Squid Game

Caporegime
Joined
30 Jul 2013
Posts
28,905
Still got 3 episodes to go, but maybe somebody can answer a question about Episode 6

Is the old man pretending to have dementia? It didn't make sense to me that he was wandering around and acting like it, but then knew he had been conned by Seong Gi-hun

Or does this spoil something later in the show?
 
Soldato
Joined
5 Apr 2009
Posts
24,858
Still got 3 episodes to go, but maybe somebody can answer a question about Episode 6

Is the old man pretending to have dementia? It didn't make sense to me that he was wandering around and acting like it, but then knew he had been conned by Seong Gi-hun

Or does this spoil something later in the show?

I'd suggest you're best off just watching
 
Soldato
Joined
15 Feb 2003
Posts
10,052
Location
Europe
I would have liked to have seen more games and more impressive games, with multiple options/routes to victory, some requiring more strategy and cunning, others more skill. I also think they killed off people too quickly. There was more room for this to grow as a series, but some parts seemed rushed, and others dragged on.
 
Soldato
Joined
17 Sep 2006
Posts
4,135
Location
Gloucestershire
I would have liked to have seen more games and more impressive games, with multiple options/routes to victory, some requiring more strategy and cunning, others more skill. I also think they killed off people too quickly. There was more room for this to grow as a series, but some parts seemed rushed, and others dragged on.

That would go against the game makers whole premise of everyone having a completely fair chance of progressing. If skill or strength came into it, then naturally many would fail straight away. I liked the simplicity of the games personally, and they delivered what was 'promised' in terms of equality.
 
Soldato
Joined
17 Aug 2009
Posts
10,719
There is a character arc from battle royale that this could have been the background story for.

Except it got ruined by the winner failing to sign up for another game at the end instead of successfully entering again (arranging to be in the next class that gets kidnapped for the deathmatch) to take revenge on the program.
 
Soldato
Joined
15 Feb 2003
Posts
10,052
Location
Europe
That would go against the game makers whole premise of everyone having a completely fair chance of progressing. If skill or strength came into it, then naturally many would fail straight away. I liked the simplicity of the games personally, and they delivered what was 'promised' in terms of equality.

Strength would skill shouldn't since it's just the ability to do a certain task, which could be learned, improved whilst on the task itself. They already messed up the equality with one of the games and some of the other actions they allowed to happen.

Speaking of things they allowed to happen, I didn't understand why the teams waited until the lights were out to fight. I would have attacked that thug well before lights out. That way everything it out in the open and done with, without sitting around waiting something to happen.
 
Soldato
Joined
5 Mar 2010
Posts
12,346
Spolier much?

No less of a spoiler than the last couple of a dozen posts.

I also think they killed off people too quickly. There was more room for this to grow as a series, but some parts seemed rushed, and others dragged on.

I'd agree with that. Didn't they lose like half the contestants from the first game as there was a masse panic.

That would go against the game makers whole premise of everyone having a completely fair chance of progressing. If skill or strength came into it, then naturally many would fail straight away. I liked the simplicity of the games personally, and they delivered what was 'promised' in terms of equality.

Skill and strength did come into it though.

1) The finance guy heard about the sugar syrup and when he saw the symbols had already guessed what the game might be - so was able to choose the easiest shape
2) Skill and strength came in to the tug of war game - with the stronger teams typically winning until the main cast on the team had used skill to overcome their stronger opponents.
3) The glassmaker used his skill to spot tempered glass in the bridge challenge

So not quite an equal/fair chance of progressing.
 
Soldato
Joined
17 Sep 2006
Posts
4,135
Location
Gloucestershire
1) The finance guy heard about the sugar syrup and when he saw the symbols had already guessed what the game might be - so was able to choose the easiest shape
2) Skill and strength came in to the tug of war game - with the stronger teams typically winning until the main cast on the team had used skill to overcome their stronger opponents.
3) The glassmaker used his skill to spot tempered glass in the bridge challenge

So not quite an equal/fair chance of progressing.

