Snowpiercer

I tend to expect more from studio films with so much money, manpower and resources at their disposal (and one's that toot their own horn for that matter.) The sloppier the work at that level the more I feel like they're just throwing cinematic tablescraps at us.

 

Really? Why? Have you seen what Hollywood's been churning out lately (and not so lately)? Most of it is disposable rubbish made with huge budgets. That's why a movie like this, while certainly not perfect, is refreshing.

 

I can see how you feel that why. Not being condescending here but (and not to sound snooty) I primarily watch foreign films or American classics (and grindhouse) these days. So that's what I'm judging against. Also against what I know Bong himself is capable of. All of the Korean directors other than Ryoo Seung-wan were lacking in their non-Korean debuts IMO. In that case Snowpiercer is just silly. In fact I actually saw it with Bong in attendance at a film fest. The smaller Korean film I saw following it blew Snowpiercer out of the water. But I will agree it's (slightly) better than what Hollywood is churning out. But that isn't much of a measuring stick. check out his Korean films if you liked what he did with Snowpiercer.

p.s.
I personally think Song Kang-ho is the greatest actor of this generation and felt Snowpiercer was a woeful waste of his talent.

 

[

While this is a studio film we're not talking Hollywood. It was done at a budget of $39 million. That's relatively low budget for a project like this. If it were done by an American studio it would have been $100+ million. It's impressive in its look (although I felt that the CGI was occasionally underwhelming betraying its lower budget) and production design.

I honestly don't see this as cinematic table scraps at all--I view something that reuses an old, tired idea and just brings bigger effects to the table and that's all. Is it flawed? Sure but it has an ambitious, unusual storyline that's tricky to pull off. I thing the director did so with style and substance.

I also don't see a anything sloppy in Bong's allegorical story--it manages to work as entertainment and social satire, commentary a tricky mixture to pull off at best. If you're focusing on structure, storytelling as far as the sloppy aspect of the film, there are plenty of classic films that have their fair share inconsistencies in storytelling and technical or storytelling flaws that still manage to work and overcome those Imperfections.

Perhaps this comes down to taste but I no eerily haven't heard a single glaring wrong with the film. Minor issues with some storytelling elements, yes, but on the whole the film provides with a thoughtful post apocalyptic story with some terrific action sequences and u usual, creative touches that show an imaginative approach rarely seen in Mainstream Hollywood produced films(and I'm not damning it with faint praise when I say that).

Even within the context of grind house films and other foreign films for me it's impressive but, really, Bong wasn't trying to make something to compete with those films--instead he was marrying the structure of a Hollywood blockbuster to something akin to his earlier projects Improving both in the process (whether or not you enjoy Hollywood blockbusters is another thing entirely.

For me "Snowpiercer" takes what the director did with "The Host" to the next level.

 

At the risk of escalating things I will say I am very aware of the film's circumstances...but let's not split hairs. "Hollywood" is an adjective or an adverb these days. Most mainstream studios, regardless of country, are aspiring to be or beat Hollywood at it's own game (except maybe Bollywood). But I'll be breif:

1. Song Kang-ho's abilities were wasted. Utterly.
2. There was quite a few sloppy bits and eye rolling moments (some of them presented in this very own thread) and I'm not very fond of this sweeping under the rug mentally of "It's a great movie if you overlook all it's flaws..." Say what? Any film can use that get out of jail free card.
3. The post apocalyptic and class war issue has been done a lot. And more effectively elsewhere.
4. I never said Bong was competing I simply said that's my where tastes lie and the standard I'm using to judge what is an effective film when explaining my position to another poster.
5. It's Bong's worst film by a large margin but decent attempt at a non-Korean production (although I know they keep waving the fact around that it's technically Korea's largest production ever.)

The Host in no way has any link visually or thematically to Snowpiercer. So how can Snowpiercer be the next level?

I don't really care enough about the film to get into an argument. It's not the worst thing around but it isn't approaching the top either. I do see it as a stepping stone to get Hollywood audiences to gradually refine their tastes to something better than Transformers 18. So Snowpiercer actually serves a good purpose.

 

I guess we will once again have to agree to disagree. I disagree with just about all of your points brought up above.

I wasnt implying the two films (The Host and Snowpiercer) were thematically related but referrring to Bong's ability as a director and writer.

I fail to see how acknowledging what a film director does well is giving them a "get out of jail free card". I can't think of a single film that is flawless for beginning to end. It's whether or not those flaws damage a film so severely that you hate the finished product. That's going to be a subjective call. Acknowledging those flaws isn't sweeping them under the rug but feel throwing out the entire film--particularly something as well done here--due to narrative flaws is a bit of a throwing out the baby with the bath water approach in my opinion andi still haven't heard any storytelling flaws that are absolutely fatal for this particular film.

Clearly your mileage was different than mine regarding the film.

 

We watched this film last night and thought it was pretty good ... it's a movie ... that's all.

As for that rat Weinstein ... someone needs to sort that guy out!!!! I'm just sayin'

 

**SPOILER FOLLOWS**

When he started grilling steak you had no idea what happened to the children yet. Combine that with what Chris Evans just said about younger meat is tender, and that he didn't eat any of the steak himself, I felt this was a fake-out. I suspected the children served a different purpose but the overemphasis of the food created some unease for me.

