In Capitalist Realism, Mark Fisher says "[inter-passive films] perform our anti-capitalism for us, allowing us to continue to consume with impunity." Today, the UN released a code red climate change report, warning of "extreme" and "unprecedented" impact. I looked at it, liked a couple of Marxist memes about it, then went on with business as usual. Sure, all that is solid melts into air— but it seems like late stage capitalism is really, really, really solid, and no amount of Chris Evans movies will change that.
The politics of Snowpiercer are placed front and center; they are ambitious, valiant, even radical in nature. According to reddit user [deleted] from 7 years ago, "The revolution was operating within the guidelines of the establishment (whether they knew that or not). The true revolution came at the end when they blasted the door. They broke down the establishment." So not only does Bong Joon-ho recognize that much of today's so called "revolutionary" reform is simply a maintenance of the system, but also that true liberation cannot be achieved within the confines of said system; we have to jump off the train. But at the end of the day, it's still a movie, starring Chris Evans (worth 80mil), produced by Harvey Weinstein (once worth 300mil), and streamed by Netflix (worth 39bil). How revolutionary, how disruptive to the social order, how mass-mobilizing could it possibly be?
However, it would be unfair to judge a Hollywood movie by its impact on proletarian revolution; this film may be significantly messy, but it's charming enough that you won't mind overlooking that.
The cast gives performances that aren't just great but also ones that I wouldn't expect from them; in my head Chris Evans is the face of romanticized American imperialism but he truly had me sold with the whole vanguard bit, and I didn't even realize Tilda Swinton was Tilda Swinton. For once, I loved the excess gore, because it was done right— instead of some completely unlikeable protagonist killing everyone in their wake for some selfish personal vendetta *cough* Tarantino *cough*, we got to witness an entire oppressed class fight for their dignity— seeing the masses fight back was exhilarating, cathartic, had me on the edge of my seat. The set design is immaculate and so is the lighting, both creating an atmosphere that is truly enchanting. There are a lot of really striking allegorical moments: the insects in the protein blocks, the ominous educational songs, the Soma-esque drugs, the child labour, etc. Curtis' cannibalism monologue towards the end was not only emotionally jarring but also allowed earlier plot points click into place, tying things up in a way that felt satisfying and subtle. Overall, this movie is just really, really fun.
But even within the realm of indulgent cinema, it is irresponsible to frame revolutions as the culmination of the genius dedication of a single outstanding individual; this film would've been much, much more impactful had it followed a multiple protagonist structure, each handing off the torch to the next, each highlighting a unique aspect of class oppression. To be fair, I doubt that movie could've been made, so there's that. Also, the plot holes (where did they get a tiny coat for Tim?) are significant, and Chris Evan's makeup is horrible; who approved that?
Comments
Post a Comment