Can Squid Game still critique capitalism after three seasons and a spinoff?
When Netflix first released Squid Game in 2021, the show's critique of capitalism was a subversive pop culture phenomenon. The Korean series follows Gi-hun as he participates in a deadly underground games tournament, where he and many others put their own lives up as ante to win a huge sum of cash.
But with the release of Squid Game 's third and final season, can the show maintain its integrity — especially after Netflix has turned the property into a money-making machine?
Today on Commotion, guest host Rad Simonpillai speaks with East Asian studies professor Michelle Cho and Vulture's culture critic Nicholas Quah about the new season of Squid Game and if it maintains its critical quality.
We've included some highlights below, edited for length and clarity. For the full discussion, listen and follow Commotion with Elamin Abdelmahmoud on your favourite podcast player.
WATCH | Today's episode on YouTube:
Rad: Michelle, talk to me about where Gi-hun's at in season three, and how his journey is serving this anti-capitalist criticism.
Michelle: So we start off season three, which is kind of a continuation, I would say, of the storyline of season two, with Gi-hun in a pretty dark place. Basically, he is at this point of utter disillusionment. Season one was all about him becoming aware of the fact that capitalism promises ethically uncomplicated wealth, but really there's no such thing. At end of season two, he's also become disillusioned with a solution, which would be revolutionary struggle, or an attempt to — as they say in Marxist criticism — seize the means of production. So that's not also the answer.
I think that the show has tried to complicate that easy binary from the get-go, especially by placing North Koreans both inside and outside the game. But Gi-hun has gone from the state of blissful ignorance, you know, "Oh, I can get wealthy with a windfall of lots of money," to this disillusioned despair. He knows now that capitalist inequity is cruel yet inescapable because it's set up to make us believe in fairness and equity. But really it's this predatory social Darwinist system that makes solidarity impossible, and that's where he leads us.
But season three tries to get us out of there. So it starts us off where Gi-hun is, and then tries to move us into something else.
Rad: Nicholas, you weren't a fan of the surprise twists [at the end]. Talk to me about why.
**SPOILERS AHEAD**
Nicholas: It should come to nobody's surprise that nothing ever ends well in this universe. So, ultimately, there is a situation in which a pregnant contestant gives birth to a baby. And Gi-hun, who we've been following as the protagonist — this really tortured protagonist — throughout the entire story, opts to sacrifice himself to let the baby win. In so doing, it provides a symbol of humanity, and I suppose it is a response to the cavernous traps of capitalism. So in that choice, there is an answer, or a non-answer, that is proffered by the series, which is that you can't really beat the system, or that the system's almost impossible to beat. You try and try and maybe you roll the dice with the next generation that may or may not be able to do the same thing. Or, if you really think about it, make the same choice at the end of their cycle. There is a very dour, very upsetting, cynical ending to the show — which, again, is contiguous with what the show is.
But when you take a couple of steps back and you think about the limits of "political art" — which this is what is supposed to be — I think we're ramping up against the end times for this particular mode of critique, which is: you can illustrate the issue, you can illustrate the cavernous nature and the inescapable nature of capitalism. But there's a reason why Squid Game was originally written as a movie that became a really great one season, not unlike the way that Bong Joon Ho's Snowpiercer functions really well as a critique of capitalism, which is to say: it provides a symbolic answer. Snowpiercer spoiler: they blow up the entire train. And with Squid Game, it ends with this, like, "We may or may not be able to do this." But when you try to answer the question, you've got to have a theory. And Squid Game ultimately does not want to provide a path forward, or is unable to provide a path forward.
And when you take even more steps back, the reason for this, probably, is because Netflix, its capitalist overlord, really wants this property to continue. So there's a way in which both the text and the meta-text of the show stabs itself in the foot. And I can't do anything but ask, "Why should I be giving time to this?"
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Globe and Mail
7 hours ago
- Globe and Mail
Can Gaming Become the Next Revenue Pillar for Netflix Stock?
