So I got this tweet a couple of days from one of you… and because I want you to know that I listen to you, and care very much about what you want to hear we are here. First, the tweet.

And actually, kudos to you Pancake, because dang, is this movie the very center of my wheel house. Sometimes I venture out to popular movies like Batman vs. Superman or Star wars or what have you but that is not what I do best. Movies that are nearly incomprehensible are my forté. Usually most movies that are hard to understand include fullon time travel paradoxes, or Ouroboros-esque movies that cycle out into the infinite. But I have had some success with you all on more normal films like The Prestige, Sicario, and a whole host of other more normal films that just didn’t completely make sense.

But Circle? Circle is EVERYTHING that spins my gears. Let’s see, we have Science Fiction – Check. Complex morality implications – check. In depth Philosophy diving – Check. Low budget, high concept, fantastic script, minimalist style, controversial ideas, Check, Check, Check, Check, and Check. This movie has everything.

Circle-Still-Machine-Aaron-Hann

My Review and Explanation of the Movie Circle

If you are unfamiliar with the movie, you will soon have to leave, but before you do – let me get you hooked on this crack. The movie begins with 50 people. Five Zero. Standing, in a dark room. They are all unconscious. But soon, one of the fifty wakes. Then another. And then it because super clear that they can’t move off their spots, or touch another person without something very bad happening. And soon people start dying. And ultimately, this group of Fifty, nope, Forty nine, nope, forty eight… need to figure out what is going on, or they are all going to die. Is it a psychopath’s twisted fantasy being played out? Is it an alien invasion experiment? No one has any idea at all. Here, watch the trailer, then… I’m sorry, but you are going to need to leave until you’ve seen the film. Fair enough? But I totally want you to see the film, and come participate in the conversation that I guarantee will get even more complicated than the movie itself.

Yeah, this thing has so so acting. Hyper-minimalist sets (I think we have one set in the entire movie until the last 2 minutes?), and even less in the way of special effects. I personally can’t imagine how these guys got 50 stereotypical individuals of every different walk of life to participate in this small film. I mean, don’t get me wrong, I would have killed (see what I’m doing there?) to get in this movie. That would have been awesome! But some of the most minimal movies are the best to discuss, because they are more about their ideas and less about excitement, or special effects. Right?

Circle the Movie Overview

Sometimes when we go down the rabbit hole way too fast we lose people. So let’s talk through what actually happens in this movie. Like, just practically speaking. We’ll leave the philosophical conjecturing til later… but, oh I promise we will get to that soon enough. So what the heck happened?

The very beginning of the movie is all about the initial shock of this situation. The people wake and quickly begin freaking out. It is here that we learn the rules of the Movie Circle. Oh, are there rules in this movie.

Rule #1 – No stepping off your circle. If you step off your circle you will die quicker than any other rule being broken.

Rule #2 – No touching other people. That well set off a warning alarm. No one dies in the movie after touching someone, but it’s safe to assume that they would have, if they continued.

Rule #3 – Every few minutes someone random will die. Unless they vote.

Rule #4 – The person with the most votes will die.

Rule #5 – You cannot vote for yourself.

Rule #5 – In the case of a tie – crazy stuff happens. But generally speaking, if the voters don’t intervene, both will die.

Rule #6 – In the case of a tie, the voters can vote amongst the two, or even change their vote to someone else… which actually plays a significant part as this movie progresses.

Figuring these rules out cost a significant number of lives. This movie has the highest mortality rate of any movie I have ever seen. Like, not even World War Z or Zombieland comes close. People pop by violent electrical shock over and over again. But as the players start to figure out what is going on, the movie goes from shock, to stereotypical profiling, to then game playing. And moves through these stages fairly briskly. And I’ll talk more about each stage in a second. But as we approach the last few players we are left with a very ‘benevolent’ guy that has been orchestrating the survival of a girl and a pregnant woman. Good guy right?! Nope.

And when this guy wins the game, he assumes he is about to be let out, because he is the last man standing. Right? Except nope. The beeping count down continues… and he knows he’s about to die to. They had been assuming that last person would be released. But now he realizes this wouldn’t be the case. But instead of dying he’s in a tie. A TIE?!? What is happening here? Well, normally the dead get dragged away by some unknown force, but this time the pregnant woman’s feet are still on the pad, and the last remaining person is in a tie with the pregnant woman’s fetus. Which, is an interesting comment in it’s own right. But right now I’m just trying to marshal my way through the details of what physically happened. So I’ll leave that until later.

