MovieChat Forums > FreeTThinker
FreeTThinker (14)
Posts
I remember back when this was on Netflix and I loved this movie...Just skimmed through it again.
What's with this recent trend of BAD MOVIES being critically acclaimed?
What's with this recent trend of horrible movies being seen as good?
To the people who keep saying ' look at it as it’s own story and not a direct sequel to the Shining.
PLOTHOLES
Rose The Hat
View all posts >
Replies
That's f#$%ing disgusting. No, slurping noodles is gross.
You must not know how utterly incompetent Korean police are. It's a trope in Korean media and it mirrors Korean life. I'll put it this way....Last week, a Korean family was having trouble with a psycho violent neighbor. Called the Korean version of 911, three cops showed up. The psycho neighbor stabbed a child in the neck. The cops ran away screaming.
South Korean cops are incompetent baffoons. Basically every Korean police's day is a Charlie Chaplin film.
I AGREEE!!!! I saw this God forsaken film in 2011 before I lived in the south. I was REPULSED by the main characters. I lived in the south just a few years later and have been there ever since. And now I'm repulsed by how they portray southerners. Southerners are nice people. Much nicer than New Yorkers and other yankees. And no, not everyone is Conservative. In fact, it's 50/50 and barely any racism at all!
I actually think Gi Hun partnering up with the old man is a flaw in the writing. I understand that the intention was to show Gi Hun as so selfless that he will risk his life so the old man doesn't die alone, but instead it just came off as something that would never happen in real life, no matter how nice a person is. There are some very nice people out there in the world, but no one is so nice that they'll essentially sacrifice themselves just to avoid hurting the feelings of an old man. From the perspective of Gi Hun, picking the old man entailed a very high likelihood of death, as you said. The chances that the next game would be very physical or would require intense dexterity and manpower was high. In this case, Gi Hun had no chance of winning with the old man on his team. In a game where losing means getting killed, no one is going to make that choice, no matter how nice they are. I think
In real life, he would have gone with the math teacher. I know that ultimately, this was done in order to show Gi Hun's character development as a kind and selfless man. But there were other ways they could have gone about it without making it look completely unrealistic. I mean, think about it. How many people do you know that would give their life away to be nice to someone? I would guess none.
Maybe you shouldn't be obsessed with the president's hands....
It wasn't good. It's one of those bad movies that got a good rating on RT. Really do not understand critics and their sense of good movies lately. I will say this: The buildup was good. The tension and scares in the movie were great. But the last 30 minutes really ruins it. The ending ruins it. The movie had all this buildup attached to it. The movie was setting up for an explosive ending. And then the ending basically undid all of the scares before. It was bad. And it makes me upset what is passing for good in Hollywood these days. You look back to classics like Nightmare on Elm Street, The Shining, and all these movies that were made with limited technology and budgets and you see how much better they were. Today's films have so much more resources. There are so many good writers that the field is so flooded. You can pay for the greatest screenplays ever. But they don't pick great screenplays it seems. It seems they pick screenplays that are simple? I guess maybe they're more profitable. But I also don't understand this reliance on reboots and remakes when we have an abundance of writers. This movie is, unfortunately a huge letdown. And the biggest letdown isn't how bad the movie is, but the fact that this movie passes as good these days....
continued AGAIN (Goodness, they don't give you enough room to write anything!!!!)
teammates would be of sound and rational mind and would invoke clause 3. I would also be ANGRY BEYOND BELIEF at the people who make the game. Because with every other game, all the players had a decent shot at winning. Game 5 seemed like a middle finger to the players. And I’d be pissed off. I’d feel like I just went through ALL OF THAT just to be told that at game 5, my chances are 1 in 34,000. I’d be angry at the ones who make the game, I’d end it, and I’d never come back.
So that’s it. Those are the major plot-holes I saw in ‘SQUID GAME’ . . . All in all, it’s a great show. But it’s far from perfect.
POST CONTINUED HERE (did not know the posts had a character limit)
game. I guess I’m just going to die. This is the end.”
And then just allow it to happen. No way. Would you just accept death? If you were in Squid Game and lost the marble game? Or would you do ANYTHING to survive? Of course, you’d do anything to survive.
The way I see it, the fact that no one tried to invoke Clause Three to save their own lives can only be explained away by acknowledging that it’s a flaw in the writing.
I swear to God, the 20-year-old Millennials on Reddit who apparently don’t have common sense about life, keep hanging onto “sunk cost fallacy” and they think they’re so smart when they explain it away like this, but they come across as very naïve.
Not to mention the glass bridge. . . Imagine you were in this game and you were at Game 5, the GLASS BRIDGE. Imagine how much some people freak out over heights. Now imagine you’re player 1 on the glass bridge. . . And it’s not a normal bridge with railings. No railings. Just plates that you must JUMP ONTO. The ones that hold people are not even that strong, and half of them won’t hold anyone. You have a 1 in 34,000 chance of making it. At that point, would ‘sunk cost fallacy’ apply to you? Would you say to yourself “Oh well, I already put so much into this that I’ll just take the 1 in 34,000 chances.” Or would you end the game to survive? I think the answer is clear here and I think it’s very unrealistic that in the show, NO PLAYER EVEN TRIED TO END THE GAME. This just goes against human nature. When characters are written to do things against human nature, it’s bad writing.
Here’s what I would do. As soon as I realized how the game worked, I would realize that the first 12 players are essentially sacrificial lambs of the game. I would then tell all the first people to wait, explain to them quickly what this meant for us and that our chances of survival were non-existent, and that we need the game to end NOW. HOPEFULLY, my fellow
View all replies >