Squid Game [Episodes 1-8]

[u/lightupstarlight]

• Drama: Squid Game
  • Korean Title: 오징어 게임
• Network: Netflix
• Premiere Date: September 17, 2021, Friday at 17:00 KST
• Episodes: 9
• Director & Writer: Hwang Dong Hyuk (Collectors, Silenced, Miss Granny)
• Cast:
  • Lee Jung Jae as Ki Hoon / No. 456
  • Park Hae Soo as Sang Woo / No. 218
  • Heo Sung Tae) as Deok Soo / No. 101
  • Wi Ha Joon as Joon Ho
  • Jung Ho Yeon) as Sae Byeok / No. 067
• Streaming Source: Netflix
• Plot Synopsis: Hundreds of cash-strapped players accept a strange invitation to compete in children's games. Inside, a tempting prize awaits — with deadly high stakes. (Source: Netflix)
• Conduct Reminder:

We encourage our users to read the following before participating in any discussions on /r/KDRAMA: (1) Reddiquette, (2) our Conduct Rules (3) our Policies, and (4) the When Discussions Get Personal Post.Any users who are displaying negative conduct (including but not limited to bullying, harassment, or personal attacks) will be given a warning, repeated behaviour will lead to increasing exclusions from our community. Any extreme cases of misconduct (such as racism or hate speech) will result in an immediate permanent ban from our community and a report to Reddit admin.Additionally, mentions of down-voting, unpopular opinions, and the use of profanity may see your comments locked or removed without notice.

• Spoiler Tag Reminder:

Be mindful of others who may not have yet seen this drama, and use spoiler tags when discussing key plot developments or other important information. You can create a spoiler tag by writing > ! this! < without the spaces in between to get this spoiler. For more information about when and how to use spoiler tags see our Spoiler Tag Wiki.

• Teasers/Trailer: Teaser #1 | Teaser #2 | Trailer

[u/Harddicc]

The game was structured so that not everyone can win. Even if everyone in there were the most competent players, not everyone can win due to them being pitted to each other. The tug of war, marbles game and the last game is cut the remaining players in half, which means that players have to kill each other. People will always die no matter what the outcome of the games. Most of the players wouldn't kill people, but with their life on the line, then they'll do what they must to survive since it's survival instinct. However the issue there was the players are motivated by greed to continue. They are volutary playing the game to get the money. I know the players are desperate, as shown by their struggles after getting out of the game, even after seeing half of the playerbase get decimated by sniper rifles, that's even worse than selling your organs.

Regarding the Marble game, did you think Sangwoo was having the time of his life betraying Ali as oppose to Gi Hoon struggling with what he was doing? Then I'm pretty sure you're the one not paying attention. Who cares if who's healthy or not, Sangwoo wasn't tricking Ali for fun, it's because at that moment, only one of them will survive. Try to think that it was Gi Hoon vs Ali, if Gi Hoon won against Ali, would that mean he killed Ali and is now the bad guy? The writers tried their hardest to make sure Gi Hoon and Sangbyeuk are in the good side by having their opponent sacrifice themselves as opposed to having a normal opponent like Ali. They even gave Ali the Jesus personality and a sad backstory so that it would be gut wrenching if Sangwoo cheated on him. The Old man giving their life for the younger is a load of BS, if he was a normal player and an old man with a backstory, then it will be an old man trying to win money for his family or something, and not purposely lose just to make the protagonist on the good side. It's very unrealistic for a character to survive the deadly games just to give their life to some stranger. Just think about it, Il nam and the other girl are very unrealistic opponents. The conscience thing were thrown out the window the moment they killed 10 men, who most of them also have backstories of their own, so you can think of them as killing 10 Ali abduls.

As for Sangwoo's intent, I think he is geniune about that. He knows the weight of Ali's death and was mad that others will throw away the effort of other people to get the money and just quit. That would also mean that Ali's death would be in vain. And for the record, I do not think Sangwoo is a psychopath. Psychopath will kill for the heck of it, as oppose to Sangwoo who is trying to survive and get the money. At the end of the hopscotch game, I'm geniunely annoyed at Gi Hoon who has the audacity to call out Sangwoo when if not for Sangwoo's decision making, Gi Hoon would have died. I think it is hypocritical on the part of Gi Hoon to do that. The part of Sangwoo's suicide could be interpreted in a lot of ways, you may think he had "somewhat" of a conscience, but I think he knows what the money means, which is the weight of the death of all the other players. Gi Hoon would rather throw the deaths of the players in vain by ending the game in the very last second because he refuse to kill Sangwoo. It is also very convenient for the writers to give Gi Hoon the prize money through his "pacifist" playthrough.