We find out later, in a voice over, that in that tie, because of Rule number Five, the people can’t vote for themselves… and the fetus couldn’t vote, the guy won that stalemate and the fetus was killed next.

And then, for the first time, we leave the dark room. And we see the guy (I think his name is Eric? Please understand, that it is nearly impossible to keep all these quickly disappearing names straight) in an aqueduct (which, as an ex-Angeleno, is a uniquely brilliant location to have them end up in) surrounded by other people staring into the sky… watching alien ships float across the sky. Are these other ‘winners’/’survivors’? Just random people? We don’t know. Cue the credits.

Right? Is that what you took away from what physically happened? Let’s make sure we get the really basic basics squared, because it’s about to get crazy up in here.

The Three Phases of the Movie Circle

As I mentioned above, there were three phases or cycles of discovery as the movie progressed. Almost like the Kübler-Ross cycle of grief, we sort of grow in our acceptance and discovery of the situation as it unveils before us. It starts out with discovery. The rules and the what of this experience. Then it moves on to a phase of stereotyping and moral justifying. And then finally it moves into a gamification of the situation. Each one is important and each one holds nuggets of truth that we need to unpack.

Phase 1 – What is happening

The ‘What is Happening’ phase is the most basic of the three phases. This is the rule discovery phase. It is the conjecturing about how they got here and a bit about the why they are here phase. But it’s formative in that the structure of the movie is built. The Philosophical rules are set here.

And it’s in this phase that we are given the liferaft conundrum. If you have attended a college Philosophy introduction course, you know of what I speak. It’s a simple mental exercise that you’ll understand immediately if you’ve never heard of it. Basically it goes something like this.

A cruise ship hits something and everyone is abandoning ship. In the chaos of the moment, 18 people dive into a life raft that can handle 8. But the severity of the situation doesn’t hit them until after the cruise ship has gone under and the life raft starts taking on water. So here we all are, reading the safety instructions on the life raft, and we realize how deep the crap is we are in. And now we have to decide, who stays in the life raft, and who goes. How do you even begin to build the psychological scaffolding necessary to make a decision as enormous as that?

Are you the guy that decides worth is based on salary? Are you that racist that decides to toss the minorities out because they are lesser than? What about age? Do we kick the older people out of the raft because they’ve already lived long lives? In Philosophy 101 this thought exercise has been a staple for years and years. So concept behind this movie isn’t anything new. But seeing it played out in this new and updated way gives it a fascinating spin.

Phase 2 – Stereotypical Posturing

As the survivors start moving from figuring out the rules and the what of their situation, they quickly head into the psychological scaffolding and justification of their rationalizing. As someone is dying every 2 or 3 minutes the conversation works in fits and starts. This isn’t a long drawn out 2 hour Philosophy class where you get to ponder your options. You either make a collective decision or someone is randomly chosen. And no one likes that option (beside the person chosen that is). So votes happen fast and furious and lots of them are about who spoke last. Or who was the racist? Or who was obviously trying to game this situation?

But this movie explores the realities of how this could possibly go down. I mean, without much in the way of veneer. We see conversations about the latino gang member, and how he beat his girlfriend. He didn’t last long. And wasn’t that one woman a porn star? Hrmmm. Those are fake breasts, right? And what about that lesbian who traveled the world working for NGO’s before marrying her partner and adopting a daughter. Does she deserve to live? “I mean, cause that’s a sin right” says the conservative, suspenders wearing white male. I mean heck, the first five people targeted were the oldest people – and there wasn’t much thought given to that decision at all. They’ve lived the longest, buh-bye.

It is probably the most openly racist, agist, sexist, and homophobic movie I’ve ever seen. And it works, because, what else are you going to do? One of the funniest moments of the movie is the woman who decides they all need to figure out what they have in common… so she would talk about herself and maybe it would ring a bell. Yeah, she was dead within a minute and a half. hahaha. The next guy who’s asked to talk about himself says, “Oh HELLLL no. I like living.” hahah.