Netflix NFLX offers games to keep its audience engaged. The streaming giant serves more than 300 million paid households, offering ample engagement opportunities through its 'no-cost' gaming titles. Netflix focuses on offering immersive narrative games based on its content, with the most recent example being the launch of Squid Game: Unleashed, which came alongside the release of Squid Game Season 3. Even non-members can play the game — a strategic move to attract new users to Netflix's platform. The company is focusing on mainstream titles like Grand Theft Auto and expanding into kids' games with the launch of the Peppa Pig game. Moreover, socially engaging party games represent a category that Netflix plans to penetrate over the long term. Netflix plans to invest in game development, but in a measured way. Over the long term, the company expects games to generate roughly $140 billion in consumer spending, excluding ad revenues. Increasing engagement trends driven by a more diverse entertainment offering and a strong games portfolio bodes well for Netflix's prospects. For the second quarter of 2025, NFLX forecasts revenues to increase 15.4% (+17% F/X neutral) to $11.035 billion. Netflix continues to forecast 2025 revenues of $43.5-$44.5 billion, which assumes healthy member growth, higher subscription pricing and a rough doubling of ad revenues. Netflix Faces Stiff Competition in Gaming Netflix faces stiff competition from players like Take-Two Interactive TTWO and Electronic Arts EA. Take Two Interactive benefits from a solid portfolio that includes NBA 2K25/2K24, Grand Theft Auto Online, Toon Blast, Empires & Puzzles, Red Dead Redemption 2 and Words With Friends. Take-Two Interactive's future release slate holds significant growth potential. The announced lineup includes major titles spanning multiple genres. The titles include Mafia: The Old Country, Borderlands 4, NBA 2K26, WWE 2K26, CSR 3, Civilization VII for Switch, and the immensely anticipated Grand Theft Auto VI, scheduled for May 2026. Electronic Arts expects continued growth in live services, as well as the launch of new non-annual titles in fiscal 2027. Its popularity is primarily driven by its well-known franchises, which will continue to fuel the top line. EA SPORTS titles, along with Madden NFL, The Sims and Apex Legends, are some of its biggest franchises. Electronic Arts is positioned for strong growth with two major franchise launches in fiscal year 2026 — Battlefield and Skate. NFLX's Share Price Performance, Valuation and Estimates NFLX shares have appreciated 45.7% year to date, outperforming both - Zacks Consumer Discretionary sector's return of 11.8%, as well as the Zacks Broadcast Radio and Television industry's 37.7%. NFLX Stock's Performance From a valuation standpoint, Netflix trades at a premium with a forward 12-month P/S ratio of 12.11X compared with the broader sector's 2.32X. NFLX has a Value Score of D. NFLX Valuation Image Source: Zacks Investment Research The Zacks Consensus Estimate for NFLX's 2025 earnings is pegged at $25.32 per share, unchanged over the past 60 days. This indicates a 27.69% increase over 2024's reported figure. Netflix currently carries a Zacks Rank #3 (Hold). You can see the complete list of today's Zacks #1 Rank (Strong Buy) stocks here. Only $1 to See All Zacks' Buys and Sells We're not kidding. Several years ago, we shocked our members by offering them 30-day access to all our picks for the total sum of only $1. No obligation to spend another cent. Thousands have taken advantage of this opportunity. Thousands did not - they thought there must be a catch. Yes, we do have a reason. We want you to get acquainted with our portfolio services like Surprise Trader, Stocks Under $10, Technology Innovators, and more, that closed 256 positions with double- and triple-digit gains in 2024 alone. See Stocks Now >> Netflix, Inc. (NFLX): Free Stock Analysis Report Take-Two Interactive Software, Inc. (TTWO): Free Stock Analysis Report Electronic Arts Inc. (EA): Free Stock Analysis Report
Winnipeg Free Press
12 hours ago
- Winnipeg Free Press
2025's best movies (so far) include ‘Sinners,' ‘Sorry Baby' and ‘One of Them Days'
Often the best movies of the second half of the year come almost preordained as the Oscars Industrial Complex revs into high gear. The first half, though, can offer more of a thrill of discovery. The first six months of 2025 have offered plenty of that, including indie gems, comedy breakouts and sensational filmmaking debuts. Here are our 10 favorites from the year's first half. The Ballad of Wallis Island 'The Ballad of Wallis Island' is the kind of charming gem that's easy to recommend to any kind of movie lover. It is goofy and friendly, has an armful of lovely folk songs, an all-timer of a rambling character, in Tim Key's eccentric and completely lovable Charles, Tom Basden's grumpy, too-cool straight man, and the always delightful Carey Mulligan. 