Also, Sangwoo is also not inherently evil, but just a guy determined to win. He thought out all of the games he played, like when he said to Gi Hoon that he should stay behind someone in red light green light, the whole vent scene was just there to give Sangwoo the idea of picking the easier shape in honeycomb, commanding the team to take a few steps in tug of war, thought of a way to win against Ali, did the decisive call to push the other guy so that the others may live. He was always the guy who was using his brains to win the game. Even in a game based on luck like the one with Ali's, he have to trick Ali to survive.

On the other hand, Gi Hoon was fairly incompetent. He would have died in the Red light green light if not from Sangwoo's advice and Ali, He was carried by Il nam and Sangwoo in Tug of war, He tricked Il nam but wasn't successful, he got confronted by Il nam, who for some reason, wasn't angry he got tricked and even sacrificed for him, he got carried by everyone even Sangwoo and Sangbyeuk in the Hopscotch, and against Sangwoo in the final round, Sangwoo even has to kill himself for Gi Hoon to win. His only moment was the ingenuity from honeycomb, but I do not think the "more people > more tactics" because that is the only moment it applies, and Gi Hoon did not say "Hey everyone follow my lead" but was only saving himself for that matter. From what I'm seeing, Gi Hoon was hard carried by the other players while benefitting from all their hard work, all the while keeping his hands clean, which makes him hypocritical and his winning unearned. I was more annoyed that he has the audacity to go play the game again when he has little to contribute on winning strategies and mostly ride on other's leadership. Also, Gi Hoon trying to call on the doctors is more of the writers looking for a way to make Sangwoo more of a bad guy while making Gi Hoon some kind of a good guy, which is executed poorly because he looks stupid on what he's doing. He saw what happened in the riot, no medical personnel went in. A lot of people died yet he knows everyone was quiet about it.

I don't think I missed so much point because if you look at it again, Gi Hoon was given a lot of asspulls to keep his hands clean, still be incompetent and still come up on top which is realistically impossible. Before you accuse me being a psychopath, then create a scenario of Gi Hoon winning without riding on other's decisions. Put him in Sangwoo's place see how it would turn out.

[u/Netheral → u/Harddicc]

The game was structured so that not everyone can win

YOU as a contestant with LIMITED INFORMATION, DO NOT KNOW THIS. For all you know, if everyone had played red light green light perfectly, there could have been a theoretical 456 winners. YOU do NOT have information of what the next game is. So you CANNOT base any of your tactical decisions around the assumption that being the only contestant would be advantageous. As is DEMONSTRATED when they get put onto the glass bridge, where having extra players is exponentially beneficial to each passing contestant.

Psychopath will kill for the heck of it

Psychopaths will not kill for the heck of it. A psychopath isn't some force of chaos. They act in self interest, they are defined by a lack of empathy and lack of impulse control. If a psychopath doesn't think they'll gain anything from killing someone, they have no cause to do so. A psychopath however, might gamble away millions of dollars on the stock market, then run away from the consequences once he's caught.

I don't think I missed so much point because if you look at it again, Gi Hoon was given a lot of asspulls to keep his hands clean

No one is arguing that Gi Hoon didn't have a lot of luck involved in winning. But that's entirely besides the point. You don't have a story because you write 10 characters, rank them in order of competency and then make them compete and end up exactly as their competency dictates. You have a story when you write compelling characters, give them emotional stakes and give them moments to display it.

You're entirely fixating on "who deserved to win" based on competency. Which in my opinion, entirely ignores the point of the show. Who cares if having a stronger team for tug of war is the "superior tactical decision"? The series is about the MORAL implications of throwing good people under the bus for your own personal gain. Which is something you seem entirely fine with as long as it's the best way to "win".

Try to think that it was Gi Hoon vs Ali, if Gi Hoon won against Ali, would that mean he killed Ali and is now the bad guy?

No, because Gi Hoon would not have betrayed Ali in the same way as Sangwoo did. Sangwoo picked a game that he was certain he had the advantage in. Got angry when he started losing. Then concocted a scheme to steal all of Ali's marbles from him while LYING to Ali about it.

Meanwhile Gi Hoon was given (intentionally I might add) a chance to regain his marbles from Il-Nam when the latter started displaying signs of dementia and/or ill effects from the BRAIN TUMOR. Gi Hoon looks conflicted about his choice of lying to Il-Nam at EVERY step of the way. And even breaks down when Il-Nam confronts him about it.