Phase 3 – Winning the game

And in the final section of the movie, it moves from racist and stereotypical histrionics to move of a strategic game playing. Two sections of people realize that this entire experiment hinges around the pregnant woman, and the young girl standing next to her. The first group wants to save this duo, and the other group wants to kill them so that someone else would stand a chance to survive. So power moves are made in a very Survivor-esque struggle. I’ll give you one, but then you have to give me two, sort of a way. So instead of profiling around who DESERVES to survive, the movie moves into a sort of game posture where two different power groups are struggling for control.

circle2

Circle Movie Philosophical Underpinnings

Ok, so most of you will skip this section and jump straight down to the Circle Ending, but you may be doing yourself a bit of a disservice if you haven’t spent at list a little bit of time under the eves of a College’s Philosophy department. And while many of these viewpoints are the most simplistic of Philosophical ponderings possible… they are still pretty critical to understanding this movie completely and helping you to come to final conclusion of what may have actually happened.

Theory #1 – The Circle and Nihilism

The King of Nihilism is none other than Nietzsche and then later on was Heidegger. Nietzsche is my own favorite post modern and Nihilist in that, if there is no God (which I disagree with, but if) then we should all be Nihilists. There really is no other option, and everything else is a trumped up fiction. But the basic viewpoint of Nihilism basically says that there is nothing beyond what we see. Not only that but that there is no reason for our being here. We were an accident of primordial soup, and you know what? That whole self awareness? That was a fluke too. Heidegger carried these thought constructs forward and was a fan favorite of Hitler. Which makes sense to me. But I don’t want to get too far down that particular beaten path.

As the movie was ending and we have our winner Eric standing exultantly, having tricked both the girl and the pregnant woman… when he hears the beeping again he yells out at the people in control of this experiment something to the effect of, “You know what? We are all fucking horrible people.” At this moment, the movie is the epitome of Nihilism. Everyone just dies. There is no point. This life experiment? It has zero purpose. We live. We die. And that’s that. Which reminds me of a quote from Nabokov (I mean, heck, we are already at 2,500 words, what’s a few more?) “The cradle rocks above an abyss, and common sense tells us that our existence is but a brief crack of light between two eternities of darkness.” Yeah, that’s Nihilism. We are all going to die, so who cares if it’s a while dying on an alien ship while being tortured along the way? Nothing matters.

Theory #2 – The Circle and Determinism

Determinism is about as simple a philosophical theory as possible to understand. Basically it posits that everything happens for a reason, that nothing is an accident. We hear a Pastor speak about God’s will and how His purposes are always good in spite of our inability to understand them. And it was God that was ultimately in control. Determinism flies in the face of free will by stating that we are not in control, even what appears as freewill, is actually already predetermined and already known. There are a million different flavors of determinism and there are fullon doctoral dissertations on these variations. For example, William James’ essay on The Dilemma of Determinism appeared in 1884. And in it he coined the terms “soft determinism” (or compatibilism – man this is some rabbit hole I’m down right now), and “hard determinism” (strict determinsm… or better put, pre-determinism from the beginning of time).

If you look at the movie of Circle from the light of Hard Determinism it would state that God foreknew that aliens would come, and experiment on these humans, and that it is what it is because it was foreknown. Eric won because knew he would. Eric was a dork, because God knew he would be. Even my discussion of Eric’s dorkism is determined. We are locked in this path, and there is nothing we can do about it.

Theory #3 – The Circle and Plain Consequentialism or Benevolence

Plain Consequentialism basically just states that of all the things a person might do at any given moment, the morally right action is the one with the best overall consequences. (If there is no one best action because several actions are tied for best consequences, then of course any of those several actions would be right.) So, by sacrificing one’s self to save a young girl, it may very well be the best action over all. Right?

Another spin on this philosophy is that of Benevolence. Which was crafted by David Hume, and it states that all actions of a moral agent are motivated by character traits… whether they are virtuous or hostile. Hume would say that if you chose to donate money to a charity then your action was motivated by your virtuous character trait. And by making this action happen you have a very real impact on the receive of your action (giving food to a starving person will actually keep that person alive… and they will be impacted by that act.)

You can obviously see why either of these philosophical theories would be instrumental potentially in defining this theory. If people are capable of moral kindness, and these kindnesses impact others, should we not consider a benevolent response in deciding how to react in this scenario?

