

The only problem I see with how this scenario fits your book is that these things were going on well-before Hill Street Blues, Seinfeld and the reality 'game' shows...

Anyhow, just my two cents. Feel free to spend them wisely...

--Garrie