Mark

 

One of many unanswered questions and one of the narrative flaws was explaining where the beef came from? Was it beef? What did they do with those bodies of those bodies they killed? Still, even with its flaws I did find it entertaining and this isn't the first time the director hasn't supplied all the necessary answers (and these would be a logical outgrowth of what we see In The film).

 

I'd also point out it's less a science fiction film and more of an allegory about our current society with the train representing our dependence on fossil fuels, etc.

 

Watched it last night with The Tall Girl. We won't be watching it again... Yes it is allegory, but stretched way too far.

 

Well it certainly isn't for everyone although I felt it was a deft mixture of satire, allegory and social commentary packaged as an action movie.

 

Bring your earplugs if your theater is anything like mine. The North Hollywood Laemmle is really falling down in quality.

I enjoyed the movie. The basic premise was so ludicrous that I just sat back and enjoyed the performances and the visuals. When the ninjas wore ski masks with no eyes I shrugged. It's a metaphor. Tilda Swinton is an awesome Ayn Rand.

 

I ended up watching on demand. Worked for me.

 

More like Soylent Green + The Big Bus. The movie had some interesting bits and images, but it also had ridiculous bits and horrible CGI and bad physics. I applaud the effort but, it did not work. Don't believe the hype.

 

I went in with high expectations based on the director's other films but honestly it really just didn't work. It felt kind of confused and haphazard.

 

go to arclight dude!

 

Yeah the cgi was underwhelming. They should have used less and spend more on the cgi. As far as the bad physics... Is free but honestly it didn't bother me that much once I realized its a allegory and given That most Hollywood films also defy the law of physics,itdidn't bother me that that much. I honestly went in blind so didn't hear that much hype and probably enjoyed it more for that reason. I wouldn't argue it's a perfect film but like Terry Gilliam's "Brazil", I think it rises above those imperfections as both entertainment and social commentary. The film is a tad heavy handed at times as well.

 

I really enjoyed it, but that is the best ever description.

And I now want to watch The Big Bus again.

 

This movie is already available On-Demand for a $3 premium above standard releases, I wonder if this is the start of a new trend where short term theatre releases are also available at home.

 

I watched it on Amazon stream a few weeks ago. Notwithstanding my relatively low expectations given the premise, which promised a claustrophobic setting and a sort of Brazil/1984 on a train, it was very engaging. I'd rather watch something like this, despite its warts, than an unending reel of special effects. I'm always a sucker for sci-fi/dystopian films.

 

Chalk me up as someone else who was disappointed by this film and really do not get what all of the praise was about. I feel that SciFi fans will take any SciFi film that is a bit different regardless of key attributes where the film falls down (numerous plot holes and details). And critics cannot stop themselves from praising any film with a message about society and classes (no matter how blunt it is).

I did not mind the CGI or the acting and hell, I was even ok to suspend disbelief about a train that can circle the world regardless of the terrain or environment. That said there were some things that I just could not get over, most of which other posters have already mentioned.

***** Spoilers Below*****








- Accents. Things would to have had to have normalized for the younger generations.
- The Osk Kosh custom snow suit for the kid at the end. The train was absolutely totaled yet oh look, this should fit you perfectly. And of course, they are the only survivors.
- The cliche ending. The train is destroyed and only the two youngest protagonists survive and of course when they get out they see a living creature (a polar bear) when it was believed all outside life was extinguished.
- Rickety train tracks still stable after all of this weather especially during the scenes where it looks like it is about to go off the rails.
- The other big reveal at the end (the head of the 1% and lower classes were actually in constant communication the whole time) was totally eye rolling. You mean to tell me the old guy was cool with losing his arm and staying in the back the whole time while his BFF was chillin in 1st class? And the fact no one in those cramped quarters noticed him talking on the phone late at night? And if people thought "oh he was crazy or some crap" then why was he the leader?

This film had some many parallels with Lost in terms of praise from its fans, neat conceptbut poor execution and supposed to be so much more then just the plot. I just feel it got so caught up in its self importance that it missed so many details and plot holes along the way.

And you know, this is just my 2 cents.

 

Looks like Snowpiercer is being submitted for the 87th Academy Awards next year. A quote from the article below:

"Had The Weinstein Company actually given enough of a **** about Snowpiercer to present it in the best way possible, they would have put it on last year’s festival circuit heading into the 2014 Oscar race. But no, American audiences had to wait until it got pissed into a limited theatrical run and VOD release. Luckily, the film has received almost universal praise from critics all over the world—and is still holding onto a 95% fresh rating on Rotten Tomatoes".

http://www.giantfreakinrobot.com/scifi/snowpiercer-appealing-oscar-consideration.html

 

DVD and BR releases set for Oct.21

 

Entertaining, but stupid.

But I really love the ending







+++ SPOILER ++++++


After having "succesfully" "ended" the "evil and unfair regime" (that somehow still kept everyone at least alive) all the "revolutionaries" got was - almost every human dead, a train wreck and polar bears in the distance - Ha ha - if we don't don't kid ourselves, that stands for total annihilation of everyone in reality - Well done !