Snowpiercer (2014)

[Plain Old Tele]

Discuss.

[CoolioD1]

would give this a B- or something. after all the hype I was expecting better. there are some v. good individual moments like the fight in the dark w/ the fire coming in, the part with Alison Pill and Chris Evan's monologue about the early days on the train and i loved tilda swinton here but I don't feel like it all comes together especially well. overall it feels like a bunch of been-there-done-that post-apocalyptic cliches, just... on a train.

[chasmmi]

Thought it was a great film and a great comic book adaptation (so I'll be ready for Ed's thread next year).

 

Although maybe not to the standard of some of Bong's Korean films, it is very entertaining, well made and avoids most of the pitfalls that can befall Asian directors and Western actors.

 

You can also see the Park Chan Wook influence in certain scenes (such as the night vision fight scene), and overall I feel it's a film that needs to be seen by as many people as possible if for nothing more than it gets Bong's name recognised in the English speaking world and he can have another go at directing in English hopefully with a distributor that will actually allow the general population to actually watch it this time. 

[The Stingray]

One of the best sci-fi movies of the last 10 years. Nuff said...

[Lordmandeep]

Great concept but with a very stupid emo ending

[chasmmi]

I don't understand the hatred for the ending, I thought it was pretty good.

[BK007]

As I mentioned in the BO thread, this is getting overrated quickly with its stellar review score.

 

It's basically a B-grade sci-fi flick with an acclaimed director at the helm.

 

So whilst its watchable, vaguely interesting, I don't think they executed their ideas very well.

[Crusader]

To me it was pretty great

 

There's no endless back story, tension is high, ideas are smart and well executed, Chris Evans is excellent in it by far his best 'mainstream' performance

 

As good as Edge Of Tomorrow to me and certainly one of year's best pictures ( I know it came out in 2013 technically but still )

 

9/10

[The Panda]

I don't understand the hatred for the ending, I thought it was pretty good.

The ending was what brought the movie from a "this is a great sci-fi movie" to "Holy crap best movie of the year" for me. I love allegories and this is a great one, I hate to sound pretentious but the people that didn't like it simply didn't get it from who I asked. For example the person I went with hated it because he didn't see a point to it and didnt understand if, he's a smart person I just don't think he connected the dots.Snowpiercer is probably the best sci fi film since children of men.

[Goffe]

I couldn't believe how bad this was after all praises I heard. It is Elysium 2.0 self judging more intelligent, even less subtle and less visually satisfying. It's a black and white tale about the oppressed breaking the system 25/100

Edited July 6, 2014 by Goffe

[Goffe]

I saw this indagation on IMDB boards

"And honestly, if I were a tail-ender in Curtis's position at the end - choosing whether to succeed Wilford as the architect of brutality or to crash the train and take a chance in the outside world (he forgot to add "and practically killing the entire human race") - I'd go for the latter. Who wants to live in a world like the one aboard the train?"

I would say "who's you to decide?"

Edited July 6, 2014 by Goffe

[Goffe]

I hate to sound pretentious but the people that didn't like it simply didn't get it from who I asked.

"The train crashing symbolized the end of the current regime, and the dawn of tomorrow" did I get the message? if no, could you please enlighten me?

Edited July 6, 2014 by Goffe

[Sam]

Love it! Bong Joon Ho is the man AWill see if it improves even more upon rewatch.

[The Panda]

"The train crashing symbolized the end of the current regime, and the dawn of tomorrow" did I get the message? if no, could you please enlighten me?

No, here is the explanation in short.

The idea is the train represents the world, people humanity (Wilfrod even says it), you have a constant struggle between two sides, back and front (could be symbolic for left v right, commie v capitalist, democracy v fascism) one side gets angry and feels abused so they rise up and take control only to find once they are in control they have to run the world the exact same way.No matter if the head in control is communist or capitalist, the poor suffer, and a rich minority who often don't deserve it thrive and abuse the poor. The classes exist because that's how the system works and there is no way to change it without everything crashing. (The train crashing)It appears to our eyes that any other way is impossible (the outside deadly winter, perceived lot unsurvivable) however the only way to truly change the system is to leave the train and start newly. (Hence everyone dying except the two children, a symbol for a new Adam and new Eve with the polar bear being a symbol of hope for survival without the old systems, entering a new Eden).That's at least what I got out of it in a nutshell there's a lot more in there.

[The Panda]

I couldn't believe how bad this was after all praises I heard. It is Elysium 2.0 self judging more intelligent, even less subtle and less visually satisfying. It's a black and white tale about the oppressed breaking the system 25/100

Except it's not about the oppressed breaking the system?

[Goffe]

It appears to our eyes that any other way is impossible (the outside deadly winter, perceived lot unsurvivable) however the only way to truly change the system is to leave the train and start newly. (Hence everyone dying except the two children, a symbol for a new Adam and new Eve with the polar bear being a symbol of hope for survival without the old systems, entering a new Eden).

there's no need to spoiler tag here.

ok, but that would mean a endless cycle of humanity destroying itself over and over again (Eden > Civilization > Train. Repeat). Unless the "new Eden" come up with a new system, where no one suffers. 

[Goffe]

Except it's not about the oppressed breaking the system?

The movie I watched it was basically about the oppressed breaking the system, I wouldn't disagree there's more than that though.

[The Panda]

there's no need to spoiler tag here.ok, but that would mean a endless cycle of humanity destroying itself over and over again (Eden > Civilization > Train. Repeat). Unless the "new Eden" come up with a new system, where no one suffers.

The idea is we are so caught up in our created systems that the only way to truly change the system would be through completely starting over.It's philosophical thought.

[Goffe]

The idea is we are so caught up in our created systems that the only way to truly change the system would be through completely starting over.It's philosophical thought.

I understand that, but I'm sure the "starting over" would lead to the same things, to the same mistakes.

why not improve what we have right now, instead of saying fuck everything?

the human species is flawed and therefore there will never be a system where no one "suffers".

Edited July 6, 2014 by Goffe

[Ezen Baklattan]

I saw this indagation on IMDB boards"And honestly, if I were a tail-ender in Curtis's position at the end - choosing whether to succeed Wilford as the architect of brutality or to crash the train and take a chance in the outside world (he forgot to add "and practically killing the entire human race") - I'd go for the latter. Who wants to live in a world like the one aboard the train?"I would say "who's you to decide?"

Well if he didn't decide, there would no stop to the nightmare storm already brewing inside the train, and Wilford wouldn't have offered this to a petty criminal. There really weren't many other ways the ending could have gone given its setup, IMO.