Snowpiercer

That ain't no Captain America...

This weekend, I was tasked with deciding which movie I wanted to see over an unusually quiet 4th of July weekend at the cinemas. This year, it's awkwardly sandwiched between Transformers 4 and Dawn of the Planet of the Apes with three rather small releases of Tammy, Deliver Us From Evil, and Earth to Echo, none of which I was really inclined/motivated to go see and none of which really packed that blockbuster punch that is so common around this weekend. Speaking of which, if you'd like to see what films are coming out this month, feel free to go check out my guest blog, Coming Soon, over at J&J Productions by clicking HERE. Luckily, my worries of having to see a ho-hum movie were squandered because Snowpiercer, a little sci-fi flick that has been generating a TON of buzz (with some calling it the best film of the year), FINALLY made it to Denver. And when I say finally, I mean over-a-year-later-finally. The film originally released in 2013 in South Korea and is owned by the Weinstein Company, whose owner is notorious for...well...being a huge prick. Apparently he wanted a bunch of footage cut from the film to decrease the runtime (as it stands the film is a quick 2 hours and 6 minutes) and the director refused thus leading to a delayed and extremely limited release in the States. Or at least that's how the story that I read goes. Which, if that is the case, boggles my mind because with a star like Chris Evans, coming off one of the biggest movies of the year with The Winter Soldier, an R-rated sci-fi thriller with extremely positive reviews practically sells itself. But who am I but a lowly blogger to judge a company's idiotic choices? Anyway...

Brings whole new meaning to that Christmas carol, "Baby It's
Cold Outside"

Number 1 on the Maxim Hot 100 right there ^^

Snowpiercer is the tale of what goes wrong when the human population tries to control global warming by spraying the atmosphere with a new chemical that is designed to decrease the world's overall temperature by a few degrees. Obviously a few calculations were off because it ends up freezing and destroying the whole planet! Save for a few lucky humans who are able to board the Snowpiercer, a train that travels in a year-long loop indefinitely, maintaining the human race as miserable as it may be. At the front of the train is the all-mighty Wilford who designed the train and as the cars go further and further back, the conditions get worse and worse until you get to the tail with some rather poor humans. They've experienced/participated in horrors that, when revealed later in the film, are absolutely shocking. But one of the stronger aspects of Snowpiercer is that reading that backstory that I just gave you is about the same amount of time that the film uses to set up the premise. There isn't 30 minutes of exposition or explaining why the world is the way it is, just a quick explanation at the beginning with hints along the way. It all leads to what is in my opinion, a rather weak opening 20 minutes. The film is so dark during this time that you can barely see anything and it's not helped by the complete overuse of shaky cam during some early scenes (which is oddly, but thankfully, missing from later scenes). And truth be told, that is really Snowpiercer's only major fault. It had my friends and I worried there for a little bit, but once the revolution of the tail end starts and they start travelling forward, car by car, the movie gets better and better.

"Honey I Shrunk Captain America...and Put Him in Iron Man's Chest."

Snowpiercer centers around Chris Evans' Curtis, a character who has little backstory until the end and is thrown into the leadership position because he possesses that quality. To say this is Evans' best work would be an understatement. He carries the movie, almost more so than he does as the Cap, and he really gets several opportunities to display his more emotional sides. Whereas Captain America is a very straightforward character, Curtis is a wounded one...a person who reluctantly accepts his role and has issues coming to terms with questions when they are answered. I was mightily impressed by his abilities both in range and to lead a film that doesn't have "Marvel" slapped on the front of it. The rest of the cast fares pretty well. Ed Harris is a good fit as Wilford and Tilda Swinton is darkly comedic as the completely out-of-touch, Mason. 



I'm not sure that Chris Evans' new technique at
fighting baddies is going to turn out so well...

From a science fiction perspective, Snowpiercer is almost destined to be a cult classic and garner a substantial following over the next few years. The ending, with all of its twists, are all well received and they don't seem to come out of nowhere for *cough Now You See Me cough cough*. In fact, several are subtly hinted at throughout the film, you just don't know it as you are watching it. Even more impressive is that the villain's motives are extremely logical. I love stories where the villain actually has sound reasoning and you end up borderline agreeing with their actions. Many of the large reveals at the end of Snowpiercer carry this exact phenomenon. The sum of all these parts creates a wholly original film that is very appreciated in an industry dominated by sequels and adaptations.

The rest of the film stands almost as tall as the aforementioned positives. I found the original score to be great in some areas and dull in others. Once the director ops out of using shaky cam, the fights are brilliant to watch and his use of slow motion is dazzling. I was also extremely impressed by the special effects for such low budget of a film. Going in to the film I was worried that with such a low foreign budget that the film would have TV-level special effects (a.k.a. "bad special effects"). Not only did the train hurtling through the snowy wasteland look phenomenal, but so too did the ruins of cities and mountain landscapes that it passes. There are a couple times where they look fake-ish, but all in all they did a great job using their money wisely in that department.

Al Gore would certainly have something to say about this...

Much like when The Raid 2 came out and I was blown away on a weekend that was fairly "meh" with wide releases, so too did Snowpiercer. It's easily the year's most original film as it gives us just a really well made and well thought out science fiction classic.

Why it hasn't experienced a wide release yet is beyond me, but it's well worth the search and potentially longer drive to a theater that is carrying it as it's one of the year's most memorable films yet.

CONS:

• The first twenty minutes are filmed poorly compared to the rest of the film. The lighting is too low and there is an overuse of shaky cam
• I would have enjoyed just a tad more backstory on the world
• The very end of the film (i.e. the final scene) is rather open ended. I believe that they were supposed to inspire hope, but I didn't quite get that feeling
• Some performances aren't as good as others
• Not necessarily a con but this film may not be for everyone

PROS:

• Chris Evans gives his best performance yet and probably one of the best of the year so far. He shows fantastic range while also being able to kick ass as usual
• Tilda Swinton and Ed Harris are fun in their roles. Swinton adds a bit of dark comedy to the proceedings
• Quick and tidy explanation of the world before the movie starts. They hardly waste anytime getting right into it
• A strong, original, and highly intriguing story for the entire runtime. Every new train car presented new information and new questions. Very, very fun to watch
• The twists and explanations at the end are superb, some of the best I've seen in a sci-fi film recently. Villain motives are clear and dare I say, agreeable, which makes the audience question what they would do in that predicament
• Some fantastic action sequences with good use of cinematography and slow-motion
• The script has its rough patches but is largely fantastic when it really needs to be
• Given the film's budget, the visuals are mightily impressive

Rath's Review Score: 9.5/10

*NOTE: If you do decide to download this film online (which who could blame you if it's not going to be playing in a theater near you due to stupid company decisions?) be warned that there are apparently TWO versions of the film out there. I'm not positive what the exact differences are but I believe that one of them is substantially shorter by about 20 minutes and not nearly as good. Just thought I'd give you guys a heads up!*