Author's Note: Please see this film. If you are planning to see this film do not read any further as this review will contain major spoilers. The power of this film and its storytelling is contingent on knowing as little about the film as possible. Here is the trailer:
Once you have seen the film, I encourage you to read the review.
INTRODUCTION
Being the cinephile that I am, I am always looking for a film to watch and appreciate. Since I have exhausted most of my desired films currently playing in most mainstream cinema, and I refuse to watch a three hrs explosive set piece designed by Michael Bay (whom I've deemed War of the four horsemen of the film apocalypse), I turned my attention to other possibilities. In my search, I started to notice a lot of positive buzz around Snowpiercer, a sci-fi Dystopian film by South Korean director Joon-ho Bong (based on a French Cartoon) originally released in 2013 that had just recently made it to the US in limited release. With sci-fi dystopia being one of my favorite genres, I was just hoping to be entertained (even though the critical acclaim had me hopeful for more). But what I got was a film that deals with a lot of social issues in a sociological way. Seeing threads of, Marx's proletarian revolution, Weber's Iron Cage, Totalitarian propaganda and population control this films gives the audience a deeply rich story about the human condition, that should not be missed.
PLOT
2014; in an attempt to curb global warming Countries around the world unite to release chemical CW-7 into the upper atmosphere. The result is a new ice age that wipes out all life on earth. 2031: the last surviving remnants of humanity live on a train that is in perpetual motion around the globe. The train is separated into an elaborate caste system, based upon the type of ticket passengers had when they first boarded. Those with first class tickets live towards the front of the train and those that had 3rd class tickets or were free riders live at the end of the train. Feeling the pain of the social and economic stratification caused by living at the end of the train, Curtis (Chris Evans) decides to lead a revolt. As he and his fellow band of rebels (Including John Hurt, Octavia Spencer and Jaime Bell) move through each compartment, getting closer to the fabled "eternal engine", they are faced with horrific realities that test their mission, their morality, motivations and mortality.
GENERAL ANALYSIS
One the best compliments that I can give this film is that it is not American made. Therefore, it does not fall into some of the same tropes and plot traps that a lot of genre films that are produced written and directed in the US often succumb. The American film structure, especially within the genre of Sci-fi fantasy has a certain structure and character moments that are often repeated which, for a fan often gets boring and predictable. Snowpiercer, sets up a number of these tropes, but just when you thought you knew the character(s) their motivations and future actions, the film reveals something in the narrative that changes the audience outlook on the film, causing them to reassess. The ending of the film goes beyond what we would typically expect from Hollywood, and that is always a breath of fresh air, and a welcomed change of pace.
SOCIOLOGICAL ANALYSIS
Themes
Marxism
It is quite clear from the promotional trailers, screen caps and descriptions of this film that the aforementioned caste system and subsequent revolt is reminiscent of the proletarian revolution Karl Marx envisioned in his most famous work. In the film, the class distinctions on the train (at least at the beginning) mirror the class struggles between Marx's bourgeoisie and the proletariat. Those in the front of the train represent the bourgeoisie ( their figure heads being played by the ever brilliant Tilda Swinton and Ed Harris) and those at the back of the train represent the proletariat.
Those in the front of the train speak of their position as one of divinity not of privilege; even to the point where some of the bourgeoisie characters try to empathize with the proletariat; bemoaning that their position is not without its sacrifices. Those living in the tail end of the train represent the proletariat, and the impoverished. Even though the adults in the tail end of the train are not described or shown to be workers on the train ( doing maintenance, or food service for the bourgeoisie), it is clear, given the conditions that they live in, that all they own is their bodies, and they have only their labor power to sell.
Another Marxian aspect in this class distinction is in the use of families. Marx believed that the family unit was important to Capitalism because it was a space to recreate the labor force: First, in giving those current workers a space for rest and recuperation before and after work. Second, allowing for a space to have children who will eventually replace the adults in the labor force as they age. As the film progresses, the audience realizes that the only reason that the tail-end proletariats are allowed to live is because they provide more children (because sex is fun and cheap) to be used as labor on the (manual running) train.
