Snowpiercer, besides Wall-E was the movie I enjoyed the most (eat your heart out Melancholia). We talked a lot about perspective this semester, and I think the basis of this movie is perspective. The world aboard the train was created from one man’s perspective on life, the all-knowing, genius psychopath, WILFORD. Note the sarcasm. Side note, for the amount of times they said his name in the movie, one would think that I’d remember that one detail, but I didn’t and used the truly all-knowing creature, google. So Wilford’s a psycho, a role typical for Ed Harris the control freak, but Snowpiercer’s plot flips this idea on it’s head as Curtis puts on display his side of the train. Basically, Curtis becomes the center of attention, displaying the movie from his perspective, while the whole time Wilford is pulling the strings like a puppeteer. MIND F***.
Imagination is another hot topic for discussion, and with good reason. All of these movies we’ve watched are the eations of people’s imaginations, with little, if any, factual backing. So our imaginations are put to work when watching these movies because other people’s imaginative creations and ideas are shoved down our throats as if these are our futures. Again, I want to bring Ed Harris up again because to me, he’s an extension of person writing the film. I’m not saying that the author or creator really believes in this future, but he/she appeals to our senses as a way to make money and express themselves. Am I calling the writer a psycho? Maybe so, but what we do know is that Curtis is really grinding to destroy the imagination and creation of the author, and he succeeds (good for him). But this calls into question: does this writer see Curtis as the enemy of his creative thoughts? Or does he know that Wilford’s ideas truly are insane and Curtis is doing good no matter what?
P.S. maybe give the writer (Bong Joon-ho) a call sometime