The Irony of Fate, or Enjoy Your Bath! (Ironiya sudby, ili S lyogkim parom!)(1975)

Following their annual tradition, a group of friends meet at a banya (a traditional public bath/sauna) in Moscow to celebrate New Year’s Eve. The friends all get very drunk toasting the upcoming marriage of Zhenya Lukashin (Andrei Myagkov) to Galya (Olga Naumenko). After the bath, one of the friends, Pavlik (Aleksandr Shirvindt), has to catch a plane to Leningrad; Zhenya, on the other hand, is supposed to go home to celebrate New Year’s Eve with his fiancée. Both Zhenya and Pavlik pass out. The others cannot remember which of their unconscious friends is supposed to be catching the plane; eventually they mistakenly decide that it is Zhenya and put him on a plane instead of Pavlik. The seatmate helps Zhenya get off the plane in Leningrad. He wakes up in the Leningrad airport, believing he is still in Moscow. He stumbles into a taxi and, still quite drunk, gives the driver his address. It turns out that in Leningrad there is a street with the same nam and with a building at his address which looks exactly like Zhenya’s. The key fits in the door of the apartment with the same number. Inside, even the furniture is nearly identical to that of Zhenya’s apartment. Zhenya is too drunk to notice the differences, and goes to sleep. Later, the real tenant, Nadya Shevelyova (Barbara Brylska), arrives home to find a strange man sleeping in her bed. To make matters worse, Nadya’s fiancé, Ippolit (Yuri Yakovlev), arrives before Nadya can convince Zhenya to get up and leave. Ippolit becomes furious, refuses to believe Zhenya and Nadya’s explanations, and storms out. Zhenya leaves to get back to Moscow but circumstances make him return repeatedly. Nadya wants to get rid of him as soon as possible, but there are no flights to Moscow until the next morning. Thus the two are compelled to spend New Year’s Eve together. At first they continue to treat each other with animosity, but gradually their behavior softens and the two fall in love. In the morning, they feel that everything that has happened to them was a delusion, and they make the difficult decision to part. With a heavy heart, Zhenya returns to Moscow. Meanwhile Nadya reconsiders everything and, deciding that she might have let her chance at happiness slip away, takes a plane to Moscow following Zhenya, easily finding him in Moscow, since their addresses are the same…

“The Irony of Fate, or Enjoy Your Bath!” (Russian: “Ironiya sudby, ili S lyogkim parom!”, literally: The Irony of Fate, or With Good Steam) is a 1976 Soviet romantic comedy television film directed by Eldar Ryazanov. The screenplay was written by Emil Braginsky and Ryazanov, loosely based on the director’s 1971 play “Once on New Year’s Eve”. The film was filmed in 1975 at the Mosfilm Studios. Simultaneously a screwball comedy and a love story tinged with sadness, it is one of the most successful Soviet television productions ever and remains highly popular in modern Russia. The key subplot to this story is the drab uniformity of Brezhnev era russian public architecture. This results in the entire planet being polluted with identical, unimaginative multistory apartment buildings of the sort that can, in fact, be found in every city, town, and suburb across the former Soviet Union. These buildings are uniform right down to the door key of each apartment. The two consecutive episodes of “The Irony of Fate” were originally broadcast by the Soviet central television channel, Programme One, on 1 January 1976, at 18:00. The film was a resounding success with audiences: author Fedor Razzakov recalled that “virtually the entire country watched the show”; the number of viewers was estimated to have been about 100 million. In response to popular demand, the feature had a first re-run on 7 February. By 1978, after several further broadcasts of the picture, the accumulated number of viewers for all of the showings including the first was estimated at some 250 million. A shortened 155 minutes version was released to cinemas on 16 August 1976; it sold some 7 million tickets. The readers of Sovetskii Ekran, the official publication of the State Committee for Cinematography, voted The Irony of Fate as the best film of 1976, and chose Andrey Myagkov as the best actor of the year. In 1977, Ryazanov, Braginsky, cinematographer Vladimir Nakhabtsev, composer Mikael Tariverdiev and actors Barbara Brylska and Myagkov were all awarded the USSR State Prize in recognition of their participation in making the film. George Faraday commented that while it was basically a happy end romantic comedy, The Irony of Fate had a “socially critical undertone”: it could be interpreted as an “explicit commentary… On the soulless uniformity of the Soviet urban landscape”. Simultaneously, however, critics accused the director of creating an escapist film which allowed the Soviet audience to turn away from the “unattractive features” of their country’s reality. Ryazanov responded that “to reassure, to encourage the viewer – it is not such a sin.” He rejected the claims his pictures were meant to please state authorities, stating their optimistic nature was “spontaneous” rather than “forced”. The film is traditionally broadcast in Russia and the former Soviet republics every New Year’s Eve, and is widely regarded as a classic piece of Russian popular culture: Andrew Horton and Michael Brashinsky likened its status to that held by Frank Capra’s 1946 “It’s a Wonderful Life” in the United States as a holiday staple. A sequel, “The Irony of Fate 2”, was released in December 2007, becoming a box office hit and grossing over $55 million to a production budget of $5 million. I was introduced to this wonderful russian film when I was living in Riga/Latvia, and at that time I had no knowledge of this film or the fact that this movie (as well in Latvia) was loved and watched by millions every New Years eve. Yes, it´s truly a classic sort of 70´s screwball comedy, but there´s so much more to it. Love, family, friendship, disappointment, sadness, deception etc and I really like that there´s also a poke at the communistic conformity, but made in a respectful way. Russia is a country that fascinates me and I have had the opportunity to study russian as well during my years in Riga, a quite beautiful language. There´s also several nice songs performed in the movie, but it has as well a great intro song and ending song. And how can you not fall in love with Nadya played by the beautiful polish actress Barbara Brylska. All in all I truly recommend you to see “Ironiya sudby, ili S lyogkim parom!”. (4 out of 5)

