Snowpiercer 4K 2013 Ultra HD 2160p

Story Movie

The not-too-distant future. 17 years ago, a man-made catastrophe occurred on the planet. Where forests and orchards used to grow, now there is snow and ice, and life is preserved only in a giant train rushing non-stop along the trans-Eurasian highway. In the first cars of the train live the ruling elite, in the last cars - ordinary people. Life in the back of the train resembles a concentration camp - disease, poverty and lawlessness of overseers. It is here that a man rises from among the humiliated and insulted to restore justice.

Review 4K Movie

I was insanely looking forward to the film, but only solely because its director Pong Joon Ho is the creator of one of my favorite films, Memories of Murder.

And here we have Snowpiercer, another dystopian concept set in an icy post-apocalypse.

In general, despite the logical helplessness of the concept with the train, the idea itself and the proposed circumstances I immediately liked. I just initially did not take into account the poorness of the whole idea (and it is delusional), and just took for granted the whole situation, which is quite interesting and symbolic in itself, albeit in isolation from logic. In our case, it has to be seen in isolation from logic, otherwise it all breaks down.

But the fabric of the picture frayed almost from the beginning. Who are all these people? Nominal, cardboard, taken out of context, with virtually no backstory, as characters completely incorporeal and intangible: some young rebel revolutionary, his young and hot comrade, a woman who has lost a child, a wise old man - the conscience of the nation, and so on. And if it were not a movie, but, say, a play, in which, based on the form, everything that happens is a scheme, it would be organic. But here in Snowpiercer, it doesn't work, for it carries no practical purpose, no meaningfulness. So when Evans' character starts talking about eating babies at the end, it's too late for us to get insight. No tears, no compassion.

I had a similar feeling with The Hunger Games, namely a sense of incongruity of elements. The reason is that the particular on-screen action, despite its classic American and European dystopian form, is filled with pure Korean stuff that doesn't mesh with Hollywood. If 'Snowpiercer' were an entirely Korean movie, I wouldn't ask half the questions because I'd take everything as exaltation. Obviously, the spirituality of the East is completely different from the West, with radically different specifics and coloring. It is different on a fundamental, historical level. And when I see Korean actors like Song Kang-ho or Kim Sang-gun gazing mesmerized, I know (or believe) that they are making a decision. And when Chris Evans does the same thing, I think he's being monstrously obtuse.

If you see a crowd of armed men outside the door, and you're clearly not prepared for it, well, close the door back, why be so, I repeat, expressively stupid? But no, here we have a subtle oriental symbolism with a fish gut, so we will stand in a spectacular pause, savor the moment when all existence froze, and here is the catharsis.... And then we lose a bunch of our people. Catharsis is catharsis, but not in this movie.

And here the protagonist Curtis, who looks like a bard from the Grushino festival, with an axe sneaks through colorful discos, saunas, concentrated parody parties of high society, from all sides he is bombarded with all kinds of hedonism and spiritual decay of the inhabitants of the first cars, and he goes from absurdity to absurdity and through absurdity. And it raises first one of my eyebrows, then the other, and then it starts to get tiresome. The anti-utopia and universal overtones fade away and some kind of Zombieland begins, in which it seems like just a moment ago Curtis was the dramatic hero, but five minutes later he becomes Statham, opposed by some thrashy unkillable thug played by a dude (of course!!) from Eastern Europe. Apparently it's a local conductor who persistently chased Curtis around demanding to be charged for his fare. And in the end, such an eclecticism, such a genre mix, which could have been the highlight of the movie, became its grave.

The movie's outcome and moral are trite and very disappointing. Worse than 'Elysium', honestly. I had two versions of the events, one of which I ended up guessing almost completely, and even with details. And the choice of actor for the role of Wilford - this is “Truman” hello. It is immediately clear to the viewer that the train is a model of humanity, resource-balanced, with imitation of natural selection. And it's clear what the protagonist will eventually come to. And the final conversation consists of such simple, ordinary phrases that it is even indecent to listen to from Harris's mouth. No metaphor, no revelation, nothing to catch the ear and the brain.

All this total dystopian absurdity should be brought to perfection, to its logical end, it should be voluminous, and it should be supported by the strongest acting, which is not present here. Yes, you can point out Tilda Swinton, John Hurt in an authentic role, but if you've read articles that say Chris Evans has matured as a dramatic actor, it's too early to tell. At least not in this movie.