Author Topic: Snowpiercer  (Read 5728 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Jeremy Blackman

  • Admin
  • *****
  • Posts: 11260
  • Respect: +1505
Re: Snowpiercer
« Reply #30 on: July 05, 2014, 03:05:29 PM »
0
Interesting. That's fair. And I do remember the first part of that from the movie. It's still bizarre that Wilford's response to the apocalypse is to continue to speed around the world on a train as fast as possible. Would you not change your plans even slightly? I would have at least liked an acknowledgement in the movie of how deranged this is.

The closest they come is explaining that the nose of the train needs to collect snow, but it's offered as an explanation for something else. Instead of dangerously ramming into ice flows all the time, why not stop the train once in a while, check things out, maybe stick a hose into a snowbank to collect water? It would be interesting if the train needed to keep going to prevent people from escaping, but that doesn't seem to be the case either.

It doesn't bother me that much, and I only thought about it afterwards, but I guess it's interesting.

(MORE SPOILERS)

The train cars themselves are actually kind of problematic, though... beyond wondering where the cattle and chickens are. The film could have benefited from a better explanation (or any explanation at all) of how everyday life on the train works. For flavor if nothing else. Do the kids really go to school through the drug/sex den and the rave? Is there really just one residential bunk car that everyone lives in? Apparently in the comic, the train has 1,001 cars. I realize there are budget constraints, but adding just 2 or 3 more cars could have helped. I'd like to see a bathroom here and there. Maybe have bunks spread throughout the train. Some actual living spaces. A few more details would have made things more solid, which is needed, because I think the movie feels dreamlike where it may not intend to. Things kind of evaporate.

I want tictacbk to watch this movie just to see if his head explodes.

Oh and I just realized this is a sequel to The Truman Show.

A fun fact from Ed Harris on the production: "His whole way of working is so different. He’ll just shoot bits of a scene at a time. Normally, you’ll shoot a master and shoot the whole scene on one person and then shoot the whole scene on another, but he’ll shoot a little bit one way, and then shoot a couple lines another way. He just constantly gets the pieces that he knows he wants. And he had the editing thing down below the stage where the trains were, and the editor was cutting while he was shooting. It was out there."
"Hunger is the purest sin"

N

  • The Vision Quest
  • **
  • Posts: 209
  • Don't forget this fact, you can't get it back.
  • Respect: +119
Re: Snowpiercer
« Reply #31 on: November 03, 2014, 02:50:51 PM »
+1
Interesting visual analysis
http://vimeo.com/110329961

polkablues

  • Child of Myth
  • Admin
  • *****
  • Posts: 7246
  • Respect: +2006
Re: Snowpiercer
« Reply #32 on: November 03, 2014, 03:12:49 PM »
0
Interesting. That's fair. And I do remember the first part of that from the movie. It's still bizarre that Wilford's response to the apocalypse is to continue to speed around the world on a train as fast as possible. Would you not change your plans even slightly? I would have at least liked an acknowledgement in the movie of how deranged this is.

The closest they come is explaining that the nose of the train needs to collect snow, but it's offered as an explanation for something else. Instead of dangerously ramming into ice flows all the time, why not stop the train once in a while, check things out, maybe stick a hose into a snowbank to collect water? It would be interesting if the train needed to keep going to prevent people from escaping, but that doesn't seem to be the case either.

It doesn't bother me that much, and I only thought about it afterwards, but I guess it's interesting.

I just finally saw this yesterday, so consider this a very belated response to your question. The impression I got was that if the engine stopped, they would not be able to restart it again. I'm not sure if there is a specific instance or line of dialogue I could pull to support this, but that was the sense that I got while I was watching the film, and if that is in fact the case, would at least partially resolve the nagging issues you experienced with it.

Overall, I liked the movie quite a bit. It would make an interesting double feature with Cabin in the Woods, as both films essentially have the same ending: when the protagonist(s) uncover the hidden costs of humanity's continued existence, they make the executive decision that humanity's existence isn't worth it. Delightfully nihilistic.
First things first, I'm surrealist

Jeremy Blackman

  • Admin
  • *****
  • Posts: 11260
  • Respect: +1505
Re: Snowpiercer
« Reply #33 on: November 03, 2014, 06:43:40 PM »
0
I just finally saw this yesterday, so consider this a very belated response to your question. The impression I got was that if the engine stopped, they would not be able to restart it again. I'm not sure if there is a specific instance or line of dialogue I could pull to support this, but that was the sense that I got while I was watching the film, and if that is in fact the case, would at least partially resolve the nagging issues you experienced with it.

That would completely solve that issue for me, actually. It's a perpetual motion machine, so I could buy that for sure. If I rewatch it, I'll listen for that. I'm 90% sure it wasn't in the video, because I think I recognized that as a cue to pay attention.

Maybe Wilford says "the train can't stop" in a few places, and maybe he means that not in a crazy dictator way, but literally... like it really actually can't stop, or it won't start again.

This still lingers, though:

The train cars themselves are actually kind of problematic, though... beyond wondering where the cattle and chickens are. The film could have benefited from a better explanation (or any explanation at all) of how everyday life on the train works. For flavor if nothing else. Do the kids really go to school through the drug/sex den and the rave? Is there really just one residential bunk car that everyone lives in?

I'm picturing the teacher leading her students single-file through all of that. "Okay, close your eyes kids! And try not to inhale!"

Okay fine, there was no smoke. Don't be pedantic.
"Hunger is the purest sin"

polkablues

  • Child of Myth
  • Admin
  • *****
  • Posts: 7246
  • Respect: +2006
Re: Snowpiercer
« Reply #34 on: November 03, 2014, 06:47:54 PM »
0
I fully agree with your second point. The train always felt way too short to make logical sense.
First things first, I'm surrealist

Jeremy Blackman

  • Admin
  • *****
  • Posts: 11260
  • Respect: +1505
Re: Snowpiercer
« Reply #35 on: November 28, 2018, 05:12:46 PM »
0
I just realized this is a sequel to The Truman Show.

Actually...


"Hunger is the purest sin"

 

DMCA & Copyright | Terms & Conditions | Privacy Policy