 

Brubaker (1980)

In 1969 a mysterious man (Robert Redford) arrives at Wakefield State Prison in Arkansas. As an inmate, he immediately witnesses rampant abuse and corruption, including open and endemic sexual assault, torture, worm-ridden diseased food, insurance fraud and a doctor charging inmates for care. Brubaker eventually reveals himself – during a dramatic standoff involving a deranged prisoner who was being held in solitary confinement – to be the new prison warden to the amazement of both prisoners and officials alike. With ideals and vision, he attempts to reform the prison, with an eye towards prisoner rehabilitation and human rights. He recruits several long-time prisoners, including trustees Larry Lee Bullen (David Keith) and Richard “Dickie” Coombes (Yaphet Kotto), to assist him with the reform. Their combined efforts slowly improve the prison conditions, but his stance inflames several corrupt officials on the prison board who have profited from graft for decades. When Brubaker discovers multiple unmarked graves on prison property, he attempts to unravel the mystery leading to a political scandal…

“Brubaker” is based on the real-life efforts of former prison administrator Thomas O. Murton to reform Tucker and Cummins Prison Farms in Arkansas in 1967-68. Murton served as a technical advisor for the film. The warden impersonating a prisoner story element was fictionalized and was not derived from Thomas O. Murton’s experiences. It has been suggested though that this plot device was inspired by Sing Sing Prison Warden Thomas Mott Osborne who in 1913 under an assumed name had had himself committed to New York State’s Auburn State Penitentiary. This is one of two Robert Redford movies released in 1980 that were Oscar nominated. This film was an Academy Award nominee for Best Original Screenplay whilst the other movie Ordinary People (1980) received six Oscar nominations. “Brubaker” was a critical and commercial success. Roger Ebert of the Chicago Sun-Times said, “…The movie (refuses) to permit its characters more human dimensions. We want to know these people better, but the screenplay throws up a wall; they act according to the ideological positions assigned to them in the screenplay, and that’s that. … Half of Redford’s speeches could have come out of newspaper editorials, but we never find out much about him, What’s his background? Was he ever married? Is this his first prison job? What’s his relationship with the Jane Alexander character, who seems to have gotten him this job? (Alexander has one almost subliminal moment when she fans her neck and looks at Redford and, seems to be thinking unpolitical thoughts, but the movie hurries on.) Brubaker is a well-crafted film that does a harrowingly effective job of portraying the details of its prison, but then it populates it with positions rather than people.” I have wanted to see “Brubaker” since 1980 as a fan of Robert Redford and now I finally bought a copy. However, I think that “Brubaker” is a bit too long, a bit too slow and a bit too talky to be honest. And I think that most characters are under developed, but the acting is truly solid and engaging. Nevertheless, in 2014 this becomes a bit like just another clichéd prison movie with a Messiah like figure with his own agenda and ways of change. In 1980 this was most likely different, but it´s not more than a 3 out of 5 in my point of view on the last day of 2014. (3 out of 5)

 

Noah (2014)