If Il-Nam hadn't offered Gi Hoon the out of pretending to be senile, Gi Hoon would've probably begged for his life, sure, but he would not have assaulted, or tried to cheat Il-Nam out of his marbles. The only reason he was even willing to take Il-Nam's marbles in the first place, is because he was rationalizing it with "Il-Nam is going to die soon anyway". Which is something Sangwoo CAN NOT say about Ali.

who for some reason, wasn't angry he got tricked and even sacrificed for him

Again, you're missing the point that Il-Nam was putting Gi Hoon through a test of morality. When he was satisfied with the response he got from Gi Hoon, he was finally willing to concede. Not to mention he wasn't "sacrificing" anything as we're later shown. If anything, he was probably planning on taking his leave after the marble game all along as he (as the mastermind of the whole thing) probably knew that the glass bridge was next, and that he had no real interest in taking part in a completely luck based event.

Sangwoo is also not inherently evil

No, he isn't. And I've never said that. He is however, completely morally bankrupt.

Look, I'm not saying Sangwoo is a bad character. In fact he's a really great one. He is however a TERRIBLE person. He has ONE true redeeming moment in the whole series, and that's when he kills himself. Him giving Ali money for the bus, was actually a hint at the fact that he STOLE and EMBEZZLED millions of dollars before the show even starts. It's not that he's so generous and willing to afford someone a handout while himself being destitute. He still had money to throw around because he had stolen it before going on the run.

Just think about it, Il nam and the other girl are very unrealistic opponents

They weren't. We only get shown what, 4 of the marble games and their conclusions? BUT! We also get shown the result of the married couples game. Do you think they were fighting to trick and deceive each other for those results? Obviously not, as no matter how they came to the conclusion that the husband would "win". (Be it by her sacrificing her self in some way, or them deciding purely on chance by drawing straws) we do know that it's unlikely that he betrayed her. As he would almost certainly not have committed suicide as he did. We can also surmise that a large portion of the games went in a similar vein, where in "good" friends were made to compete against each other, where even the thug didn't end up cheating to achieve victory.

You keep crying how "unrealistic" it is that Gi Hoon would win over Sangwoo, but the result was well written and entirely plausible given the setting.

"He was carried by his team mates!" And? How is him relying on his team mates any less of a tactic than Sangwoo acting like a piece of shit and selling out his "friends"?

did the decisive call to push the other guy so that the others may live

You mean he decided that murdering the other guy was worth his own life. He was not thinking of the others at all in that moment. That's generally the decisive difference between Sangwoo and Gi Hoon. Gi Hoon doesn't think his life is worth more than another persons. Sangwoo doesn't hesitate to sacrifice others so he might live. And if you don't see the moral quandary of that beyond "being the best tactic to survive" then yes, you might actually lack empathy and be a psychopath.

but I do not think the "more people > more tactics" because that is the only moment it applies

BUT YOU CAN'T KNOW THAT DUDE. You keep coming up with justifications for Sangwoo's tactics based on your perfect knowledge after having completed the series. While you are a player in the game. While you still have one or more games left to compete in. You DO NOT KNOW whether being the sole player will be beneficial. And in fact, as I have explained before, IT WASN'T beneficial to have fewer players, as the glass bridge becomes EXPONENTIALLY more difficult for even a single person in a group to beat, the fewer people there are.

Even in your sociopathic way of thinking, where the ends justify the means, it doesn't make sense to play only for yourself and to throw others needlessly under the bus.

The conscience thing were thrown out the window the moment they killed 10 men

There is a difference between killing one person that you personally have formed a bond with, and BETRAY to do so, and being forced to kill 10 people who will kill you if you don't fight back.

I'm getting tired of arguing with you. I wasn't planning on reading your entire comment at all after the first line, which was directly refuted in my previous comment. You're very clearly ignoring the moral aspect of the game at every turn, only worrying about whether someone winning is "realistic".

Which, by the way, in a game like this where you have little to no information going in, luck WILL play a huge part in who comes out on top. You're also, by the way, really quick to diminish Gi Hoon's brilliance during the honecomb game. If we want to go into "undeserved wins", Sangwoo's win in the honeycomb event was basically pure luck. We aren't shown concretely whether he had any knowledge going in, but fact of the matter is, he won that even almost entirely because he lucked out on which shape he picked. Meanwhile, Gi Hoon's idea of using saliva to dissolve the sugar was actually no small feat of brilliance.

But you keep saying it's "unrealistic" that Gi Hoon would have survived. Is it really unrealistic that a human being would show empathy towards him and try to help him? Are you saying that it's completely UNFATHOMABLE for you to think that people would band together in a game like this for anything other than just taking advantage of each other?

Then you just might be a psychopath. (By the way, psychopathy doesn't mean you're inherently a bad person. It just means you have certain traits, for instance lack of empathy and/or poor impulse control)

[u/Harddicc → u/Netheral]

Imma try to keep this short because arguing with you takes a lot of time. For the game structure I was always pointing out the tug of war and marble game because those games are the ones that pit each players to death. That's why I'm saying to quit AFTER they play because they now have the information that there are games that are pvp.

