Proxy

I won't cover everything you have written since you wrote a lot and many were tangential, no offense.

First, it's not one or two things that point to Tang's abilities being real. It's how all the coincidences keep piling up whenever he is involved in a crime. You can't just isolate the dog situation and say that could happen by sheer chance, then look to the another coincidental scenario separately and say that the chances of that is also possible. Sure, they are all possible individually, but altogether, they become astronomically low or completely improbable. That is, you have to look at the chances of Tang only killing criminals, the dog licking off the evidence, the thieves stealing the evidence as Tang is about to turn himself in, the fire, the wood falling, the rain, and all the other coincidences as one event, not as isolated events.

Second, if you enter a house, the dog food is ripped open, there is a trail of dog food leading to your dog, and your dog has crumbs in its mouth, then you can safely assume that the dog ate the dog food. Is it possible that there is an alternative explanation? Yes. Yet, is it likely? No, and it definitely doesn't lean in the direction for an alternative explanation based on the given information. There could be an alternative scenario for the news coverage in Season 2, but right now the editing of the show leans or points to Tang committing the murders for the ending because that is how the scenes were edited. The scenes show Lee Tang reentering the country, the news report with JNG's reaction, and then Lee Tang's bumping into a stranger with his goosebump sensor going off. The logical suggestion is that Lee Tang is continuing his killings.

Third, just because something is supernatural doesn't mean it has to come from God or a Creator. I don't know why you are making this assumption. Do superpowers from superheroes or supervillains imply God gave those powers to them? Roh Bin thought so, but that is only his interpretation of the situation. Unquestionably, Tang has some sort of ability but you can just assume that it comes from the Writer and it won't make a difference because the series doesn't mention God or a Creator.

And finally, you can call it fortuitous luck, but at the end of the day, it's just semantics. If you think the show is really just about sheer luck and Lee Tang is a deranged thoughtless lunatic psycho committing all these murders by always leaving traces around and never planning for them, but he was just in the right spot and right time every single time, and if you think that's a good interpretation.. Well, I just don't know what to say to that?
I am positive that is not the direction of the show and that Lee Tang himself, at least, believes he has some sort of ability, which is why he's so confident about committing the murders without a care in the world. Then, the writer always coincidentally matches the expectations of his belief. If you accept that Lee Tang believes in the ability for whatever reason it may be (maybe he's delusional or suffers from megalomania, it doesn't matter) ask yourself this:
Suppose you are writing a story and the main character of your story, whenever he flips a fair coin, the coin always lands heads. And then, whenever your character flips a coin, something coincidentally causes that coin to flip heads. Now imagine that character starts abusing this power to gamble and makes a lot of money, but it just turns out he's incredibly lucky and he was just living in a universe where a one out of a googolpexian (1/(a number with 10^100 zeroes) chance was granted to him. What is the difference whether the coin always flipping heads is by the character's luck or his supernatural ability at that point? None whatsoever. The character believes that he possesses some sort of ability. The character acts as if he possesses that ability. And finally, you, as the writer, constantly grant him his expectations... then, that's just your character's ability. It's also clearly supernatural in the sense that it defies all common odds and common sense.

This will be my last post about this topic because I don't think you can convince me to think otherwise. You can also believe whatever you wish. However, kindly understand that you are in the minority when you claim you can reject the supernatural tag that was given to the drama and accepted in every platform. It is also extremely strange of you to argue that the drama leans in favor of your interpretation when your interpretation not only reject the tags and labels provided for the drama by the studio that categorized it, but also ignores the details within it.

The news reporter is reporting the death of John Doe or "Kim-ssi," which is the Korean version of John Doe, when investigators realize that John Doe's DNA also matched the DNA for the prime suspect of an unsolved abduction-murder case. John Doe is also suspected to be a part of a string of murders that may be linked. The previous and subsequent scenes are of Tang entering Korea and getting goosebumps after bumping into a stranger. Altogether, this suggest Tang is back to killing criminals and Nam Gu knows it because he knows about Tang's abilities or his "luck."

You forgot the fire, the rain, the wood falling on Roh Bin, and people always willing to take the fall for Tang.
It's not just luck, or if it is, that's just his superpower at this point 😂

That's a good one too!

? I didn't say the comedy didn't work for me. I said the original webtoon is a comedy so the first few episodes of the webtoon passed off the first couple of murders as accidents and coincidences. The drama, however, is more time limited so they explain the powers pretty early on.