As a young boy, Noah witnesses his father, Lamech, killed by a young Tubal-cain. Many years later an adult Noah (Russell Crowe) is living with his wife Naameh (Jennifer Connelly) and their sons Shem, Ham and Japheth. After seeing a flower grow instantly from the ground and being haunted by dreams of a great flood, Noah takes them to visit his grandfather, Methuselah (Anthony Hopkins). On they way they encounter a group of people recently killed and adopt the lone survivor, a girl named Ila (Emma Watson). Noah and his family are chased by Tubal-cain and his men but seek refuge with the fallen angels known as the “Watchers”, confined on Earth as stone golems (nephilim) for helping humans banished from the Garden of Eden. Methuselah gives Noah a seed from Eden and tells Noah that he was chosen for a reason. Returning to his tent that night, Noah plants the seed into the ground. The Watchers arrive the next morning and debate whether they should help Noah until they see water spout from the spot where Noah planted the seed. A forest grows quickly, and the Watchers state that they will help Noah do the Creator’s bidding. The trees are cut by the Watchers to build Noah’s Ark with the help of Noah and his family. After birds fly to the Ark, Tubal-cain arrives with his followers and confronts Noah about his reasons for building the Ark. Noah defies Tubal-cain and remarks that there is no escape for the line of Cain. Tubal-cain retreats and decides to build weapons to defeat the Watchers and take the Ark. As the Ark nears completion, animals of various species enter the Ark and are put to sleep with incense. With Ila having become enamored of Shem, Noah goes to a nearby settlement to find wives for Ham and Japheth, but upon witnessing humans being traded and apparently slaughtered for food, he abandons his effort and begins believing that the creator wants all of humanity dead. Back at the ark, he tells his family that he will not seek wives for his younger sons. After the Flood, they will be the last humans, and there will be no new generation of man…

Paramount Pictures were very worried about how Noah (2014) and its religious theme would be treated properly, so they screen tested three different rough cuts of the film, both without the approval and knowledge of Darren Aronofsky and all of the versions met with resounding criticism from Christian audiences. It has, since then, led to countless controversy and debacle on its correspondence to the biblical text found in the Book of Genesis. Aronofsky said that he was very unhappy with Paramount testing alternate versions of Noah that were not ‘true to his vision’: “I was upset – of course. No one has ever done that to me. I imagine if I made comedies and horror films, it would be helpful. In dramas, it’s very, very hard to do. I’ve never been open to it. I don’t believe that.” After much discussion and compromise, the studio announced on February 12 that Darren Aronofsky’s version, not any of the studio’s alternate versions, will be the final cut of Noah. “They tried what they wanted to try, and eventually they came back. My version of the film hasn’t been tested… It’s what we wrote and what was greenlighted,” Aronofsky said. It will not be test screened until post production is finished, as per Aronofsky’s wishes. Russell Crowe explained his characterization of Noah as not necessarily having to be nice: “The funny thing with people being, they consider Noah to be a benevolent figure, you know? Because he looked after the animals. Are you kidding me? This is a dude who stood by and let the entire population of the planet perish!” Darren Aronofsky had been fascinated with the character of Noah since childhood, seeing him as a “a dark, complicated character who experiences real survivor’s guilt”. As an avid fan of Aronofsky´s previous work I wanted to see his adaptation of the biblical character Noah as well. It´s a visually stunning movie and I reckon there´s all sorts of intriguing stories in the bible that can be put on the silver screen, now recently we have Ridley Scott´s “Exodus”. However, I personally think that “Noah” is a biblical slush puppie structured like some sort of religious actioneer with over the top theatrical performances from all involved and silly dialogue. It just doesn´t come together at all. Yes, this is an adaptation of the figure Noah and his tale, but I just think that Aronofsky handles it wrongly and the existential/spiritual values gets lost in this action mish mash. The story is there, no matter what you think of it from a religious point of view, but “Noah” is not what I hoped for. The Wrap called the film “Darren Aronofsky’s Biblical Waterworld”, but with that said I did like “Waterworld” and not “Noah”. (3 out of 5)

 

The Hills Run Red (1967)

