Snowpiercer: Is revolution the answer to society’s ills?
Snowpiercer, a 2013 Bong Joon Ho film that explores class struggle, forces us to reflect on power. The film, which is easily in my top five action-thriller films of all time, does not explore the raw human reaction to class as Bong Joon Ho did in the Oscar-winning Parasite but instead explores the system as a whole. While there are so many things that the movie explored, we’ll focus on how Bong Joon Ho views power and systems.
WARNING: SPOILERS AHEAD
In a post-apocalyptic frozen world, what’s left of humanity is in a train called Snowpiercer. The train, invented by a man named Wilford (Ed Harris), is divided into different sections. The tail section lives in hunger and experience violence from those in the front sections, while the front section lives in comfort, extravagance, and hedonism. The movie follows Curtis (Chris Evans) and the people from the tail section as they make their way to the front to confront Wilford and take control of the “life-giving” engine. Early on in the movie, we also get introduced to Namgoong (Song Kang Ho) and his daughter Yona (Go Ah Sung), who helps Curtis and his people open the gates to the front sections of the train.
The society in the train is like a mirror to today’s societies and societies throughout history. The dynamics in our society, especially today, are usually seen through a power lens, whether it’s about class relations, race relations, patriarchy, or other social facets. The oppressed, like those in the tail section of the movie, rightly demand more freedom and equity. Revolutions seem inevitable especially viewed from the lens of power dynamics. The oppressed would eventually rise and take power, turning de facto to de jure.
While revolutions throughout history seemingly result in a more equitable society, they still fail to provide solutions to society’s problems. The French Revolution took power from the monarchy to the people but also gave way to the reign of terror; the American Revolution led to the self-governance of the Colonies, but it was also built on slavery; the Bolshevik Revolution took power from the Romanovs but continued to violate a multitude of human rights of its people. Somehow, these revolutions that were too focused on power, end up being the beast they wanted to kill.
At the ending of the movie, it is revealed that Curtis’ journey from the tail to the engine was orchestrated by Wilford. Curtis’ revolution would end with him gaining control of the engine. He would have to take over the train, maintaining the “balance” and the “pre-ordained positions” within the train. He would perpetuate the system he has been fighting.
Isn’t this the danger of the many ideologies in our society today? Many of the “isms” that we have use power as a lens to view society and solve society’s problems. But the question is, what happens once power is reversed? Would we be in a better society? Or would we just be running the same engine, just with different people in power?
The ending of the film provides us with another perspective. Namgoong breaks the linearity of the movie and points to the outside of the train. He understood that the outside world might no longer hold all death but could have life — a life better than inside the train. Initially resistant to the idea, Curtis gives Namgoong the match to blow up the door leading to the outside after finding out how the “life-giving” engine works — a mechanism that he does not want to perpetuate.
We are all born within the system of the world today. Like Curtis, we only see the linearity of the world. We only see left or right, front or backward. But perhaps, instead of just viewing the world in terms of power relations, instead of just perpetuating the system, there is a third way. It could be that the liberal democratic and capitalistic system is not the end of history and neither is authoritarian communism. But we must force ourselves to look outside of the system, break the false perspective of either front or backward.
Yet, even this third way may not be what we hope. In the film, only Yona and the child Timmy survives the explosion. Namgoong was correct that there is life outside the train. But it remains unclear whether life outside the train is better than when the train was running. After seeing the film, I found myself asking whether this life is better for Yona and Timmy. The emotions and faces of the characters were not of hope but confusion and uncertainty.
Such is the reality of the human condition as has been explored throughout history. In the book of Exodus, after the Israelites were freed from slavery, they started to blame Moses for taking them out of Egypt. Being a slave was better than the hunger and thirst in their journey to the Promised Land. Even if we find another system for our world, we do not know how to perceive it. Life may not be necessarily better in this new system.
Like Curtis, we are stuck with a choice. We could continue operating the “life-giving” engine of the world and put up with its necessary injustices, or we could go out of the train full of the uncertainty of our fate. Perhaps, the world, like in the film, has no true happy ending. Maybe revolutions are not the answer to society’s ills but could lead the way to uncertainty. And maybe uncertainty is the only thing better than our societies of today.
All image copyright to belong to the distributor of the film, the publisher of the film or the graphic artist.