'Wallis Island' is a film about letting go and moving on told with humor, wit and a big heart. Also hailing from the British Isles is the equally delightful 'Wallace & Gromit: Vengeance Most Fowl.' (streaming on Peacock) —Bahr One of Them Days The big-screen comedy has been an almost extinct creature in recent years, but Lawrence Lamont's 'One of Them Days' gives me hope. Not only was this buddy comedy a surprise box-office hit, it is probably the exhibit A in the case of Keke Palmer Should Be in Everything. She and SZA, in her film debut, play Los Angeles housemates in a madcap race to make rent. (Streaming on Netflix) —Coyle Sorry, Baby There's a sequence in Eva Victor's delicate, considered and disarmingly funny directorial debut, 'Sorry, Baby' that kind of took my breath away. You know something bad is going to happen to Agnes, it's literally the logline of the film. You sense that her charismatic thesis adviser is a bit too fixated on her. The incident itself isn't seen, Victor places their camera outside of his home. Agnes goes inside, the day turns to evening and the evening turns to night, and Agnes comes out, changed. But we stay with her as she finds her way to her car, to her home and, most importantly to her friend, Lydie (Naomi Ackie). This is a film about what happens after the bad thing. And it's a stunner. (In theaters) —Bahr Black Bag Arguably the best director-screenwriter tandem this decade has been Steven Soderbergh and David Koepp. They were behind the pandemic thriller 'Kimi' and another standout of 2025, the ghost-POV 'Presence.' But their spy thriller-marital drama 'Black Bag,' starring Michael Fassbender and Cate Blanchett as married British intelligence agents, may be their best collaboration yet. It's certainly the one with the most delicious dialogue. How has it taken the movies this long to make a dinner scene with spies dosed with truth serum? (Streaming on Peacock) —Coyle Materialists Celine Song's 'Materialists ' might not be the film people wanted it to be, but it's the film they need in this land of high-end dating apps, designer dupes and everyone pretending to live like minor socialites on Instagram. A thoughtful meditation on money, worth, love and companionship, this is a film that upends everything we've come to think we want from the so-called romantic comedy (the idea of prince charming, the inexplicable wealth that's supposed to coexist with middle class mores). Lifestyle porn will always have a place in the rom-com machine, but this is a populist film, both modern and timeless, that reminds us that love should be easy. It should feel like coming home. 'Materialists' is simply the most purely romantic film of the year. (In theaters) — Bahr Sinners Not only does the wait go on for Ryan Coogler to make a bad movie, he seems to be still realizing his considerable talents. There are six months to go, still, in 2025, but I doubt we'll have a big scale movie that so thrillingly doubles (see what I did there) as a personal expression for its filmmaker as 'Sinners.' This exhilarating vampire saga is ambitiously packed with deep questions about community, Black entertainment, Christianity and, of course, Irish dancing. (Streaming on Max) —Coyle Pavements In a world of woefully straightforward documentaries and biopics about musicians, Alex Ross Perry decided to creatively, and a little chaotically, upend the form with his impossible-to-categorize film about the 90s indie band Pavement. Blending fact, fiction, archive, performance, this winkingly rebellious piece is wholly original and captivating, and, not unlike Todd Haynes's 'I'm Not There,' the kind of movie to turn someone who's maybe enjoyed a few Pavement and Stephen Malkmus songs into a fan. (In theaters, streaming on MUBI July 11) —Bahr April A rare and exquisite precision guides Dea Kulumbegashvili's rigorous and despairing second feature. Beneath stormy spring skies in the European country of Georgia, a leading local obstetrician (Ia Sukhitashvili) pitilessly works to help women who are otherwise disregarded, vilified or worse. This is a movie coursing with dread, but its expression of a deep-down pain is piercing and unforgettable. (Not currently available) —Coyle On Becoming a Guinea Fowl A visually, and thematically arresting marvel, Rungano Nyoni's darkly comedic, stylish and hauntingly bizarre film about unspoken generational trauma takes audiences to a place, I'm guessing, many have never been: A Zambian family funeral. And yet its truths ring universal, as the elder generation turns their heads from the awful truth that the dead man, Fred, was a predator and pedophile, while the younger wonders if things must stay as they are. (Streaming on HBO Max on July 4) –Bahr Friendship On TV, Tim Robinson and Nathan Fielder have been doing genius-level comedy. Fielder hasn't yet jumped into his own films, but, then again, it's hard to get an epic of cringe comedy and aviation safety like season two of 'The Rehearsal' into a feature-length movie. But in 'Friendship,' writer and director Andrew DeYoung brings Robinson, star of 'I Think You Should Leave,' into well-tailored, very funny and dementedly perceptive movie scenario. He plays a man who awkwardly befriends a cool neighbor (Paul Rudd). While their differences make for most of the comedy in the movie, 'Friendship' — which culminates in a telling wink — is really about their similarities. (Available for digital rental) — Coyle
CBC
a day ago
- CBC
Can Squid Game still critique capitalism after three seasons and a spinoff?