In the aftermath of the American Civil War, two rebel Texans are fleeing toward the Mexican border in a wagon, having made off with a huge sum of money stolen from the United States government. Just before reaching the safety of foreign soil they are intercepted by a U.S. army patrol. As the mounted soldiers close in, the men draw cards to decide who will stay on the wagon and draw the pursuit, and who will jump off with the loot and escape, keeping the other man’s share safe until he can claim it. Ken Seagull (Nando Gazzolo) wins the draw, jumps off and successfully hides. Jerry Brewster (Thomas Hunter) crashes the wagon, is apprehended by the troopers, and is sent to a military prison. Five years later, Brewster is released and returns home to reunite with his wife and son. He finds his house deserted and in ruins, but discovers his wife’s journal, which tells him that Seagull not only gave her no aid, but told her nothing of the money or the fact that her husband was alive. Maddened by the betrayal, the unarmed Brewster immediately finds himself under gunfire: Seagull has learned of his release and sent men to get him out of the way once and for all. Running into the barn for cover, Brewster finds a mysterious stranger (Dan Duryea) who throws him a weapon with which Brewster kills his attackers. His benefactor, who introduces himself as Winnie Getz, offers to tell Seagull that, while Brewster killed the hired gunmen, Getz himself finished their job and killed their target. The seemingly homeless Getz says he hopes to parlay that false intelligence into a steady job with Seagull. Getz goes on ahead, while Brewster (now using the name Jim Houston) follows on his quest for vengeance. Brewster soon learns that Seagull, now known as Ken Milton, has used his wealth to acquire a ranch and the services of vicious killer Garcia Mendez (Henry Silva), with whose help he has expanded his holdings by terrorizing other landowners. Brewster also learns that Seagull killed his wife, but finds his young son alive and living nearby as an orphan. The man called Houston gets a job with Mendez (while managing to stay out of sight of his employer “Milton”) and, with Getz’s help, proceeds to play a double game wherein he rides with Mendez and his killers, but secretly aids their intended victims…

“The Hills Run Red” (Un Fiume di dollari) is one of the earliest spaghetti westerns made after the Eastwood/Leone Italian western boom, in 1967 and directed by Carlo Lizzani. And it´s so apparent that Lizzani casted Thomas Hunter in the lead because he carries a resemblance to Clint Eastwood. He even seems to try to talk like Clint Eastwood in certain scenes. There´s some nicely shots scenes, but the revenge story carries nothing new and “The Hills Run Red” just becomes a poor poor mans Leone/Eastwood spaghetti Western copy. And I always had a slight issue with the dubbing in movies like this. The only upside is the always outstanding Henry Silva as Mendez and Ennio Morricone´s (using the pseudonym “Leo Nichols”) great score. (2 out of 5)

 

Chinese Puzzle (Casse-tête chinois) (2014)

Xavier Rousseau (Romain Duris) is now forty years old. At forty you are supposed to be more mature and live a a steadier life than at twenty. But not Xavier. Well, to be fair, he has made some progress in the field of thoughtfulness (he has even become a writer) but as concerns his everyday life, it is far from well-ordered. To be totally honest it is not entirely Xavier’s fault if his wife Wendy (Kelly Reilly) has suddenly divorced him for a new companion in New York and taken their two children with her. Realising he can’t stand living without them, Xavier decides to settle down in The Big Apple in order to remain close to them and continue to write books. His close friend Isabelle (Cécile de France) has also decided to move to New York to be with her new partner Ju and they help Xavier to find a place in Chinatown. Isabelle has also asked Xavier to become a spermdonor for her and Ju so they can get a child. And Martine (Audrey Tautou) suddenly gets in touch with Xavier to tell him that she will come to New York on a business trip. With other words, things are getting a bit complicated as always for Xavier…

“Casse-tête Chinois” (Chinese Puzzle) is the third chapter of the Spanish Apartment trilogy, after “L’Auberge Espagnole” (2002) and “Les Poupées Russes” (2005). Almost 10 years has passed since part two came out, so I reckon I was a bit rusty in remembering the characters and the other two parts properly, but both “L’Auberge Espagnole” and “Les Poupées Russes” was of my liking when I did see them. I actually saw “Les Poupées Russes” when I was living in Australia and I reckon that particularly year my life was sort of like Xavier´s… It´s nice that Cédric Klapisch decided make a third part that sort of connects the dots. Great to see that Romain Duris, Audrey Tautou, Cécile De France and Kelly Reilly reprise their roles. I reckon the foundation of this trilogy is that there´s not set structure or path for any of us and what we might mean is a “perfect life” is something that can look so different for each one of us. With all sorts of challenges in life you grow and learn and that makes your specific path become your path and your “perfect life”. Klapisch wanted apparently to portray a generation of people who are more mobile, who aren’t afraid of mixing with different cultures, live in different countries, deal with the challenges presented by this new country. I love the dynamic way Klapisch directs and the funny ideas like bringing in old philosophers talking to Xavier. And the same goes for the quirky animations and when people comes alive in a magazine for example. “Casse-tête Chinois” has this “authentic” feeling to it. Duris & Co makes also the story really come alive, as they all are “home” in their roles since this is the third time they portray each character. Life presents difficulties when we might least know it or want it, but life is in general not that bad. Despite Xavier´s problems there´s this positive vibe and feeling within the movie and I do like that. I do recommend you to see this trilogy. (4 out of 5)

 

Black Christmas (1974)

A disoriented man climbs up into the attic of a sorority house while the occupants hold a Christmas party. Jess Bradford (Olivia Hussey) receives an obscene phone call from “the moaner”, a man who has recently been calling the house. After sorority friend Barb Coard (Margot Kidder) provokes the caller, he replies, “I’M GOING TO KILL YOU,” then hangs up. Claire Harrison (Lynne Griffin) is offended by Barb and goes upstairs to finish packing for her trip home. She hears Claude the cat’s cries and goes to investigate. Claire is attacked and asphyxiated with plastic dry cleaning covering over her head. Her dead body is carried up into the attic, where the killer places her in a rocking chair next to the window and puts a doll in her lap. The next day, Claire’s father arrives to take her home for the holidays. When she is not at their appointed meeting place, he goes to the sorority house. Jess meets her boyfriend, Peter Smythe (Keir Dullea), a neurotic aspiring pianist, to inform him that she is pregnant and wants to have an abortion. Peter is upset and urges her to discuss the situation with him more later but she refuses. Mr. Harrison and two of the sorority sisters Barb and Phyllis “Phyl” Carlson (Andrea Martin) go to the police to report Claire’s disappearance. Sgt. Nash dismisses the report and says that Claire is probably with a lover. Claire’s boyfriend, Chris (Art Hindle), is informed by Jess about the disappearance and Sgt. Nash’s unwillingness to help; they rush back to the police station to discuss it with Lt. Kenneth Fuller (John Saxon). A mother reports that her daughter, Janice, is missing as well. That evening, Mr. Harrison, Chris, and the sorority sisters join a search party aiming to find Janice or Claire. Back at the house, Mrs. Mac (Marian Waldman), the sorority’s housemother who’s packing her bags to leave for the holidays hears Claude’s meows in the attic and goes to investigate. She stares in horror as she discovers Claire’s body, but the killer launches a crane hook and hangs Mrs. Mac. The long awaited taxi driver becomes impatient and goes knocking on the door and then leaves. With the help of Lt. Fuller the sorority girls gets a wiretap on their phone to be able to trace “the moaner” whom they think might be involved in the disappearance of Claire, but will they manage to stop the killer roaming around in the attic before he kills again?…

The film is regarded as being one of the first slasher films. It set the layout for films such as John Carpenter Halloween (1978). However, director Bob Clark considered it to be more of a psychological horror film than a slasher film. The film had only moderate box office success and negative critical reception when originally released, however the film went on to have a large cult following. It has since received a critical reevaluation and is now considered a classic. Composer Carl Zittrer said in an interview that he created the bizarre music score for the film by tying forks, combs, and knives to the strings of his piano so the sound would warp as he struck the keys. Zittrer also said he would distort the sound further by recording audio tape while putting pressure on the reels of the machine to make it turn slower. Upon initial release in the US the films title was changed to “Silent Night, Evil Night” because the American distributor feared the title “Black Christmas” might cause the film to be mistaken for a ‘blaxploitation’ flick. However the film didn’t do well under the new title and it was changed back to the original “Black Christmas” title, under which it was a success. According to director Bob Clark the original script for the film featured murder scenes that were more graphic. Clark however felt that it would be more effective if the murders were toned down and made more subtle on screen. Writer Roy Moore liked the idea as well. Minimal vulgarity from the phone calls were initially scripted, director Bob Clark read out rather tame dialogue for the actors to react to. However stronger coarse language was later looped in post-production for a stronger reaction. Cinematographer Albert J. Dunk created Billy’s POV shots by rigging up a camera harness that would mount the camera on his shoulder as he walked about the house and climbed the trellis and attic ladder himself. Heidi Martinuzzi of Film Threat called the film “innovative” and praised the leading actresses, Olivia Hussey and Margot Kidder. However upon its initial release, the film had garnered mixed reviews. A writer for The New York Times scored the film a 1 out of 5, calling it “a whodunit that begs the question of why it was made.” “Black Christmas” did set several standards in the slasher genre for sure (something you understand after having seen it), despite the fact that director Bob Clark considered it to be more of a psychological horror film. It´s not that graphic, but instead disturbing and quite chilling created via the cinematography, camera angles, voices, shadows, objects and environments. The telephone calls are pretty disturbing in my book and even I raised an eyebrow or two during those scenes. The calls sets the mood straight away and it keeps you in that grip throughout the movie. Nice to see a young, beautiful and terrified Olivia Hussey and Margot Kidder. “Black Christmas” is a quite well made psychological horror movie, created with small means and hardly a big budget. And I do like the ambiguous ending. (3 and a half out of 5)