No, when they kidnapped the prosecutor, they didn't know what crime he committed. They just assumed he committed a crime because of Tang's ability and then Roh Bin confirmed which crime he committed after hacking into his computer. Right before JNG shoots Chon, Tang also gets the goosebumps. It wasn't gut intuition. The fly, the dog, the random robbery, the dying dad taking the fall, Roh Bin taking the fall, the rain, the fire, the wood falling down on Roh Bin, and the gun running out of bullet were all indicative of Tang's "lucky" ability to always escape his crimes.

You didn't answer my question. If you don't think it's supernatural then what was the final scene where JNG watches the news and figures out Tang is still committing murders? He's just a really good or lucky serial killer who manages to find other criminals and leave absolutely no evidence behind whatsoever all the time; someone who always manages to effortlessly commit perfect crimes by actual dumb luck? That would be ridiculous.

He's also great in DP, Roundup, My Liberation Notes, and Big Bet.

I had really high expectations coming into this drama and was let down. The drama is pretty entertaining but not without its flaws. Nothing to write home about. 6.5/10

The first half of the drama is the typical cat and mouse police chase and the second half of the drama is some sort of character-driven supernatural, vigilante thriller.

I think movie makes it obvious Tang has some sort of superpower while the webtoon makes it less obvious because the webtoon is more of a comedy.
Tang's ability is that the goosebump act as some sort of spidey sense for other serial killers and the evidence that can incriminate him keeps miraculously disappearing. If you remove the supernatural, then the drama becomes confusing. How else did JNG identify Tang was continuing his killing spree when the John Doe, or Kim-ssi, in the news coverage of the final scene is revealed to be a serial killer if it's not because of Tang's supernatural abilities perfectly matching the MO of the killer question?

rip

lol

I agree that the situation was a lot more complex and the information from the video is outdated. It is insane to me how quickly information seems to move in the digital age.

If anyone is confused by why the overall score went up from 7.5 to 8:
I had rewatched this drama with my roommates who were interested because of the show's fame, and the drama ended up being better than I had remembered it. Initially, my rewatch value was a 6, but I bumped it up to a 7 because my second experience was almost as great as my first experience.
Thank you all for reading!

I do not mean to intervene in the actual discussion, but have you seen their watchlist? If you have not, then I suggest that you do.

Yes, that was the film in mind. Thanks!

And, that is quite the shame. I disliked the ending, but I thought the characters were portrayed very realistically, which is a win in my book.

Nice try, but you have edited your message twice now and it still looks confusing. I think my point was made if I have at least convinced you to change your message ;).

Right, because it is not like I can conveniently edit my posts without needing to include the word "edit:"
Also, if you are going to feign ignorance, at least be realistic about it. Do you really think adding "almost" in "everything is almost exactly the same" is going to make it sound differently from your original post? The insinuation is still there.

I am not sure what you were exactly implying in your post by noting the similarities of Korean shows and other Western films since I have never seen the Korean sources -- I took it that you meant that the filmmakers were inspired by or, worse, plaigiarized those movies. If not, you should just have left it at X Korean drama reminded me of Y American/British film and I would have understood what you meant.
Therefore, I will just say this generally. There is no evidence of Squid Game being inspired by Saw or Hunger Games in any shape or form. Their only resemblance is that they fit the same subgenre as Ian has already noted. If an inspiration is to be noted it would be a "comic" under the same genre; the writer had never specified which comic it is, but there are a variety to choose from.

Hunger Games and Saw are both franchises of the death game subgenre.
The idea itself is not exclusively based off those American movies as implied by your post, and can be traced back to the Japanese film, Battle Royale, as a film reference, but earlier references to The Running Man, and if we also included novel references, such as Stephen King's The Long Walk (and Running Man/The Long Walk's concept can be referenced further back to older films and the novels, but their names escape me).
Essentially, the idea is at least a century year old and has nothing to do with the Saw or Hunger Games series, which are both less than 20 years old.

I am excited and a bit worried: American Psycho (2000)'s Christian Bale is a tough act to follow.

Yes, you may have a preference for a more traditionally straightforward, plot-driven narrative, and that is fine too. I also agree that misplaced fillers suck too. Or, when a writer may not have thoroughly thought out or poorly implements her intentions.

My spiel was regarding your commentary on KES adding side characters, love triangles, bromances, etc as being redundant or an indicator of bad writing. I am willing to argue otherwise: that even if it may seem redundant, those may be good (and perhaps more strongly, better) add ons in the screenplay because it engages the viewers in the immersive experience, and allows them to make subconscious or conscious comparisons of the different relations and the transformations in the relations.