Social Sharing When Netflix first released Squid Game in 2021, the show's critique of capitalism was a subversive pop culture phenomenon. The Korean series follows Gi-hun as he participates in a deadly underground games tournament, where he and many others put their own lives up as ante to win a huge sum of cash. But with the release of Squid Game 's third and final season, can the show maintain its integrity — especially after Netflix has turned the property into a money-making machine? Today on Commotion, guest host Rad Simonpillai speaks with East Asian studies professor Michelle Cho and Vulture's culture critic Nicholas Quah about the new season of Squid Game and if it maintains its critical quality. We've included some highlights below, edited for length and clarity. For the full discussion, listen and follow Commotion with Elamin Abdelmahmoud on your favourite podcast player. WATCH | Today's episode on YouTube: Rad: Michelle, talk to me about where Gi-hun's at in season three, and how his journey is serving this anti-capitalist criticism. Michelle: So we start off season three, which is kind of a continuation, I would say, of the storyline of season two, with Gi-hun in a pretty dark place. Basically, he is at this point of utter disillusionment. Season one was all about him becoming aware of the fact that capitalism promises ethically uncomplicated wealth, but really there's no such thing. At end of season two, he's also become disillusioned with a solution, which would be revolutionary struggle, or an attempt to — as they say in Marxist criticism — seize the means of production. So that's not also the answer. I think that the show has tried to complicate that easy binary from the get-go, especially by placing North Koreans both inside and outside the game. But Gi-hun has gone from the state of blissful ignorance, you know, "Oh, I can get wealthy with a windfall of lots of money," to this disillusioned despair. He knows now that capitalist inequity is cruel yet inescapable because it's set up to make us believe in fairness and equity. But really it's this predatory social Darwinist system that makes solidarity impossible, and that's where he leads us. But season three tries to get us out of there. So it starts us off where Gi-hun is, and then tries to move us into something else. Rad: Nicholas, you weren't a fan of the surprise twists [at the end]. Talk to me about why. **SPOILERS AHEAD** Nicholas: It should come to nobody's surprise that nothing ever ends well in this universe. So, ultimately, there is a situation in which a pregnant contestant gives birth to a baby. And Gi-hun, who we've been following as the protagonist — this really tortured protagonist — throughout the entire story, opts to sacrifice himself to let the baby win. In so doing, it provides a symbol of humanity, and I suppose it is a response to the cavernous traps of capitalism. So in that choice, there is an answer, or a non-answer, that is proffered by the series, which is that you can't really beat the system, or that the system's almost impossible to beat. You try and try and maybe you roll the dice with the next generation that may or may not be able to do the same thing. Or, if you really think about it, make the same choice at the end of their cycle. There is a very dour, very upsetting, cynical ending to the show — which, again, is contiguous with what the show is. But when you take a couple of steps back and you think about the limits of "political art" — which this is what is supposed to be — I think we're ramping up against the end times for this particular mode of critique, which is: you can illustrate the issue, you can illustrate the cavernous nature and the inescapable nature of capitalism. But there's a reason why Squid Game was originally written as a movie that became a really great one season, not unlike the way that Bong Joon Ho's Snowpiercer functions really well as a critique of capitalism, which is to say: it provides a symbolic answer. Snowpiercer spoiler: they blow up the entire train. And with Squid Game, it ends with this, like, "We may or may not be able to do this." But when you try to answer the question, you've got to have a theory. And Squid Game ultimately does not want to provide a path forward, or is unable to provide a path forward. And when you take even more steps back, the reason for this, probably, is because Netflix, its capitalist overlord, really wants this property to continue. So there's a way in which both the text and the meta-text of the show stabs itself in the foot. And I can't do anything but ask, "Why should I be giving time to this?"