 

Snowpiercer (2014)

In 2014, an experiment to counteract global warming causes an ice age that kills nearly all life on Earth. The only survivors are the inhabitants of the Snowpiercer, a massive train powered by a perpetual-motion engine that travels on a globe-spanning track. A class system is installed, with the elites inhabiting the front of the train and the poor inhabiting the tail. In 2031, the tail inhabitants prepare for the latest in a series of rebellions. Guards arrive periodically to deliver protein blocks for food, and take some of the children. During the guards’ next visit, Curtis Everett (Chris Evans) leads the tail inhabitants in revolt, forcing their way through several train cars to the prison section. There, they release prisoner Namgoong Minsu (Song Kang-ho), the man who built the security system that controls the doors dividing each car, and his clairvoyant daughter Yona. They offer him uncut Kronole, a drug that both he and his daughter are addicted to, as payment for unlocking each of the remaining doors. One of the cars is filled with armed men. Under the orders of Minister Mason (Tilda Swinton), the men battle Curtis’ forces. Curtis’ side prevails, and he captures Mason, but he is forced to sacrifice his second-in-command, Edgar (Jamie Bell), to do so. Mason agrees to lead the group through the high-class cars in exchange for her life. In the school car, the teacher points out seven frozen rebels through the window. She and a henchman then draw machine guns, slaughtering many of Curtis’ followers, and executing his mentor Gilliam. Curtis then kills Mason. Curtis, his few remaining followers, and Namgoong and Yona continue through the train, discovering the extravagance in which the elites have been living while the poor wallowed in squalor. One of Mason’s henchmen, Franco the Elder, kills the rest of Curtis’ followers, before the henchman is himself seemingly killed. Curtis resolves to complete his mission, accompanied by Namgoong and Yona. The trio moves through the remaining cars where the elite indulge in food, partying and Kronole; Namgoong steals much of this Kronole from the inebriated revelers. As they arrive at the Engine door, Namgoong suggests they use the collected Kronole, made from explosive chemical waste, to blow open the side of the train, and escape into the outside. Namgoong explains that every year, the train has passed a crashed plane buried in snow, which has become less buried with each passing year, suggesting that Earth is warming, and that survival outside is now possible…

“Snowpiercer” is based on the French graphic novel “Le Transperceneige” by Jacques Lob, Benjamin Legrand and Jean-Marc Rochette. “Snowpiercer” received widespread acclaim from critics, audiences, and at festivals all over the world, particularly for Bong Joon-ho’s direction, the film’s cast (especially Chris Evans, Song Kang-ho and Tilda Swinton), visual scope, social commentary, Hong Kyung-pyo’s cinematography, and Ondrej Nekvasil’s production design. A.O. Scott wrote, in his review for The New York Times, “Planetary destruction and human extinction happen a half-dozen times every summer. It’s rarely this refreshing, though.” Clarence Tsui of The Hollywood Reporter wrote a highly positive review, commenting, “Snowpiercer is still an intellectually and artistically superior vehicle to many of the end-of-days futuristic action thrillers out there.” Speaking highly of Bong’s film-making, Tsui wrote, “Bong’s vivid depictions-aided by Ondrej Nekvasil’s production design, Hong Kyung-pyo’s cinematography and Steve M. Choe’s editing-are exceptional.” At first sight, trailer and poster, “Snowpiercer” looked a bit like a classic ok sci-fi action vehicle, but nothing more. However, this piece of film feels actually fresh in many ways within its genre. It´s gritty, apocalyptic, violent, dynamic, sad and current in its storyline. And not least to say unexpected with nice twists and turns. “Snowpiercer” puts the finger on what happens around us in the world, both in terms of current dictatorships like North Korea and the global warming process. And what might be the results of them in the future. A scary future. (4 out of 5)