‘Snowpiercer’ a wasted two hours

Based on Ken Hanke’s raving five-star review [“Snowpiercer,” July 9, Xpress], we saw the new movie Snowpiercer.

Having endured the two-hour farce, I can only surmise Hanke is enjoying either payola or powerful psychoactive drugs.

This was one of those movies that was so unapologetically bad that it was almost good. It was good in the sense of it entertaining via the many laughable absurdities provided for any mildly astute viewer. Here are a few examples:

1. Our hero Curtis and his partner Gillian begin their siege of the train and find themselves faced with a car load of hooded, ax-wielding goons, and he turns to Gillian and utters in all seriousness,  “Be careful.” This, sadly, was not tongue in cheek.

2. A little further on when the mayhem is at full throttle, Curtis does a Three Stooges pratfall on a dead fish, a plot device introduced earlier that is totally disconnected from the thin plot.

And 3. Nearing completion of his mission, Curtis attempts to explain the motivation for his selfless heroics with a rambling story of his early days after civilization collapsed: “They were going to eat the baby, but then a man cut off his own arm and said, ‘Eat this instead.’ Soon other people were cutting off arms and legs to save the baby. … I’ve never seen anything like that before.”

Well, let’s hope not, people!  And we as the audience are supposed to take such drivel seriously! I won’t even describe the ending, not to avoid a spoiler, but because I was left speechless and still can’t find the words to portray such inanity.

Snowpiercer screams for a return of the brilliant and sadly forgotten Mystery Science Theater 3000. The movie would provide a rich mine of laughable moments deserving their trademark witty derision.

 Unfortunately, Hanke cannot return the two hours of my life I’d like back that I wasted on this movie, but I feel it his moral obligation to reimburse to me the admission price as well as to other viewers who feel as duped as I.

Terry Barham
About Letters
We want to hear from you! Send your letters and commentary to letters@mountainx.com

Before you comment

The comments section is here to provide a platform for civil dialogue on the issues we face together as a local community. Xpress is committed to offering this platform for all voices, but when the tone of the discussion gets nasty or strays off topic, we believe many people choose not to participate. Xpress editors are determined to moderate comments to ensure a constructive interchange is maintained. All comments judged not to be in keeping with the spirit of civil discourse will be removed and repeat violators will be banned. See here for our terms of service. Thank you for being part of this effort to promote respectful discussion.

8 thoughts on “‘Snowpiercer’ a wasted two hours

    • Marcianne

      Ha! I guess not! Like you, Ken, I loved the movie. Beautiful, weird, violent and subversive.
      Marcianne Miller, film critic, Bold Life magazine.

    • sally sefton

      I know this was a year ago, but I am just seeing it.
      “Payola and psychoactive drugs.” What a grand life you must be living. How does one get “payola” from writing a review? I want to find out how this works so I can look into becoming a critic.

      If I do, I will keep some coins handy to refund anyone who feels I MADE them spend their money on a film or a play that they didn’t find worthy.

      • Ken Hanke

        I have heard about critics being “bought” for years, but I’ve never seen any actual evidence of it. That said, if you do find out, let me know. I may want a piece of this action.

  1. SamHunt

    This person is clearly a waste of space anyways. Who believes in the “moral obligation” for critics to reimburse the cost of admission if they don’t like the movie? Can you imagine a world in which consumers can just get reimbursed for anything they claim to not like? Ugh. Some people are so hellbent on being stupid they’ll say anything to feel self-important.

    • Ken Hanke

      Even theaters won’t reimburse you if you watch the whole movie. Most use the halfway point as the cut-off.

  2. Dionysis

    It is pretty absurd and brazen to expect a film reviewer to “refund” someone’s ticket cost; art of any kind is largely subjective anyway. That the complainer didn’t care for the film is fine, but it takes either monumental gal or fuzzy thinking to claim someone has a “moral obligation” to reimburse someone because they had a different take.

    The writer shows no moral obligation to avoid spoilers. Hey, come to think of it, since he spoiled the movie for me, how about paying me for ruining the experience, as well as others so impacted? Seems every bit as reasonable as asking Ken to pony up.

  3. Edwin Arnaudin

    The first two examples of “laughable absurdities” are such minor moments and the third appears to be an inability to accept desperate measures taken in dire circumstances because they don’t line up with normal civilized human behavior.

Leave a Reply

To leave a reply you may Login with your Mountain Xpress account, connect socially or enter your name and e-mail. Your e-mail address will not be published. All fields are required.