Ah ah la review de ma vie celle-ci je crois x)

No offense I really hope there'll be some space between the episode ‘drops’, the wait and the theories are what have fuelled the helluva hype. Removing this aspect of the series entirely would be a huge mistake in my opinion, even if I have no doubt that it's been thought through beforehand.

‘Panem et circenses
Bread and circus games.

Imagine an ending where squid games were shown on TV. We would see a young person betting everything he had on a player who was eliminated.

He would then think that he too could take part to pay off his debts. After all, it's just a game.

If we behind our TV can theorise about the death of this or that character, why shouldn't they be able to? After all, it would be a show like any other (like Panem's Hunger Games).

Would it be any more immoral than buying a lottery ticket or betting on a racehorse? Of course, but for the spectators the result would be the same.

Imagine, then, that instead of outraging people, Squid games are gaining in popularity. That some people find it the solution to their problems. While others find it entertaining. After all, they're games? There are participants, there's a prize...

Imagine that instead of stopping the games, people would be wondering whether they too might not have tried to take part. After all, it's a lot of money? And people were consenting, weren't they?

After all, we're talking about the murder of hundreds of people. But as we've seen with the choices made during the games, or even with the choice of recruiter in episode one, would this outrage the majority, or would people actually care about the games?

So imagine an ending where Jun-Ho and maybe Gi-hun manage to reveal to the world that Squid games exist with the intention of destroying them, but it has the opposite effect. At first, of course, people would be outraged.

From now on, we're going for a purely theoretical approach.

An ending that wouldn't be happy, an ending that wouldn't please the audience, an ending that would teach a lesson. In general, people don't like to have their way of being, of consuming, etc. questioned.

So Squid Game Season 1 didn't have the happy ending you'd expect. So why should this be the case for the series? What if the series' ending was a lesson with a terribly bitter message for its viewers?

As soon as he realised that the games were continuing, he gave up. He puts a coin in the machine to bring down those responsible. And Squid Game should have ended on this uncertain note, with the games still in existence and Gi-hun fighting to stop them.

Gi-hun had won, but the games still existed. He lived in misery for 1 year, the memories of the killings haunting him, not touching a cent of what he had won, finally accepting to live only once the creator was dead and therefore in the hero's mind, the games with him.

Because having Gi-hun triumph over games (again). Who manages to put an end to all that, and all's well that ends well, doesn't resemble Squid game or the creator's vision at all. The proof is in the ending of Season 1, which should have been a single season.

On top of that, he admitted that fans of the series probably won't like the way it ends. And in my opinion, they will, because the message will be very fatalistic, or too realistic.

If nothing is won or lost in advance, director Hwang Dong-hyuk has already more or less answered this question. Squid game is a reflection of our society.

But as I said earlier, the subject of this second season had nothing to do with the games. It was about which vision of the world will win: that of Gi-hun the idealist or that of In-oh the fatalist.