Click to Skip Ad
Closing in...

Unpopular Opinion: Maybe Harvey Weinstein Should Cut 20 Minutes From ‘Snowpiercer’

by Rodrigo Perez
February 14, 2014 2:30 PM
  • |

Free Indie Movies and Documentaries    


  • viewer | February 25, 2014 5:27 PMReply

    I saw the film recently without any knowledge about the story at all and I found it very gripping and entertaining - it didn't feel long at all! I'd say if anything had been cut I might not have understood the story properly.
    Also, I totally agree with @Mehrine: the "slower" parts have to be there to be able to process what's happening and to have a break from the action scenes. There's also quite a lot of (dark) humour in those scenes that shouldn't be lost.

  • Mad | February 24, 2014 6:40 AMReply

    wow, just wow. Well, this is the proof why "critics" are just critics.
    Why watch movies then?. Better, someone cut me the unnecessary parts and just tell the good ones, to not lose time.

  • Lou | February 24, 2014 4:07 AMReply

    Let those that defend Weinstein's view actually tell us which scenes they suggest should be cut.
    I for once felt that some subjects were a bit too hastily treated, and would have liked more details here and there.

  • Feiy | February 24, 2014 1:19 AMReply


  • Josh | February 23, 2014 4:52 AMReply

    I mean seriously, is film an art form? In what universe could you consider Harvey Weinstein an artist? I'm not sure Perez understands how badly this article undermines his credibility as a film critic.

  • Josh | February 23, 2014 4:48 AMReply

    It's astonishing that a professional film critic at such a reputable site would claim that Harvey Weinstein knows better than Bong Joon-ho how to make a film. Astonishing and tremendously disappointing. I would trust Perez to know how to cut the film before I would trust Weinstein, but I would also assume that Bong and his creative team made the film they wanted to make, for better or worse.

  • Alex | February 21, 2014 1:28 PMReply

    You left out the part where Weinstein said he wanted to trim it down because people in the mid-West wouldn't get it.

  • Bill Thompson | February 18, 2014 2:41 PMReply

    It all comes down to artistic vision, and Mr. Weinstein has nothing to do with that. Maybe Snowpiercer will be too long and could use some cutting, but it's not up to Mr. Weinstein to decide to cut the film. The artists who were actually involved in the film have a say, it's their artistic product, and this article misses how important the right to produce the art you want to produce is to the artistic process.

  • THeplaylist sold out for 30 silver coins | February 16, 2014 1:45 PMReply


  • JOHN | February 15, 2014 7:13 PMReply

    I saw it. The middle part foreshadows the last parts of the film, and is very important essentially to entire storytelling and allegory although it seems boring and unnecessary. (and that part doesn't exceed 20 minutes.) It shouldn't be cut even one seconds. Besides, adding voiceovers? Oh Jesus.

  • Rick Mexico | February 15, 2014 6:52 PMReply

    It seems like you don't understand the term Neo-Marxist.

  • Mark | February 15, 2014 10:08 AMReply

    I saw it. The middle part is somewhat boring and basically unnecessary as far as the storytelling and allegory go. It could certainly be cut by at least 20 minutes.

  • Andrew F. | February 15, 2014 2:03 AMReply

    So now we have two people -- one a bloated businessman looking out for his wallet, the other a third rate movie dilettante -- who have never made a movie in their lives agreeing that one of the best filmmakers on the planet (by jury of his peers) should cut his movie by 20 minutes to "fix" it's excessive artfulness and idiosyncrasies.

    It's one thing to be a critic and, right or wrong, feel that a movie should have been cut -- you state your case and try to persuade people and if you're insightful maybe you even persuade the filmmaker. But it's outright Weinstein ass-kissing when you write a piece saying Bong Joon Ho's money machine of a movie ought to be cut to help Harvey's precious bottom line. F*** this piece, f*** this website and f*** Harvey Weinstein.

  • Gabe Toro | February 16, 2014 1:49 PM

    Then go to Aintitcool or some geek site like that. Don't hang around here.

  • JOHN | February 14, 2014 9:29 PMReply

    A proven filmmaker should have control over the final cut of their own film. If TWC were onboard from day one this may be a different story, but the film was acquired by the company. They should leave it as they saw it when they made the buy.

  • Mark T. | February 28, 2014 12:45 PM

    I fail to see what was geeky about anything Andrew said. "Don't hang around here" is super geeky though and you should feel bad for actually writing that. Also, this entire article is trollin' trollin' trollin' down the river.

  • Russell | February 14, 2014 9:09 PMReply

    Well, I've already seen the movie, uncut. In my opinion, there is nothing should be trimmed in Snowpiercer. Which scene on earth? Ok, some people may think that personally, but if one scene is chopped up, instead, this film will be ruined and lose its meanings and values completely.

  • Neil | February 14, 2014 3:40 PMReply

    I saw the movie a few months back. I personally loved the film, but if we're going to talk about trimming it, maybe trim it by 2-5 minutes? 20 minutes seem a bit much.

    Also, one of the things that admittedly even I found frustrating at first was the sound mix. I do not know if it was the screening room's problem but the film's dialogue, while audible, seemed as if recorded from a much further distance than it normally would be. After I thought about it though, I think the weird sound mix(if it was not a problem with the theater's audio) actually added to the alien nature of the environment depicted in the film. At the same time though, I can understand if this particular quality of the film ends up frustrating an English-speaking audience.

    If Weinstein really wants the film to sell, he should tell Bong to change the sound mix, not cut the film.

  • cineman | February 14, 2014 3:26 PMReply

    Weinstein has effectively been trying to stylise himself as an arthouse Roger Corman. But whereas Corman funded his movies from Day 1, so really had the right to do so, Weinstein buys in already finished movies and reshapes them, often based on egotistical whim. Film-makers have to learn to stay away from the flatulent toad, no matter how much money he promises (especially as historically he's frequently neglected to pay up).

  • Dane | February 14, 2014 3:00 PMReply

    Snowpiercer is being dumped in English speaking territories by Weinstein Co.
    Even if he gets his way and cut 20 min from the movie, he will still find another excuses to delay and make it limited release.

    CJ(the South Korean producing company of snowpiercer) will lose a lot of money from Snowpiercer.

  • Mehrine | February 14, 2014 2:59 PMReply

    "it also has almost arty and pensive starts and stops that kill its pace"

    Letting the audience breath between action scenes doesn't mean killing the movie's pace.

  • RUSSELL | February 15, 2014 8:24 AM

    I agree with you completely.

  • Gordon | February 14, 2014 2:35 PMReply

    Hell. No. A distributor overriding the intentions of a works' creators is NEVER "for the best," even (hypothetically) if it makes the work better from anybody's opinion. Artists should always, for better or for worse, have the final word.

Email Updates