1) but he only saw that as he was snooping around
2) Most valid one. Can't remember how the teams were picked, but if random then it should be equal.
3) The game makers didn't know about this until he was playing the game, so they assumed it was equal beforehand
 
Man of Honour
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
100,333
Location
South Coast
Been reading that the creator of this actually pitched it 10 years ago but Netflix etc were not interested because they thought it was too weird. Now they are raking in the ratings lol.
 
Soldato
Joined
13 Feb 2006
Posts
5,724
Location
--->
No less of a spoiler than the last couple of a dozen posts.

Maybe, but it's still spoiling it for others coming into the thread in good faith.

Don't give anything away without putting it in spoilers, it's not hard to do, but people seem to struggle with it for some reason.

Like people who don't spoiler 'never saw the twist coming' in the movie thread - you're spoiling it for others as they're now aware there's a twist coming and you find yourself looking for it as a result.
 
Soldato
Joined
5 Mar 2010
Posts
12,346
it's not hard to do, but people seem to struggle with it for some reason.

Would seem a bit more of a common sense approach to not post in a thread about a TV show unless you've seen it / are not bothered about the ending, as most people posting in here have already seen it. Otherwise you may as well just have a rule that says no discussion allowed until everyone has seen it. At what point exactly are you suggesting an open discussion is allowed? Some people may not watch this show for several years, so should every reply in this thread be wrapped in spoiler tags?
 
Caporegime
Joined
22 Oct 2002
Posts
26,946
Location
Boston, Lincolnshire
Skill and strength did come into it though.

2) Skill and strength came in to the tug of war game - with the stronger teams typically winning until the main cast on the team had used skill to overcome their stronger opponents.

So not quite an equal/fair chance of progressing.

The strength came into the tug of war because the doctor knew what the challenge was. Otherwise it would have been totally random. This is why the game master guy was so angry because the game wasn't fair no more.

The old guy even mentioned it being akin to a horse race. You can have stronger horse's but ultimately it is down to luck. You could be Albert Einstein on the glass bridge game but if you picked number 1 you are basically buggered. The whole thing is basically there for the V.I.P's to get some excitement from betting because they are basically bored.

 
Soldato
Joined
17 Aug 2009
Posts
10,719
Been reading that the creator of this actually pitched it 10 years ago but Netflix etc were not interested because they thought it was too weird. Now they are raking in the ratings lol.

Not wrong about the weirdness.

Sounds like a second season is going to be rough since the writer and director said he was dry of ideas so S2 has excellent chances of being all for the money.

Which is weird because
the police guy, brother of Front Man was intentionally shot in the arm and fell off a cliff with no clear death and the lead had basically the matrix ending of calling up the people in charge and making threats before some purposeful movement and the film ending.
which stinks of setting up a sequel.
 
Soldato
Joined
17 Aug 2009
Posts
10,719
You could have said the same about Super Mario Bros the movie :p.

Talking about things said about SMB the movie... :eek:

"The worst thing I ever did? Super Mario Brothers. It was a ******* nightmare. The whole experience was a nightmare. It had a husband-and-wife team directing, whose arrogance had been mistaken for talent. After so many weeks their own agent told them to get off the set! ******* nightmare. ******* idiots."

I reckon Squiddy has more interest and chance of making a profit from a sequel.
 
Soldato
Joined
13 Feb 2006
Posts
5,724
Location
--->
Would seem a bit more of a common sense approach to not post in a thread about a TV show unless you've seen it / are not bothered about the ending, as most people posting in here have already seen it. Otherwise you may as well just have a rule that says no discussion allowed until everyone has seen it. At what point exactly are you suggesting an open discussion is allowed? Some people may not watch this show for several years, so should every reply in this thread be wrapped in spoiler tags?

The general consensus/protocol on this forum, at this moment, is to use spoiler tags.
 
Back
Top Bottom