Discussion 15

Having read the description of Snowpiercer on Netflix before actually seeing it in class, I was skeptical as to whether or not this film was for me. The movie itself was just as ridiculous as it sounded, but in a glorious and unforgettable way that was entirely new to me. The film seemed to run the gamut of emotions that are possible, and still maintain a cohesive storyline (as far as such a heavily stylized film can). I was very impressed.
The heavily Korean theme of revolution and distrust of authority pervades throughout and allows for the plot to develop rather quickly and effectively. Snowpiercer was much more than just a Korean genre film, and had many intellectual undertones. Weinstein was probably worried that this would push away much of the American audience who, if you can infer from Weinstein’s stance, were either not interested in intellectuality or would not even understand it. If Weinstein had been able to get his hands on Snowpiercer a fundamental aspect of this film would have been lost.
Much of Korean film is genre based. Snowpiercer falls in line with the dystopian science fiction genre, and is the result of an attempt to solve global warming once and for all. The irony of this is striking, and is mirrored in the plot of the film itself. Curtis attempts to lead a revolution that will theoretically save his people from their squalid conditions, only to find out that this revolution was doomed to fail from the beginning. In both cases, trying to solve a large problem has even larger consequences.