Theory #4 – Game Theory’s Prisoner’s Dilemma and Egoism

You know the prisoner’s dilemma. Two prisoners who committed a crime together are being held in separate cells. If they both stay silent they will both get one month in jail. If one of them snitches, the snitcher will go free, and the other will go to jail for a year. If no one snitches they both go to jail for 3 months. If they both snitch they both go to jail for 3 months. The question here is simple… as a prisoner in this situation, how do you game this scenario to gain the best possible outcome? (Want the best possible execution of the Prisoner’s Dilemma? Check out this play here which was discussed in detail on the podcast Radio Lab.)

Obviously, at the end of the movie, Eric makes a purely selfish manipulation of the Prisoner’s Dilemma. He gets the young girl to step off her space simultaneously with him (or so he says) and instead of stepping off he votes for the death of the pregnant woman. Eric basically plays the prisoner’s dilemma twice in the span of 2 seconds. The first time with girl, getting her to commit suicide, and the second time with the pregnant woman by voting her out… and thereby killing her.  If for you this movie is most adequately understood from a purely game theory standpoint then this is the theory that best depicts the primer movers for all these actors.

And if you couple Game Theory with the most selfish act possible you have just crossed the streams with Egoism. Egoism is simple enough to understand. It basically states that there is no such thing as an altruistic thought or action. Even if I give food to a starving person, I am only doing it because I want to impress you. Or I like feeling good about myself. Right? Egoists are a truly savage beast of a person to deal with.

Circle Ending and My Favorite Theory

This movie has a very specific world view that it is espousing. It’s obviously a very nihilistic and selfish perspective of the planet. That everyone should do what is best for themselves and that they should be justified in so doing whatever it is that they do if it furthers their purposes. Right? This thought experiment shouts loudly and clearly that since there is nothing but the abyss awaiting us, do whatever the hell you want to do to get yours.

I remember meeting a true anarchist/nihlist in my first Philosophy class. We actually became fast friends because he believed that since there was no God, he should live every moment for his own benefit. It was a logically clean system. I believe the exact opposite, that since there was a God, I should live benevolently. And our relationship was a bi-polar match made in heaven. We actually got along swimmingly because we believed in a pure system. Most people in the class stood firmly in the middle. They believed there was no God, and yet, they shouldn’t steal… they should act benevolently… for some purpose I didn’t understand.

My Anarchist friend, if here today would applaud Eric and his actions that manipulated his way to the end. And I applaud him too. Minus the fact that I believe in God and that there is a reason and prime mover that supersedes simply winning this alien game of twister. My two favorite guys in this movie was the young emo guy that chose to commit suicide early on. He was the first to do so. He did what I would do if I was really put in that situation. And the second was the man who never cast a vote and never said a word. Both of these characters were the most morally correct perspectives of how to play this game in real life in a world where God exists and our actions carry import.  So personally, I would side with Hume and Descartes that posit that our actions matter. That we all have a God shaped hole in our center that calls us to live benevolently and with a perspective beyond the moment.

But I would expect most people to go with would be that of the Game Theory explanation. That the person who is able to manipulate their way to the final tribal council is the winner come hell or high water. No? I’d love to hear your perspective on how the movie views the world, or how you view this exercise from your world view.

The Circle Epilogue and the Various UFOs

At the ending Eric is dumped into the Aqueduct, and he sees a number of others there too. Now, if you never lived near an aqueduct, you probably don’t know that you aren’t supposed to be in there. Sure, lots of movies and shows have car chases in aqueducts. But really? You can’t go into the aqueducts without getting in trouble. To have a stash of people just wandering around there makes zero sense. I would argue that all those people we see at the end are winners of their games. I even initially noticed a pregnant woman, and wondered if it was our pregnant woman. Which would imply that everyone in that ‘game’ survived, and that it was just one big psychological experiment.

But when I looked closer I noticed that the pregnant woman was not the same one. Which is a big deal from an explanation standpoint. Because it means that everyone really did in fact die. That it wasn’t a ruse. And that Eric had been complicit (no, not complicit but directly responsible!) in the deaths of 49 other people. Right?

