You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Originally I thought the concept of a television show about Snowpiercer would be a bad idea. I still do but this is better than I thought it would be. Where does the series go?Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I wanted to give this new series a few episodes before chiming in for forming my own opinion. "Snowpiercer" is based off of the 2013 masterpiece South Korean film co-written and directed by Oscar winner Bong Joon Ho (wow: it feels awesome to be able to refer to him as Oscar-winning Director!) that starred Chris Evans as a lowest-class resident struggling for survival one a constantly-in-motion super-train that continuously circles the globe after earth's climate is decimated to the point of zero survivability due to deep-freeze. Also starring in the sci-fi film that's a metaphor for class warfare is Tilda Swinton as a high-level employee of the train, tasked with maintaining some semblance of order: via a private army. John Hurt, Octavia Spenser, & Kang-ho Song round out a superb supporting cast of lowest-class stowaway colleagues of Evans, bent on revolution; Ed Harris makes a great 3rd Act appearance as the owner/operator of the train, Mr. Wilford.To say that this is a great film is a gross understatement: it has an inventive visual style that makes audiences FEEL the cramped confinement of living at the back of a train in dingy squalor, and has some incredibly awesome fight scenes (the mostly-dark ax-fight is TOP NOTCH on every level!).But to further talk about the greatness of the original film, based off of a French graphic novel called Le Transperceneige, would be to likely call attention to the seeming shortcomings of "Snowpiercer" the series: or at least the shortcomings of the initial couple of episodes.The series kicks off with a bang: high tension right from the get-go. We get a glimpse of backstory, where humans tried to stave off global warming climate change by cooling the environment chemically, or with some bomb or other such mumbo-jumbo: things of course go wrong, the atmosphere and climate are seemingly permanently damaged, and the earth goes into a deep freeze relatively quickly (I presume: I don't think there's a time-table stated in the first couple episodes). We see our main character, Daveed Diggs as Andre, try to jump onto the end tail of Snowpiercer, the luxury train meant to keep the rich ticket-buyers safe indefinitely while the rest of humanity is lost. We immediately see Snowpiercer security measures act to remove the stowaways from the train by throwing them off: an act that means quick certain death. The editing of these early scenes filled me with dread, and the premise of "isolate yourselves from the outside world or risk death" while living in the age of a pandemic wasn't lost on me at the time. Quickly the series jumps a bit in the future, with the folks in the bake, known as "tailies," plotting a revolution. We see Andre as the level-headed planning type, giving us the impression that he's always thinking about the next steps ahead.The show has relatively solid casting in the lead rolls. In addition to "Hamilton" original cast member and "Blackish" guest star Diggs, we have the other side of the power/class coin with Jennifer Connelly's Melanie. Melanie is the employee, the polished high-up socialite who's the Head of Hospitality: charged with keeping everything in order and tending to all the passengers, but especially the incredibly rich most of all. I mean, Connelly is certainly no substitute for Tilda Swinton (note: literally no one on our plain of existence is), and Diggs is a different character than Chris Evans': they're an incredibly rough, broad analogue to each other from a basic premise standpoint, but no more.But while casting is solid, so far the premise is kind of head scratching. We almost immediately change things up radically and move to a police procedural. See, part of why the revolution that Andre helped plot ends abruptly is because he's enlisted to solve a murder. So...the awesome metaphor about class warfare quickly turns into a murder mystery? To be honest, I was barely engaged in the mystery by the end of the 1st ep, and by the end of the 2nd I was mostly over it. It's not something I care much about, mostly because there are a hundred murder master series out there I can stream now that are infinitely better at being murder mysteries. I'm personally hoping that this mystery gets wrapped up sooner than later: preferably by or before the halfway mark of the season. I'm really hoping that the writers & show-runner are using that premise as a springboard to introduce the logistics of the train, class stuff, characters, struggles & sins, etc. and once we're sufficiently in-the-loop (see what I did there!) with the ins & outs of things, we can move on to bigger and better situations.After the tension of the pilot episode, the pace seemed significantly slower 2nd ep. This was a huge detriment for me, as it made the weaknesses of the series even more glaring. We get some requisite background of Andre: nothing that really breaks new ground. We start to see the scale of the train, and that shines light on more problems:* the scale of it all feels 'off.' The original film was shot fairly dimly lit, in smaller and confined sets that felt like legit train cars spatially. Take something like DAS BOOT, or U-571: films that take place on a submarine during war. You feel the claustrophobia of the confined quarters, you feel the 'heat' rise during moments of stress, etc. "Snowpiercer" the series mostly lacks this for the most part. Even scenes in the Tail of the train are made to kind of look tight, with bunks stacked above and real close to one another, but it never feels exceptionally tight. The series goes for the easy contrast of "the lower your class, the darker and more closed-in the space; the higher your class, the brighter and wide-open the space" which is fine but feels a bit too on-the-nose. And also gives the show a feeling of TV cheapness.