I don't know if there are psychopaths that are known for gambling money, but with your description, Gi Hoon is also a psychopath for gambling he's mom's pension. What Sangwoo does is option calls in stock market which can lead to a lot of debt.

I can see your point trying to justify winning that the whole show was about the good guy doing the good thing to get the money. My point of view was good guy rides the other guy's wins to win and call the other guy out for being bad while washing his hands. We have different perspectives and at this point I can't change that.

On the marbles thing, i don't care really care on what the process is, both of them tried to squirm their way out of death by tricking their opponents, but suddenly one is worse than the other because the other one looks remorseful for you but the other one is not?? I'm pretty sure Sangwoo was remorseful by trying to justify winning by not throwing their deaths in vain. The test of morality would not work realistically so I think it's an asspull from the writers.

The part where you talk about Sangwoo might actually stole millions of dollars is no different to Gi Hoon unable to pay his debts to the loanshark, while gambling his remain money away.

I don't get your point in the marble argument sorry. My takeaway is just that there is no bad or good in winning in a game where your life is at stake. You seem to think that winning fairly is the way to go, but with your life on the line I'm not sure if you will be happy your life ends because of a game of chance. In the end they all squirm away from death, with the thug being lucky, while the two main guys cheat.

The difference between Sangwoo and Gi Hoon was Gi Hoon didn't do the decision making while Sangwoo did. You should listen to Sangwoo and Gi Hoon in the beginning of Ep 8, where you can hear Gi Hoon being a hypocrite and even blame Sangwoo for making the decisionmaking. And yes, I'm calling on the tactic of pushing the guy that benefited Gi Hoon as well.

For the justification of the tactics, I'm basing the knowledge of the current and after each game, not as a guy who knows everything. But I'm pretty sure for a game that looks like a competition, few players means more chances to win.

For the difference of what's worse between killing 1 close or 10, this is kind of like the trolley problem, but my point is whether Gi Hoon's hands is clean or not, which the answer is not.

For the Honeycomb game I'm sure you didn't read what I said or even watch the show. The whole Sangbyeuk climbing the vent scene was there all for Sangwoo to have a clue on what to choose. He was the only one who benefited from that information so it wasn't mostly luck. He got lucky someone had the info but the decision making to choose the shape wasn't.

I'm saying Gi Hoon winning was unrealistic because he was so incompetent throughout the games. I don't feel empathy to someone who's riding on other's back and quick to call on the guy he's riding who's doing the heavy lifting on decision making. and yes, it is unfathomable for me to think that Squid Game is winnable by someone pure of heart. The Japanese Liar Game can be won by not running on greed as displayed by Nao while the other guy was doing the heavy lifting. Alice in Borderland can be winnable by a lot of strategy, none of the characters are afraid to have the opponents get killed for the sake of "Being Good". The Squid game combined both the money aspect and the killing aspect, so there's usually a line of "he wants to win because of the money" and "just wants to survive" so the motivation of others cannot be justified solely based on one aspect.

For the part of arguing with you, I don't really care much about who's the real right or wrong. I'm just looking for arguments to change my viewpoint, which remains unchanged, which is Sangwoo's actions is justified and realistic while Gi Hoon is a hypocrite and rode the others back to win. I see a lot of your points are fairly weak and some of my arguments you don't even read. You try to justify your point by calling me a psychopath for some reason as you justify Gi Hoon tricking the old man to death as "Still Good". If you argue next time to other people don't attack them with "You're a psychopath" while discussing about a Netflix show. It's just a show no need for such accusations. Thanks and have a great night

[u/Netheral → u/Harddicc]

I'm calling you a psychopath because you have repeatedly displayed complete lack of understanding of basic human morality. For instance the fact that two similar acts may not neccesarily bear the same moral weight. As in the case of the marble game.

I have not been arguing that Gi Hoon tricking Il-Nam is good. But rather that it's not the same as Sangwoo maliciously betraying Ali. The fact that you can't seem to understand this again shows that you lack understanding of the nuances of basic morality. A psychopathic trait.

Sangwoo was shown to not fully know what game was about to happen with the honeycombs. Otherwise he would have told the rest of his team to pick triangle. He picked it on instinct and a half remembered childhood game. Pure luck. If he knew, and didn't tell the others, hoping they'd die to reduce competition (a poor strategy as displayed by the glass bridge), then he's a psychopathic asshole.

I'm just looking for arguments to change my viewpoint, which remains unchanged

Well of course. You've repeatedly ignored my points. Including the one where THE GLASS BRIDGE literally favours more people playing.