If I am correct… what happened was this. Thousands, even millions, of people were abducted and made to play this game. When the game finished and there was one person left standing they were teleported back to earth to consider what it was that they had done. Right? And if the scale of the game was world wide, what would be left on planet earth would be 1/50th of the people… or 140 million people. And those 140 million people would be some of the worst, most egotistical people ever. 140 million people with the blood of almost 7 billion people on their hands.

And that is the larger picture that the movie creators want to posit. That we are all egoists. That we only should do what is right for our own best interest. That we should lie. Swindle. Steal. Whatever it takes to come out on top. No?

Personally I loved this movie. The acting was sparse. The writing was merely OK. But the theories at work underneath the surface here are fantastic. Just gorgeous. How would you play the game if you were forced to play? How do you think the creators of the movie believed the world should act if put in this position? Do you have one theory that really resounds for you? Or heck, bring your own philosophical theory to the table! There are a million to choose from. I literally cut out 5 more that I’d written out fully. But at 4,000 words now, I’m thinking this write up needs to stop and turn it over to you guys! I want to hear from you now.

Related Posts

89 Responses

  1. Ari

    Thank you, I enjoyed this. More than Belko, less than Exam. Every round was very suspenseful, no matter where the moral compass went. To me it didn’t matter who they picked in the end, but it matters how they got to the end. The movie shows the American version of the dilemma. It would be interesting to see different Circles all over the world.

    To me endings have a very important impact on my overall judgment. Form and message should go hand in hand. This ending is very brave. In an era where twists are the norm, the ending was straightforward (in my mind at least). The survivor survived.

    Other Circles would have different journeys, but they would all be dealing with the same questions. BUT AGAIN! My frantic mind races with all the possibilities, what if it was a circle of 50 pregnant women? 50 kids? 50 gay men? 50 prisoners? and so forth… and all the different permutations. 1 out of 50 is the world’s 2%. Right now less than 1% are in fact deciding on how the rest of the world lives, or dies. They and their ancestors put and kept them there.

    I love the metaphor and the microcosm this movie has shown. And, I marvel at the Thinc-ing community you have nurtured here. 🙂

    Reply
    • Taylor Holmes

      Thanks for the response Ari…
      My mind raced to the possibilities of a sequel with International Circles happening. Kinda like the ending of Belko? We see other places with other experiments happening? It’d be clever to flip between them and watch as they go different directions. I think Cube 2 sort of did this? No, but there were others of different nationalities? That was an interesting movie that the community recommended after my falling in love with these wild movies.

      Regardless, I too loved the metaphor of the movie and the dialogue it created. Fun movie. You’d think that the idea would never make it past 20 minutes. But it does and more! Anyway, thanks for coming out and finding us here. Make sure you swing back through regularly and let me know if you see any movies worth watching!

      Taylor

      Reply
  2. De Advocate

    It is somewhat unsettling (maybe more realistic though) that the guy who won killed a little girl and a pregnant mother and her child.
    Taylor, I would love to hear your thoughts on how God plays into this. Does he go to hell if he lets them live because that is suicide for him. Or does he go to hell because he essentially murdered them. Personally I feel if he chose to die, he would be fine as it would be to let the others live (golden ticket to the Pearly Gates) I don’t think this would count as suicide, at least not to me.
    As it stands, he lived. So he is either a psychopath and has no remorse. Bleak.
    Or the full reality will hit him later that he killed 49 people more or less. Massive survivor’s guilt. Maybe he commits suicide anyway. Bleak.
    And then we have aliens who play messed up games for who knows why. Bleak.

    Reply
    • Taylor Holmes

      Funny question De…
      But heck, I’ll play along. Let me see if I can explain fully. After reading through the Bible several times end to end, and slowly getting a feel for the love that God has for us both in the Old Testament, and also in the New (yes, you heard that correctly) I think my answer might surprise you.

      Let’s play three eventualities out in our minds. All between you and me. I am assuming in this thought exercise that you and I both are Christians. And by that I mean, you believe that Jesus is God come in flesh, who died for your sins, and through which you have been given grace.

      1. I don’t respond to one of your comments on my blog (this is a real one, because I can’t keep up with you!) and you hate me for it.
      2. I hear you hate me for not commenting, and I come to your house and kill you.
      3. I hear you hate me for not commenting and instead of killing you, I commit suicide.