* pacing is also a concern. We start off great, and then move into the murder mystery. I dig the peaks (so far) of the class differences, and talks of revolution and keeping control, etc: all things that resonate with modern culture. This shows seems to not really be a murder mystery type of show, but is following those tropes from the beginning. It better be leading to something cooler, opening up the world more, etc. or it's going to run out of steam quick. Also, the 'procedural' isn't even handled very well: not much more than merely "perfunctory." The writers are jumping into this world by serving us a mystery about a serial killeroperating on board the train who has been cutting off men's genitals & keeping them as trophies. Yes, you read that right. It's almost like the show runners weren't sure how to fill 10 hours (20, if you include the fact that this series had a Season 2 green lit before Comic-Con 2019) so they figured "why not a mystery?!" There's even the 'police procedural TV trope of the hard-ass sergeant' being filled by a head of security type on the train who's constantly giving Andre guff!* plausibility questions abound, beyond the obvious ones. Like, I can shrug off "how the heck did a corporation build track that circles the globe while in the middle of a deep freeze the killed off billions of humans: especially all of the oceans?!" But we have questions like, "how do employees make the 5-mile trek from tail to front engine in short time with ease? How are characters like Andre in such good shape while living years in squalor w/out sunlight, exercise, or nutrition?! There are others but I've chosen to ignore for now, hoping the show improves enough from to not dwell on logic on a show who's mere premise dictates I ignore logic.* the movie used the train as a horrific metaphor while the series tries hard to make you think "this is real." And it doesn't really come close to accomplishing this reality for me thanks to the above issues I have* Connelly's character Maleanie isn't exactly a different take on Swinton's Mason so much as an unimaginative one (so far). The first two episodes have somehow expertly crafted a character that's both a fleshed-out version of Mason while also being a far-less nuanced version (and less interesting). I at lest look forward to seeing where her character goes forward, and I have faith in Connelly as an actress to make a compelling character.Now there is some promise. Like I said, I will follow Marquis de Lafayette/Thomas Jefferson...er, Daveed Diggs...to great distances since he's a commanding actor; Jennifer Connelly has potential too. As I said, if writers are using the mystery as a narrative device to introduce us to the characters and cars that permeate Snowpiercer, then the mystery is forgivable. I'm fearing, now at least, that we'll instead learn that translating SNOWPIERCER to the small screen was every bit as bad as its problematic 5-year development implies: one that lost its original show-runner, pilot director, and even network. I really want to like this series , but I guess at this point I'd give this an incredibly lukewarm reception with hope of improvement.Has anyone else seen this? What do you all think: am I thinking too hard here, about right, or should I just shut up and watch SNOWPIERCER for the umpteenth time?
I have a friend who's a TV critic who has seen the whole season, and he's not a big fan (though admits nothing would likely be able to match the intense greatness of the film), though he did confirm that the murder mystery DOES wrap up around the half-way point at least. Maybe this series is just taking a loooooong time setting up characters, situations, etc. (note: I'm not fan of a series treading water, certainly not in its first season)
After seeing the film a couple of times, I, too was excited for a series. Ugh. I do not like the lead character at all, so it is tough finding empathy or connection for him and his actions. However, after reading some of the posts here, I will at least finish the second episode! 🤣😂
I've watched all 3 shows so far, but I'm still not sold on it.No judgement here, but I'm curious about what you don't like about the lead character. I'm not drawn to him either.
I am rewatching the first episode and here is what I feel. He has a very flat affect. I do not believe he is truly feeling most of the lines he is delivering. I get that he is a kind of leader of the tail group. I wouldn't follow him across the aisle, let alone to possible destruction. I see no cleverness, no fire. Acting tough. Weak as soggy toast. Blah. For me, that closes it.His accent, too. What is that?...And...this is no fault of his...I have dreads, and his fake dreads are waaaaay fake. Haha fake. ;DSoooo....I like him even less on this rewatch. Send him back to the tail!
I suspect that this series is taking a while to set up it's characters. I'm giving this series a chance and I am settling in to enjoy the storyline. Even though it is a little spoilerish, knowing that the murder mystery will end mid season is good news for me. Also, when I tried to find out if there was a voice actor associated with the "Wilford" character, yes I know that Mel is in charge and appears to the "Wilford" alter ego, there is a big secret as to who he is in the series. In my search for an answer, I learned that there seems to be or already is a season 2 in the can.
I watched the season finale of Snowpiercer last night. I don't want to put out spoilers. I found it to be very exciting and a great lead in for season 2.