Thirdly, there is also a Marxian stratification of resources among the front end of the train and the tail end. While the front end of the train dines on Sushi, fresh water, vegetables and fruits and real meat. The tail-end proletariats however, were reduced to cannibalism.
"I hate that I know what human flesh tastes like, and that babies taste best."- Curtis
After the first month without food, the passengers in the tail end began eating their fellow (weaker) passengers, and babies. To curb this practice, people started willingly gave up body parts so that everyone could survive. This is an extreme version of communist solidarity. However, once the bourgeoisie was alerted to this practice they began manufacturing protein bars that are fed to the proletariat (to keep the worker working); its ingredients we learn are all of the unsavory bits of protein found on the train...reminiscent of soylent green.
Weber's Iron Cage
As the film reaches its ideological climax, the proposed Marxian revolution that the audience has been invested in throughout the most of the movie, is revealed to be part of an elaborate bureaucratic process of population control. Every few years, "government" moles in the tail end of the train fuel the fires of rebellion getting the workers to revolt. The subsequent casualties on both sides (although the ruiling body always makes sure that their are more losses for the proletariat) maintains the population so that the train will continue. This added system of control reminds me of one of the overall messages of The Matrix Trilogy.
What Snowpiercer and The Matrix Trilogy have in common is the inclusion and interpretation of Max Weber's Iron Cage of Rationality. Being a (some what) contemporary of Marx, Weber concluded that the proletarian revolution that Marx saw as inevitable (due to his faith that people would be fed up and demand social change) was never going to happen. This was because Weber understood that people were regulated by a bureaucracy which not only dehumanized, disenchanted and controlled people but trapped them in what C. Wright Mills called "Private Orbits" unable to see anything or desire anything outside of their own limited perspective leading to complacency and a maintenance of the Bureaucratic order.
Other, more contemporary scholars like George Ritzer have added that this maintenance of complacency requires distraction, a way to focus attention away from the plight of the oppressed or from their own circumstances in order to quell revolution and revolt. This is nothing new. In ancient Rome they had the coliseum, In present day United States we have social media, and endless types of pop cultural entertainment that spans, multi-media platforms. If we spend as much money on these distractions as we did on fighting homelessness, poverty or disease all of these social problems would be eradicated.
In SnowPiercer, there are two main types of distractions used by those in power. The first is a socialized system of propaganda that deifies Wilford ( Ed Harris) the creator of the train forcing children to watch brainwashing videos that reinforce stereotypes as well as recite mantras that invoke fear of leaving the train. This aspect of the film is paralleling both the regimes of North Korea and China in the way they present their leaders and censor information.
The second type of distraction that those in power uses in the film is hope itself. Ritzer, Weber, and Mills knew (and their work is a testament to this notion) that one way to keep people under control is to give them the illusion of choice and the illusion of freedom and free will. Just as we have the illusion of choice in our own entertainment (which is presented and packaged and controlled by only 6 companies), and other commodities through manufacturing desire, in the film the desire for revolution is similarly manufactured and controlled. Thus, like the other illusions, the revolution in the film (being a part of the system) doesn't change anything. Ironically, the first non coerced choice that is made in the film, is what leads to the ultimate demise of the train and almost everyone on board. But leaves enough for life to start again.
CONCLUSION
This is a deep, well crafted, thought provoking and entertaining film. It is a premise that lends itself to rich sociological analysis ( as you can see). I assumed that a film with this premise to be "believable" there would have to be some human rights abuses and a fair share of atrocities...and I got that in spades. This movie is so powerful for me because it takes the very real types of inequality, and difficult social problems we see in our contemporary society (from war, to classism, poverty hunger, terrorism, drug addiction, and genocide) and takes them to an extreme for the fantastical situation presented. This is what good science fiction/fantasy is supposed to do; take relatable problems and social issues and present them in a different way for the purposes of entertainment, but more importantly as an allegory. This is the brilliance of Snowpiercer, a film that should at least be appreciated (if you hate it or the genre) and at most celebrated as an important contribution to film and social analysis.