      So, I’ve upped the ante a little bit here. Who goes to hell? You, in option 1? Me in option 2? Or me in option 3? Anyone? Anyone? Bueller? I don’t believe any of these options sends us to hell. But, if you were to do it again, and neither of us believing that Christ is God… 1, 2, and 3, sends us to hell. The key here being, that we have not received his grace for all of the sin we have done in our lives. Which includes petty hate thoughts. Yes?

      Does that make sense?
      Taylor

      Reply
  3. De advocate

    Your example makes sense. Unfair to ask you to pull it out of the movie in hindsight, but thanks for indulging me. Don’t get me wrong, I love movies with bleak endings. You just have to give me a great story and solid character development be they good or evil. I had none here. That is why for me this wasn’t a movie, just a filmed thought experiment in which the director determined the outcome for me.

    Reply
    • Taylor Holmes

      Fair enough. But just as a Philosophy 101 discussion starter this is an awesome movie. You are right though. I too need characters to drive the plot. And that didn’t happen here.

      Reply
  4. Jessica

    This movie was insanely interesting and unique to me, very different from any movie ive seen. In the situation I believe i would have done a possibility of a few things…one is try to convince others not to vote period because if everyone is going to die why do we have to go out killing or deciding who lives longer or dies sooner based on past sins or anything else. Another is to vote for the older people first, sounds horrible but I kind of agree with the guy at the beginning regarding the older going first, Id hope when I’m old if in a situation I would sacrifice my life for younger lives. Another that i would do which goes against what most probably think is if i of had to choose between the pregnant woman and the child I would choose the child. Why? Well my thought process is that even though the pregnant woman is technically two lives because of the baby in her(which we now know of standing alone to live she wouldve had to choose her unborn baby) but we have no clue if her pregnancy will turn out okay, what if it doesn’t, so my thought is the child is alive and very very young and id want her to get a chance to live. As a mom myself in any situation my first is to protect child/children so I know in that situation id want to protect the living child i see vs one that is unborn, which is odd because I value lives of unborn babies as well of course so its kind of hard to explain in words on here but i would have tried to make sure the child lived. What was a twist was the one that lived who manipulated so he could live, i didn’t see that coming. I also wondered during the movie if the last one would live or if the aliens would do something to them. I hope based on the ending their will be a sequel to further the story. It schocked me people wanted to vote for the child or pregnant woman at all and at that they were trying to do it fairly early on. Definitely one of the most interesting movies ive seen in my opinion, it had my attention the whole time which isnt easy for me in regards to movies/tv etc.

    Reply
  5. FuZzy Style

    “some of the worst, most egotistical people ever”
    I don’t agree there are a lot of kids, and young woman (probably all pregnant, though not visibly), so the majority of games were won because of the sacrifice of the other players.

    Reply
  6. Anit Bagga

    I think what you said at the end about only the most egoistic people being left on the planet is really intriguing. Makes me wonder if it’s similar to winning the sperm race you know so everybody alive on earth right now has selfishly defeated all the sperms to be here which means every human really is evil, if that makes any sense lol?

    Reply
  7. KCinSD

    My theory is it’s an alien casino, like a roulette table, even kind of looks like one. The aliens are behind a screen placing bets.

    Reply
  8. Displeased professor

    You impressively managed to enumerate all of the standard philosophy tropes of fundemental misunderstanding . Seeing as I specialize in Continental philosophy , your readings of Nietzsche are so off that you essentially managed to reach the exact opppsite conclusion of his philosophical project . Nietzsche was NOT a nihilist , he did NOT say that we should be nihilists , instead maintained that as the moral edifice of society shifted away from a catholic framework to one that was not based on divinity , this state of suspended gnosis would leave people feeling nihilistic. His ENTIRE body of work is focused on rebuilding society away from both the hegemonic religious model of morality and the nihilistic version of morality . Nietzsche encouraged assigning your own values to your life and emancipation from apathy and platonisicm / religious / kantian transcendentalism. And calling Heidegger a nihilist is just laughable. Not only did Heidgger ( like Nietzsche ) argue that nihilism was dangerous he wrote extensively about technology being the apparatus of nihilism for his concept of “being.” I could keep going but I think you get the point.

