CHRISTCHURCH, New Zealand – The story of the 1972 Andes plane crash, known as the “Miracle of the Andes,” has been adapted for the big screen multiple times, with the latest version being the film “Society of the Snow.” This is not the first or second retelling of the story, as Hollywood previously brought the story to life with the 1993 film “Alive.” These two movies provide different perspectives on the harrowing tale of survival after a plane crash in the Andes Mountains.
Comparing “Alive” and “Society of the Snow” reveals some distinct narrative choices made in each film. “Alive” opens and closes with a framing device featuring an older survivor, adding little substance to the narrative. On the other hand, “Society of the Snow” uses a more poetic framing device, albeit with questionable effectiveness. Both films follow the major events of the story in similar fashion, recounting the crash, the survivors’ attempts to survive, and the difficult decisions they were forced to make.
“Alive” is directed by Frank Marshall, known primarily as a producer in the film industry. His direction in the film is competent but workmanlike, lacking the flair of a seasoned director. However, “Society of the Snow” presents a grittier and more intense portrayal of the survivors’ ordeal, focusing on the harsh realities of their fight for survival.
Despite the similarities in portraying the events of the Andes plane crash, “Alive” and “Society of the Snow” offer unique perspectives on the harrowing tale, each with its own narrative choices and directorial styles.
In conclusion, both “Alive” and “Society of the Snow” retell the gripping story of the Andes plane crash with their own distinct approaches, giving audiences different insights into the harrowing ordeal faced by the survivors. Their differences in narrative choices and directorial styles contribute to the richness of the cinematic portrayals of this extraordinary story.