Snowpiercer was much better. At least it was entertaining and much more bizarre. High Rise has good cinematography though and more titties, so theres that.

Very true. The uprising didn't start with "Snowpiercer," and it won't end there.

We were saying this as well. Snowpiercer, Lord of the Flies and The Exterminating Angel tossed in together.

I had the same thought and found Snowpiercer to be a far superior film. In a weird way, I think the implausible post-apocalyptic setting of Snowpiercer actually worked in that film's favor. Because the premise was so ludicrous on its face, I was able to suspend disbelief from the start and give myself over completely to the allegory.
TV:
http://ihatemydvr.blogspot.com
LOST:
http://eyemsick.blogspot.com

Snowpiercer is decidedly more compelling and interesting.
Although I thought Snowpiercer got rather silly in the second half, I enjoyed it a lot more than High-Rise. The characters were more interesting and the plot was easier to follow. The characters here all seemed to blend together, especially the 'upper-class' ones. The only ones who stood out for me were Luke Evans and Jeremy Irons.
And all the pieces matter (The Wire)

Yes, exactly what I thought but Snowpiercer is decidedly more compelling and interesting.

Just came to say that. Granted I didnt think much of SP, but thought even less of this. Acting was good, but didnt like a single character and overall was way too disjointed to enjoy.

The thing is that Snowpiercer was intelligent, funny, entertaining, and entirely coherent. High-Rise was none of those things. Well actually not entirely true. High-Rise was entertaining. Just not intelligent, funny or coherent.

This message has been deleted.

Yeah, theres definitely alot of snake eating its own tail going on with this.
http://popculturallyinsensitive.com/author/tommylorenzo/

And this feels to me like if David Cronenberg in the early 90s made Snowpiercer.
Which is funny because David Cronenberg (who, I'm sure you know, has always cited Ballard as an inspiration and adapted his novel Crash) released Shivers the same year that High Rise was published and there are definitely parallels between the two.
It rubs the butter on it's skin, y'all.

There's definitely a connection. Since the novel of High Rise was released decades before Snowpiercer, I'm sure the writer of Snowpiercer had that book in his mind. With the movies, it's the case of the inspired somehow coming ahead of the inspiration. Similar to how John Carter of Mars was stripped mined by seemingly every sci fi movie ever, leaving the movie feeling really trite and cliched.
And this feels to me like if David Cronenberg in the early 90s made Snowpiercer.
http://popculturallyinsensitive.com/author/tommylorenzo/

Loved Snowpiercer. Hated this film.
I let you know me see me. I gave you a rare gift, but you didn't want it - Hannibal Lecter

I posted this elsewhere but it fits the topic here too:
I've said it before in the past, but to me, this is nothing like Snowpiercer. On paper, a lot of people will make comparisons that this is like "Snowpiercer inside a building" but that's such a lazy comparison. First off, High-Rise does not seek a greater purpose like SP. It's a perverse, voyeuristic look at a microcosmic world that devalues order. The chaos never breaks outside its confines, like how SP ended up. The characters relish in anarchy. The characters in SP fight for change. High-Rise is satirical in its premise, whereas Snowpiercer is a straight forward dystopian.
"The dream is to keep surprising yourself, never mind the audience." - TH

A few months late here, but just finished it so it's fresh in my mind. Very quickly residents seemed to lose their connection to the outside world: Wilder asking Laine for a ride because he doesn't know where he parked, but Laine says no because he doesn't know where he is either. Little things like that where peppered through the beginning.
A few things didn't really make sense to me, but I'm not worried about it. They're not plot holes.

I still haven't watched the movie, but the novel actually has the people slowly going kinda nuts. At first, everyone is still going to work but as things start to descend into madness, the residents stop going to work. They eventually start suffering something akin to that phobia concerning open spaces. It's all just crazy, but then it
is
a J.G. Ballard novel.

Saw High-Rise last night and kept thinking how similar it is to Snowpiercer
I thought the same thing.only there was a logical explanation as to why the people couldn't get off the train. I still can't figure out why the tenants simply didn't leave the building since they did leave to go to work???
what Jordie?

Though High Rise (the novel) was wrote in the 70s, they'd been trying to make a film version since its release.

You don't even have to see more than the trailers for both, to see the thematical similarities.
Both movies were highly anticipated ones that let me down. Still, I could enjoy "High-Rise", unlike "Snowpiercer", wich was all over the place and a lazy excuse for a thoughtful tale of dystopia. In my oppinion.

I also preferred Snowpiercer. And the main reason is that it had a hero I cared about. The main character in High Rise was as contemptible as all the other people in the building. I couldn't connect to him or care what happened to him or any of the other characters.

Just reading the synopsis made me think of Snowpiercer immediately.
Driver picks the music, shotgun shuts his cakehole

My vote goes to Snowpiercer as well, so much more entertaining.

Snowpiercer
was a much more coherent effort.

Both films have a similar plot and themes to LIFE.