    Reply
    • Taylor Holmes

      Fair, I got your point. All of your points. But I personally believe he failed in all of those attempts post his definition of the void. He did such an amazing job tearing down, but lacked conviction or even logic in his building up. At the end of the day I believe that Nietzsche seemed to be a happy tree hugger. There is nothing – so seize the day. Which may make sense to you. Which, is fair. But not to me. And I have heard this argument time and again, and I know that that is his philosophical goal, but didn’t buy it when I was reading it. So, yes, you are right… I am wrong. So yes, I have come to his philosophy with my own optics and jaundices. Thanks for pointing them out. The class is all the wiser for it. I am not a professor. So I will yield to your perspective and reference your comment in this thread from now on.

      Reply
    • Kemo

      Because Nietzsche was a ponderer of nihilism and morality, it is easy to understand why a person who believes in a god might misinterpret while reading his aphorisms.

      I don’t know the person’s name in which to give credit but their words read some time ago stuck: “Live a lot, question yourself a lot, make mistakes, reflect on them and then read Nietzsche.”

      Reply
      • Taylor Holmes

        That is true Kemo. I do believe in God, and therefore the rest of his attempts to reassemble purpose after tearing it down ring false to me. But maybe it makes sense to you? Fair enough. I get it. I just don’t get it. But I do enjoy Nietzsche very much. If there was no God, he’s who I’d tied my hopes to.

  9. Tom

    Nice Summary and I agree with all of your points………. One thing bothered me though. There is a round close to the beginning where everyone votes to their right and the system notes a tie between all the competitors and kills one at random. How is this possible if the old guy who never spoke also never voted? Surely everyone would tie (and have a light on them) except the person standing to his right who wouldn’t have received any votes as he didn’t vote for them.

    As previously stated I think the end shows that lots of ‘games’ were positive where the people successfully sacrificed themselves for the child or Pregnant woman (which this would have been if not for Erics final selfish betrayal) I do wonder though if this was real how long they would survive after this. In a purely Darwinian way the strongest, not weakest, should have been chosen

    Reply
  10. Dom

    Wjust watched this movie… Not really sure about the ending…what if this wasn’t Erics first playthrough… Notice the group of people at the end? Mostly kids and pregnant women. And I think the ship at the end was just about to grab those people for the next round. Maybe Eric had the idea, that his greatest survival chances were if he played against kids and pregnant women? Noticed that he looked a tad to long at the pregnant woman in front of him. The only thing that doesn’t add up was his surprise that he had to play against the unborn child in the end…what do you think?

    Reply
  11. Rodolfo

    Hey first of all, thanks for the explanation.
    I wanna add something ,that for my personal opinion, its really bad done in most of the human culture and in our way to conceive the world and reality.
    I am talking about anthropocentrism.
    I liked the movie, but there was something that was always bodering me, we always think about other living beings to be exactly like us, not in shape but in their way to think and interact. We presupose that they experiment (science), that they believe in moral (religion), and that they wanna teach us something.
    Im being kind of a killjoy but i think that we won`t be ever able as occidentals to understand other forms of living, they maybe understand or learn things in other form of intelligence, maybe not reason and maybe not feelings.
    What do you think?
    Sorry for my engligh, am not native.
    Greetings from Chile

    Reply
    • Kemo

      Rodolfo, I was waiting for you haha! I please ask you to read “What Is It Like to Be a Bat” by Thomas Nagel.

      http://organizations.utep.edu/Portals/1475/nagel_bat.pdf

      You are so in line for Nagel’s philosophy of mind and ethics.

      Hopefully, Thomas Nagel’s “Bat” paper is easy to find translated in your language. You express a raised consciousness about things Thomas Nagel expresses so well and in-depth.

      It would do many people good to know and read the Thomas Nagel link given. How strange and welcomed a movie could lead to such a pathway of ponderance!

      Reply
  12. Kyle Sexton

    I just wayched this movie and initially i thought the same thing. I would just step off because theres no way im going to choose between a kid and a pregnant chick, let alone a 16 year old or a guy in the military. But as i thought i womdered if i should play the game to the best of my abilites for two reasons. One) i know ill do the right thing at tge end and two) I don’t trust most of the people in that show. I wish I couldn’t call every single twist, but I’m pretty good at reading people in real life so a movie is a cake walk and I’m hardly impressed. The ending was clearly winners as there are only roughly 15 outsole and mostly children and a couple pregnant ladies. Eve the guys tat win represented the bearded guy and a hole kid that won. With the information I provided would you still do the same thing?

