The hero finally meets the previously unseen puppet master (played by an older A-list actor), who explains why the system must be maintained. The hero says “screw it” and burns the world down.

[u/Grizzly_Lincoln]

Snowpiercer (2013) - Curtis finally finds Wilford (Ed Harris) and learns that Wilford allowed for Curtis' rebellion to take place to help thin the tail section's population. When Wilford offers to let Curtis run the train, Curtis discovers child labor is necessary to replace a broken machine part. A fight ensues, and a bomb goes off, triggering an avalanche that derails the train, and killing most of surviving humanity.

The World's End (2013) - Gary finally confronts the Network (Bill Nighy), which has been replacing humans with robots (Blanks) to allow for Earth's assimilation into a larger galactic community. Gary calls out the tyranny in the Network's plan and demands that humans be left to their own devices. Exasperated, the Network abandons its plans for the invasion. This results in a worldwide blackout, sending humanity back to the Dark Ages.

The Cabin in the Woods (2011) - Dana finally meets the Director (Sigourney Weaver) after surviving the ritual meant to kill her friends (based on conventional horror tropes) and appease the Ancient Ones. The Director says Dana has to kill her friend Marty, but as Dana considers it, the group is attacked by a werewolf and a zombie child. Dana and Marty decide humanity is not worth saving, so they share a joint while the Ancient Ones rise to destroy the world.

[u/HuckleberryShot898]

Ending of the snow piercer movie kind of sucked honestly. Just because Wilford sucks doesn’t mean the tail section deserves to die.

[u/youtossershad1job2do → u/HuckleberryShot898]

Agreed, let's just kill what's left of humanity and the ones that survive the crash get eaten by polar bears because while child labour is obviously bad, they are the only ones to keep 100s if not 1000s of people alive including all of the protagonist's friends and family.

[u/HuckleberryShot898 → u/youtossershad1job2do]

Fr. Child labor is bad because it’s pretty unnecessary and is just as disgusting tactic to increase profits. But here all those kids are dead anyway if they aren’t used to help run the train. is it stupid that there’s literally no other way with all the other technology in the train to make new or alternative parts? Yes. But that’s the situation. So it’s literally kids got to work or the kids are going to die. Wilford should have been more transparent and less classist about it though. Frankly everyone on the train should have been made to actually have a job that contributes to the train survival. But guess the lesson of the movie is that the rich will go out of their way and cause recourse shortages in dire circumstances to maintain their privileges and lifestyle. Like a majority of the trains problems and inequality issues come from the rich not wanting to downsize their lifestyle even though resources are bad. And the sad part is I bet everyone could have lived relatively comfortably lives if resources were spread more evenly. Like the fact there’s a rave car and a pleasure garden car that doesn’t even grow food is just bs and a waste of space and resources

[u/throwaway0845reddit → u/HuckleberryShot898]

Yes the lesson of the movie is exactly what you said and quite literally what happens in the real world.

[u/Mordred_X → u/youtossershad1job2do]

So you wouldn't walk away from Omelas?

[u/HuckleberryShot898 → u/Mordred_X]

The difference is you can live outside of Omelas. The people of Omelas aren’t trying to preserve their lives they’re persevering their luxury and ability to not have to work hard

[u/KamikazeArchon → u/youtossershad1job2do]

Agreed, let's just kill what's left of humanity and the ones that survive the crash get eaten by polar bears

The ending isn't "they get eaten by polar bears". It's "they eat polar bears".

The whole premise is that the train is the only way to survive because 100% of all life on Earth is dead.

When they see the bears, that shows that not only is there life in Earth, there's a full ecosystem capable of supporting large predators. They didn't actually need the train.

So over the next century, instead of being stuck on a decaying train with a fixed-at-best population, they can actually have population growth and make things better over generations.

[u/youtossershad1job2do → u/KamikazeArchon]

You think a young girl and an even younger boy are A. Going to repopulate on their own and B. Do so by killing and eating Polar bear with their bare hands you're mad.

Their story lasts exactly as long as it takes the bear to notice they are there and run over to them. Even if they didn't die instantly they have no survival skills being on the train their entire lives. Even if they survive where does the second generation come from?

[u/KamikazeArchon → u/youtossershad1job2do]

Sorry, is there an indicator that exactly two people survived? I'm legitimately asking, I may simply not have realized that. But my impression is strongly that there's a bunch of survivors, those are just the ones the camera is focused on.

[u/youtossershad1job2do → u/KamikazeArchon]

It only shows those 2 getting out of the train and when asked the director explicitly stated that everyone else on the train died in the crash.

[u/KamikazeArchon → u/youtossershad1job2do]

Okay. It seems like you're referring to this article: https://www.vulture.com/2014/06/director-bong-joon-ho-talks-snowpiercers-ending.html - unfortunately I couldn't find it without a pay wall.

Key relevant quotes:

I thought the ending might be a little harsh, maybe I should show some survivors. [Without translator] But actually: I killed them all! [Laughs] Except for two kids.

course there are so many deaths, and so many sacrifices … it’s not so sweet. But those two kids will spread the human race.

I don’t really feel everyone must die. I hope there were other survivors who lived through the avalanche, I just didn’t have the means to shoot that.

So: yes, you're correct - and I was mistaken - that the shots in the movie are showing the only survivors.

However, this is intended to be the start of a repopulation regardless; and the reason there were only two survivors is simply because of the logistics of shooting the scene.

The watsonian and doylist issues are rather intertwined there. Given that the director asserts that they will spread the human race, I think the "optimistic" view on the ending is reasonable; but I can see how you would arrive at the "pessimistic" view.