Uhm, yes, the exchange variation is utter cr*p.
Just check out the online database at www.newinchess.com. FR 1.4 thru FR 1.6. Take any line where Black doesn't play Bb4, and White is scoring a mere 45%. Against Bb4, he scores 52%.
Those numbers equate to "utter cr*p" in my book when you are talking White. If Black scores that, fine, that's normal.
Does this database factor in inaccuracies or blunders in the middlegame or endgame or even in the later opening? Database use is meta-analysis and not real analysis. It is not an actual evaluation of a position. Real analysis is done over the board by masters and they use individual games by masters as examples with maybe a bit of computer analysis. Exchange French isn't utter crap, it's just drawish and not very ambitious as white. It aims to keep the position simple and get into the middlegame.
Openings are overrated anyway. Look at how Carlsen can dominate the game without being the best opening player.
Chesshole, the New In Chess database specifically has the policy of only including upscale games, hence why it's only 1.7 Million in size and not 5 or 6 million like ChessBase databases are.
And yes, even if it scored exactly 50%, based on your comment of being drawish an unambitious, that's still "utter cr*p". White has no business scoring at or below 50% when 1.e4 as a whole scores 54% for White and 1.d4 scores 56% for White.
You give me White, I want my advantage. You give me Black, I'm more than happy to settle for sterile, dull, boring, drawish equality. You've just completely eliminated my disadvantage for going second!
The advance is an OK way for white to play, but those who know the French know that it isn't the most trying variation out there (3.Nc3 is).
For a game in the a3 line: