Snowpiercer - Analysis and Review

Find it and Watch it. Whatever it takes. Whatever it takes...

It is unfortunate that this film had to premier the same day that Transformers: Age of Extinction because it is obvious which one will make a lot more money. It is also unfortunate that this movie is only showing in 10 cities all over America instead of the wide release it is getting overseas because of what the Weinstein Company did. So even if people wanted to see it, they couldn't. The catch for a wide American release is if the film does extraordinarily well at the box-office with the 10 cities that it is being shown at. This movie was just set up for failure in America from the start. And that is really sad.

The Plot

After an attempt to stop global warming goes horribly wrong, the world gets sent into a new Ice Age. The surviving humans only chance of survival is the Wilford Train that was designed to circle the globe in one year. A train with an eternal engine and the capabilities of surviving the most harshest environments. The survivors are divided into classes. The Rich occupy the front of the train, and the Poor occupy the tail. In a desperate move to seize control of lives they have forgotten from being on board the train for 17 years, Curtis (Chris Evans) rallies the passengers of the tail in a revolt to take over the front of the train! Their mission will take them through a long path of violence and discovery as the ones left standing will soon learn why The Powerful chose to keep The Poor alive. And in the end... what does it mean to ensure World Order.

Analysis

The Best Science Fiction Movies are the ones that ask the hard questions or put a mirror on society. This is an example of one of those films. Unfortunately it is not a film that will succeed in America. I remember watching a trailer reaction video of people who immediately declare it a Hunger Games rip off but on a train. Which fascinated them but they just keep seeing an R-Rated Hunger Games on a train instead of a different dystopian Sci-Fi movie. And because of the trailers being very vague around the premise of the movie other than there is a clear separation between the rich and the poor, the average American Movie Going Audience will just groan at the thought of Hunger Games on a train. When it is clearly not.

The problem is dystopian futures are everywhere these days. Whether it be in The Hunger Games or in X-Men: Days of Future Past or in TV Shows like The Walking Dead, the genre for post-apocalyptic future is everywhere. While The Hunger Games offered a new take on for an audience not familiar with other types of post-apocalyptic futures, any other new take would just be looked at as a Hunger Games rip off. I'm sorry, but it is true. Even if people want to call Snowpiercer a new look and a much better high quality science fiction examination of the post-apocalypitc future, it will always be viewed by an American audience as R-Rated Hunger Games on a Train. 

Most viewers don't even ask: why are they on a train? Why is it snowing outside? Instead what I see from youtube comments or trailer reaction videos from people who don't know anything just think: Oh so they stick some poor people  and some rich people on a train then kill each other and whoever is left standing wins. In other words Hunger Games on a Train. They don't ask, why is the whole world on a train. They don't even think its the whole world, just a few people and maybe the rest of the world is watching. They don't even ask why is it snowing outside? No one even seems to question that part. So in the end, while it is not good to have youtube comments or commentators to be the basis for the representation of the general movie going public the sad truth sometimes is that it is.

I'm aware that both The Hunger Games and Snowpiercer have the class war similarities and the same reasons as to why class war is integral to maintaing a balance in society. But The Hunger Games takes three books/four movies to get that point across. Snowpiercer gets it done in one movie. 

Review

Director Bong Joon-Ho is quickly becoming one of my favorite directors. He is probably best known in the states for creating The Host (2006) the Korean monster film that was a universally praised by critics all over the world as the best monster movie and political thriller made in years. The Host was definitely Korea's biggest worldwide big budget blockbuster and his take on Snowpiercer will be his second foray into the big budget arena. Though in comparison to American big budget movies (100-200 million) this one is only a medium budget movie in the states (60-70 million). But that is still a lot and he handles what he has with extreme care and precision.

He does what directors used to do a long time ago, and if some were to do this now they would automatically be ousted. He took inspiration from a graphic novel and turned it into a film. He didn't adapt the graphic novel to the screen, he took the idea and made the idea into a movie. That is something that would be looked down upon if an American director tried adapting a comic book these days. But because the comic was not too popular even in its native country of France, one can see how easy it would be to create a film off of a pre-existing text without getting any flack for inaccuracies. It was the smartest decision to make and one that won't restrain him from having to follow the story beat by beat. Because the ideas are what resonate with people, not the story in the graphic novel. Him and his American co-screenwriter, Kelly Masterson, handle it well.

But enough about the behind the scenes guys, lets talk about the people in front of the camera. Chris Evans, better known as Captain America, plays a reluctant hero named Curtis who does not want to be a leader and does not use grand speeches to sway his fellow passengers but rather actions of bravery that speak louder than an motivational speech. This is a distinction that makes him different from most character put in this situation. He is not a leader, yet people look to him as if he is just because he's taking the lead without have to lead anyone. This may sound like incompetence but it is the way friends would follow one of their friends. These people know each other and will follow each other till the end. That is shown by the loyal Edgar played by Jaime Bell, the desperate mother played by Octavia Spencer, the silent assassin played by Luke Pasqualino, and the man who inspired them all played by John Hurt. Their plight is driven mostly by the odd character of Mason played by Tilda Swinton who is the supreme example of someone who is passionate about their job but is not evil. The job just makes her look evil. Which is a common theme in this movie: the need for there to be a class struggle to maintain balance. Then of course caught in the middle of this power struggle is someone who once worked for the rich, played by Song Kang-ho, and his daughter played by Go Ah-sung (who played father and daughter in The Host) who were placed in prison for being drug addicts. They prove to be integral to the success of Curtis' revolution as well as shades of who the rich really are in this train.

There is a small appearance by Allison Pill who plays a pregnant teacher with an extraordinarily high positive attitude while wielding an uzi. But then there is a small role played by a well known actor that really brings all the pieces together. And when assembled it shows that in order for there to be order, there has to be temporary chaos to remind people of the horrors of chaos. Without a moment of chaos, order means nothing. It is the same as saying that without the existence of the poor, then there would be no distinction of who is rich or any need to want to do better. The film delves into what these concepts mean and funnels it into a film that literally has the whole world on a train. And on that train that circles the globe, the world is still the same.

Final Thoughts

I'm not going to discuss how I saw this movie. But I'll say that the reason why I had to see this movie through illegal means is because there was no theater anywhere near me that was showing it. And even though there is one in the next city away from me, I'm not willing to drive to a city that is only showing it for limited time in one theater. This contributes to the problem of film piracy and unless the wide release happens then result to any means necessary to see it. It is a great film and I would've gladly contributed my money to it. I will even buy it once it hits the home markets. But for now, if you're lucky enough to have it playing in a theater near you, go see it. For those of us who don't, I should say wait, but knowing the drama behind showing this movie in America: Waiting is no longer an option.

SCORE: 9.5/10 - One of the best Sci-Fi films this year that will never be seen.

The Host (2006) - Analysis and Review

The "JAWS" of Korea, and it is brilliant!

Just as how my review of the Korean film, The Good, The Bad, The Weird, states that a Korean film triumphs with a western adventure blockbuster better than Hollywood, The Host is a triumph in the monster horror adventure film that Hollywood has abandoned. This is the first film I ever saw created by the brilliant director, Bong Joon-Ho. His upcoming film Snowpiercer starring Chris Evans will be making its way to the U.S. soon which looks like another triumph in Korean filmmaking over Hollywood blockbusters. But before that, I must talk about this movies: The HOST.

The Plot

When snack vendor Gang-Du (Song Kang-ho) witnesses his daughter getting taken by a mysterious fish monster, his world goes spiraling out of control as a virus begins to break out in the city shortly after the monsters appearance. Forced into quarantine with his family and several others who first witnessed the monster's rampage, Gang-Du must escape in order to locate the monster that has taken his daughter.

Analysis

The monster movie genre has never really be used to its fullest potential. When JAWS came out, a bunch of imitators have tried to replicate the success. Mainly by just having a ravenous animal attacking people. But that's not so much what made JAWS successful. It was the characters and the need to show restraint of showing the creature. That is what helped Ridley Scott's ALIEN become such a success by following those traits but not trying to copy the exact same story. John Carpenter's The Thing also benefits from this but instead of having restraint in showing the creature, the creatures are shown in full form but can change their appearance making them unpredictable as to where they will be next.

It is a genre that hasn't been tapped into a long time. Sure there have been Godzilla films but nothing like this. If an American studio were to make this a movie, and they had planned on remaking it back when it first came out in 2006, I already know it is going to lack the heart. American audiences are all about the spectacle these days instead of the stories of the characters. I come up with this point due to people preferring to see Godzilla destroying things rather than a human story. So there come stat question of whether to do one or the other? Who is more important? The story of the characters and their development or the rampaging monster on the loose? The answer in this film is both can exist in perfect balance.

Unlike JAWS which showed restraint in revealing the shark, this film does no such thing. It immediately shows the creature, but it makes its entrance into the film memorable. The design is very unique in that usually in giant monster films, the beast is gigantic, but in this one the creature is no bigger than a bus. It is a bold move to show the creature immediately, something that has been done in American monster horror films before but for some reason it did not have the same impact? Why is that? Again. The characters and the story are what matters.

Review

This is how it is done. This is what a monster movie should be. Strong characters: In this case a very lovable yet dysfunctional family that you genuinely believe will do anything to save one of their own.  Strong story: a mysterious monster releases a viral outbreak that has the city in quarantine with a father desperate to get his daughter back from the beast. Strong themes: in this film it may not be apparent to Americans, but this is definitely a direct reaction to an incident involving America and South Korea. To put it simply, Americans are the bad guys. We are indirectly responsible for the creation of the monster, and are directly responsible for taking advantage of the situation in order to have a hold over South Korea. All these elements help elevate this monster movie above and beyond what it is on the surface to something that is truly spectacular.

The cast is brilliant. Song Kang-ho, Byun Hee-bong, Park Hae-il, Bae Doona, and Go Ah-sung are all brilliant in their roles as the dim-wited protagonist, the stern but caring father, the stuck in the glory days brother, the successful yet timid sister and the daughter who fights to survive. This is a family that you wish you were a part of during better times because seeing them at their worst is really heart wrenching. The scene when they believed that the daughter was dead was borderline pulling on heartstrings while also being strangely funny to watch. It is a brilliant balance of how a family can't really stay serious but would try to be funny at appropriate times to make their situation more easier. And in a dark time of not knowing if your daughter is alive in the hands of a literal monster, it really goes to show how strong a small moment of comedy can help bring hope. It is hard to give a standout performance in this film but if there had to be one, then it is by the daughter. Go Ah-sung's performance as the captive daughter was extremely convincing and watching a young girl having to grow up into survivalist was one of the great subplots of the film. She weighs her opportunities for escape while also coming to terms with the fact she may not make it out alive.

The creature in this film is also one of the most smartly designed creatures in a long time. It is ugly. There is nothing cool about it. It is just straight up ugly. And really does resemble what a fish would realistically look like had it been mutated by weird chemicals. The design was to give it various abilities such as running, swimming, climbing, and swinging from high beams with its tail. This is a creature that very much acts like a creature. By nature it just wants to live, and how it lives is by eating people occasionally. One of the best creature moments in the film was when it was outside in clear view with its mouth open just drinking the rain. Usually in monster movies the creature would never do such a thing, but a small moment like that makes it believable that this thing doesn't really care if its seen.

Final Thoughts

Bong's directing and creativity with the film definitely shines. It is one of the best monster movies made in a long time as well as maintaining that blockbuster flavor that has been missing in Hollywood for years. Be on the look out for any movie this guy makes, especially his efforts into big budget Sci-Fi with Snowpiercer. This is a film that will make one believe that the monster movie blockbuster is alive again. Whether or not we'll see another monster movie with such powerful storytelling and an original creature remains to be seen. Gareth Edwards' Godzilla comes close yet lacks the powerful narrative or originality that this film has. It can be done. This film proves it.

SCORE: 9/10 - The Korean monster movie blockbuster that trumps modern American efforts

The Good, The Bad, The Weird - Analysis and Review

The best American Adventure film...that's not even American

The western is a genre that has evolved or taken hold in other genres. The very nature of a genre is that it can either morph or merge into another one. Which brings up the adventure genre. What happened to it? Where did it go? When did the fun of the western and the adventure die? Was it with Captain Jack Sparrow? Was it with the sad attempt of making The Lone Ranger a Pirates of the Caribbean on land? Or did it truly die with Kingdom of the Krystal Skull? Maybe in America, but not in Korea.

The Plot

It is the 1930s in Manchuria. "The Bad" (Lee Byung-hun) and his gang raid a train transporting a Japanese official to acquire a map. On board the train, "The Weird" (Song Kang-ho) attempts a one man robbery and "acquires" a map from a Japanese official. The two outlaws collide on board the train only to draw the attention of a bounty hunter aka "Th Good." Everything that can possibly happen in a western becomes even more ballistic with "The Weird" thrown into the mix as the roaring chase for the map is on!

Analysis

I always thought to myself that I'd love to see a western film done like this. I just never expected it to be from Korea. There is no denying that when it comes to quality films, they are definitely up there in terms of out doing films here in the States. It also amazes me how a genre that is known for being an American one easily outdoes Gore Verbinski's feature film adaptation of The Lone Ranger. Granted, Verbinski did make an excellent swashbuckler trilogy with Pirates of the Caribbean as well as a highly entertaining CG animated western with ILM's Rango, so come my shock to see something that is inevitably a long drawn out mess. Even more surprising is how it took me one bored day at home to watch this on Netflix and I'm still in disbelief of how well done it is. I don't really have some grand analysis for this so let me just go straight to the review!

Review

This is one of the most exhilarating movies I've seen in a long time. From the title I assumed it was going to be some sad parody of the Western Epic starring Clint Eastwood. What I discovered was pure magic. As I've raved over and over in this article, this is one of the best western adventure films I've seen in a long time. It is ridiculously entertaining with outlandish characters who don't appear to be too outlandish given the setting and the time. Director Kim Jee-woon crafted a very well balanced western adventure film that references the serious Sergio Leone epics but with the flair of a Steven Speilberg romp. It has given me my second exposure to actor Song Kang-ho who I previously saw in the creepy Korean vampire flick, Thirst. 

Song's character Yoon Tae-goo aka "The Weird" is one of the most lovable outlaws I've seen onscreen in a long time. He is weird but not Johnny Depp weird. I like how he is partially smart and partially naive but never so far out that he becomes too much of a cartoon character. He was just the right amount of weird to bring life to "The Weird."

On the serious side, or at least they try to be serious when in the presence of "The Weird," are Lee Byung-hun as Park Chang-yi aka "The Bad" and Jung Woo-sung as Park Do-wan aka "The Good." Lee Byung-hun's Park resembles a modern Korean gangster, yet at the same time the image seems to be completely at home in the Western genre. He plays the cold and calculating outlaw with great finesse. His motives appear straight forward but really there is more to what drives him than one might believe. Then on the good side, and a very loose definition of good, Jung Woo-sung's Park was an obvious homage to Clint Eastwood's Man with No Name but with some devil-may-care trait of Harrison Ford's Indiana Jones. For a guy who is suppose to be "The Good" of the story he does come off more as an anti-hero rather than a straight up hero. He plays it the way a shark would, in that it knows its prey and it will keep pursuing as long as there is blood in the water. He utilizes every chance that he gets in order to pursue his target, even if it means teaming up with "The Weird."

Enough about the cast though. The story is straight forward. If you've seen The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly there are some similarities but trust me when I say this: IT IS NOT A REMAKE!. This is an original film that borrows elements from several recognizable western films and the dangerous stunts from the original Indiana Jones trilogy to create something that is completely exhilarating. This is how a blockbuster western film should be done. Every single aspect about this movie just screams American blockbuster, only better. It is such a wonderfully fun film that I enjoyed every single minute of it. Sure there are some problems, mostly with the character development being very weak but it really is a minor problem. Also, most of the effects in this film are PRACTICAL! There may be some CGI but as far as I know there isn't many. It makes the danger feel more real and brings back the exhilaration that has been lost from action films in a long time. This is one of the most fun films I've seen. It is currently streaming on Netlfix now but if you don't have Netflix, go rent it to decide if you want to buy it. 

Final Thoughts

If Korea is capable of making a western adventure film without over blown CGI, then why not Hollywood? I'll never know, but till that day comes I'll be enjoying the hell out of this film. This is one of the best fun westerns I've seen in a long time. Go see this movie!

SCORE: 8.9/10 - The fun western you wished The Lone Ranger would be