    Reply
  13. Malachi

    If you notice all the people at the end standing in the aqueduct are pregnant women or children so I believe that the UFO things would have people of all ethnic groups and beliefs and actually did the exact same thing but all the other groups decided to keep either the child alive or the pregnant lady and they are the ones who survived as that was the final decision because I believe it was a test to see who would put their own selfish life over someone else because of race or belief or religion not saying I wouldn’t I dont know but that is what is really happening but the group we saw in the movie were all everyone to their own and want to live so kill someone else off for them and I the end Eric lived and he’s now with a group of pregnant or children

    Reply
  14. Daniel

    Considering the rules up until the end, why would the people be the survivors?

    We make this assumption from seeing “Eric” at the end of the movie regrouping with another set of individuals. There is a pregnant woman among these “survivors”. The circle confirms the assumption that unborn children count as a life (or a player) when Eric ties with the unborn child. If that is the case and a pregnant woman is left as the final player, wouldn’t this scenario result in a tie between the unborn child and the pregnant woman?

    “Rule #5 – In the case of a tie – crazy stuff happens. But generally speaking, if the voters don’t intervene, both will die.”

    Perhaps it’s a cyclical process to find the ultimate survivor and the movie shows us one of many rounds. Unanswered questions that make me wonder about this: (1) Why did the guy who woke up first know about some of the rules (e.g., stepping off and touching are bad); (2) Why would Eric move comfortably towards the UFO after surviving the first round?

    Reply
  15. Larry

    I thought the movie was dumb.

    Thoughtful reviews. Most of you really like stuff like this. I kept watching hoping for some form of a moral victory. Guess I am not a good nihilist.

    I applaud the people in the movie who stepped off the red circle for others.

    Reply
  16. AlexM

    I just watched the movie. My initial theory was some kind of “Aliens save our planet by reducing the human population”. I got that idea because of the seemingly insignificant fact that the people said they were abducted while being stuck in a traffic jam… <- like an example of pollution produced by the human race 😀 I know…it is a bit far fetched 😉 I wished I found any other hints pointing at that theory, but I did not 😛

    Reply
  17. Daf

    I really enjoyed reading your breakdown of the movie and philosophies, but I disagree with your conclusion. I think you will too.

    You concluded that the movie maker’s verdict was that we are egoists. I agree that the onlookers at the end were probably survivors. Are these survivors any less random than the contestants?

    Yes. 4/15 are children, 8:7 are male vs female, 1 is pregnant. None are elderly, none are disabled.

    My conclusion is that the sick, elderly and weak are killed off during the initial panic and self-preservation stages. Perhaps some survive to later rounds but ultimately lose to the benevolent vote, or are executed by the egoists. Ultimately there are three types of survivors: the egoists, best attuned to playing the game, intelligent, manipulative and ruthless; the soft targets, surviving from pity/benevolence; the survivors, who made it to the end by staying anonymous, getting lucky, avoiding a war.

    I believe in 1/3 of our groups benevolence won out. As for the other 2/3, we can’t be sure if it was the egoists or survivors. What we have learned, however, is if you want to survive the alien apocalypse, be young, be able-bodied, be non-threatening, and wear black pants or jeans.

    Reply
  18. Shaun

    The pregnant woman would have lived if she had heeded to the earlier warning and didn’t trust anyone. Her failure to vote is akin to lowering her gun in a Mexican standoff, with one shooter being influenced to killing themselves ie the little girl.

    It wasn’t just the philosophy that enabled him to win. It was the pregnant woman’s failure to understand the situation logically. If she did, everyone should have died, or she should have survived as was intended.

    Reply
  19. Jessica

    I also did the same thing! Lol. I finished the movie about an hour ago and instantly went to Google to find more meaning regarding the ending and whatnot. I hope their is a sequel, maybe their wont be though. I sort of love movies like this though because more movies seem to have a full ending so kind of cool to come across movies that dont fully show the full picture but leave enough to make you imagine and wonder and question what happens etc. Definitely a love hate with endings like that, but the movie was really interesting for sure!

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.