Since from my perspective it's a fable not a hard sci-fi story, I feel there isn't really a requirement for it to obey the criteria of realism in either of the points you mention. The story is at one level no more realistic than Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, so these inconsistencies, at least to my mind, scarely register at all. I'm not saying your points are nit picking, I just feel they're not relevant to the type of story at least as I perceive it, more mythical than grounded.
Regarding the ending, in many ways it resembles the Ursula Le Guin story "The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas" which is about a perfect utopia - which this isn't, by any means, but it at least functions as a society - which is built on the suffering of one child. A magical fable with no pretensions at reality.
When the people of that world know that truth, some walk away and some are content to live in this secretly cruel society. That "walking away" ending is scarcely possible from a speeding train, so by default the ending here has to be what it is. Once the terms of the world are set up, only complete destruction of the train-world can suffice for a moral-fable outcome. So again, it works perfectly as political-social fable, not in any way as a realistic story.
I read the article, but I think this is stretching it. There are similarities between the two films, I'll grant you that, but that doesn't make one the sequel of the other. Too far-fetched for me. With that way of thinking, you could probably weave links between tons of films and claim that X is a sequel of Z when they had nothing to do with each other. It's just wishful thinking IMHO.
I get what you're saying, and it's a fair point, but I'd argue every fiction is, to some extent, beyond the realm of realism and there is always room for some leniency. I do expect some level of credibility though. That said, I do feel like those are fairly minor points. I only mentioned them because it did bug me a little bit during my viewing. The ending was the main thing that bothered me.
That's an interesting parallel you're drawing with the Omelas story (which I've never read) but I don't think that really works. Because if you look at the timeline, Namgoong talks about blowing up the train before we find out about what's going on with the kids. Unless he already knew about it, but there is no evidence of this being the case--in fact, the only reason he gives for wanting to blow up the train is that he 'thinks' the ice is thawing. Feels a bit thin to me, especially considering what happened to the Frozen Seven.
I would have *loved* if the film had gone in the direction you suggest, I just don't think it did--or at least, not successfully. They should have had that revelation happen before Nam talked about blowing things up. Though note that he states he wanted to do it from the beginning, so a better fix would have been to have him state at some point that he knew about the kids. Which would make sense. Heck, maybe that's the reason he was locked up in the first place--they never explained that.
Missed opportunities IMHO. It's a great film that could have been so much better.
Randomly, I haven’t watched the movie but have seen the TV series on Netflix. First season was good and then not so much. Will need to catch up with the film as lots of folks seem to like it 👍🏼
Since from my perspective it's a fable not a hard sci-fi story, I feel there isn't really a requirement for it to obey the criteria of realism in either of the points you mention. The story is at one level no more realistic than Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, so these inconsistencies, at least to my mind, scarely register at all. I'm not saying your points are nit picking, I just feel they're not relevant to the type of story at least as I perceive it, more mythical than grounded.
Regarding the ending, in many ways it resembles the Ursula Le Guin story "The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas" which is about a perfect utopia - which this isn't, by any means, but it at least functions as a society - which is built on the suffering of one child. A magical fable with no pretensions at reality.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Ones_Who_Walk_Away_from_Omelas
When the people of that world know that truth, some walk away and some are content to live in this secretly cruel society. That "walking away" ending is scarcely possible from a speeding train, so by default the ending here has to be what it is. Once the terms of the world are set up, only complete destruction of the train-world can suffice for a moral-fable outcome. So again, it works perfectly as political-social fable, not in any way as a realistic story.
It's not only just as realistic as Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, it's a potential sequel: https://screenrant.com/snowpiercer-movie-sequel-willy-wonka-theory/
Gosh that's a far-out theory, I must say I never heard that one before.
Or maybe I did and it was hanging in my subconscious?
I read the article, but I think this is stretching it. There are similarities between the two films, I'll grant you that, but that doesn't make one the sequel of the other. Too far-fetched for me. With that way of thinking, you could probably weave links between tons of films and claim that X is a sequel of Z when they had nothing to do with each other. It's just wishful thinking IMHO.
I find it hilarious. Should have added an emoji.
I get what you're saying, and it's a fair point, but I'd argue every fiction is, to some extent, beyond the realm of realism and there is always room for some leniency. I do expect some level of credibility though. That said, I do feel like those are fairly minor points. I only mentioned them because it did bug me a little bit during my viewing. The ending was the main thing that bothered me.
That's an interesting parallel you're drawing with the Omelas story (which I've never read) but I don't think that really works. Because if you look at the timeline, Namgoong talks about blowing up the train before we find out about what's going on with the kids. Unless he already knew about it, but there is no evidence of this being the case--in fact, the only reason he gives for wanting to blow up the train is that he 'thinks' the ice is thawing. Feels a bit thin to me, especially considering what happened to the Frozen Seven.
I would have *loved* if the film had gone in the direction you suggest, I just don't think it did--or at least, not successfully. They should have had that revelation happen before Nam talked about blowing things up. Though note that he states he wanted to do it from the beginning, so a better fix would have been to have him state at some point that he knew about the kids. Which would make sense. Heck, maybe that's the reason he was locked up in the first place--they never explained that.
Missed opportunities IMHO. It's a great film that could have been so much better.
Big fan of this one!
Randomly, I haven’t watched the movie but have seen the TV series on Netflix. First season was good and then not so much. Will need to catch up with the film as lots of folks seem to like it 👍🏼
I'll have to give the show a shot, curious to see how it fares compared to the film.