Trigger Ending Explained: Is Kim Nam Gil Able to Stop Rampant Gunplay by Kim Young Kwang? Find Out
As for the laws, South Korea is strict over its gun policy, and the show, Trigger, stands for everything against the gun laws in the country. In the 10 episodes, the audience saw Lee Do, a police protagonist, as he saves the Korean society from falling into a panic state.
Trigger ending explained
In the final episode of the Korean show, Baek's actions got Do out of his job for a few days. When Lee Do wakes back up, he is heartbroken over learning about Captain Jo's death. The latter steps up as a chief mourner, as he mourns the death of Jo and his daughter.
As for Baek, he went on to declare that whoever wants the gun in Korea will be able to get one. Following the announcement, public fear engulfs the country, as thousands of weapons are delivered to the populace.
Moreover, the decision of providing the guns to the public becomes a topic of debate amongst the politicians.
Further in the episode, Lee Do returns back to work. He remembers Baek's advice that the latter had provided him with over a dinner before realizing that Baek was villainous. 'Wouldn't pulling a 5-millimeter trigger in pursuit of revenge spread fear in the minds of many?' Do tell, Baek.
He further states, 'Out of fear that they might die without a gun, everyone will rush to get one. And a society like that will soon be destroyed.'
After a major fight sequence that takes place in the finale episode, Baek is in the hospital. When Do visits him, the doctor reveals that he is unlikely to recover due to cancer and the blood loss that happened following the gunshot wounds.
Though the ending of Trigger isn't a happy one, it definitely provides hope to the fans. The police go on to conduct a drop-off drive to collect as many weapons from the country as possible.
As for Lee Do, he de-escalates yet another day. He also adopts the child, in the echo of Captain Jo's words.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indian Express
24 minutes ago
- Indian Express
Sarzameen: Ibrahim Ali Khan's terrible film accidentally gets you to root for a terrorist to kill an Indian soldier, and you can't even deny it
In Sarzameen, a stern military man allows his only son to be murdered by terrorists in Kashmir because… nation comes first or something. You often hear about parents who proudly declare that they are willing to sacrifice their children for the country, and perhaps Prithviraj Sukumaran's Vijay Menon is cut from the same cloth as those folks. The only difference is that his son isn't a soldier on the front-lines, but a child for whom he feels no love. Played by Ibrahim Ali Khan, the child's name is Harman, and the only reason his father hates him is that he isn't like the other boys; he's timid, he can't play sports, and he speaks with a stutter. Bizarrely enough, Sarzameen implies that Vijay wouldn't have let his son die had he conformed to the 'norms' of boyhood. If Harman didn't have a speech impediment, the movie suggests, he'd likely have lived. It's an astounding thought that struck absolutely nobody in the Dharma writing incubator that coughed up this script, which relies almost exclusively on contrivance, convenience, and coincidence to keep the plot moving. Sarzameen expects us to root for a reunion of some kind after it reveals that Harman miraculously survived a bullet to the head — nobody dies in this movie, even after being shot at point-blank range — but unintentionally gets us to cheer for a terrorist to kill a member of the Indian Army. Also read – Nadaaniyan: Ibrahim Ali Khan makes one of the worst debuts in years; is Karan Johar determined to set fire to his career before it even begins? Only a complete failure in storytelling can send a viewer so wildly off track. Sarzameen is directed by Kayoze Irani, who showed such promise with his heartfelt short film in Ajeeb Daastaans. For him to have selected this as his feature debut makes no sense; as it is, it feels like he wasn't involved in the conceptualisation and execution of the action scenes at all. His focus, presumably, was on the drama. And it's drama straight out of a poor '90s movie; you can imagine how competent Sarzameen is when you realise that even Netflix, which gave an enthusiastic thumbs-up to Nadaaniyan, drew the line. As with that film, it feels like every line of dialogue here has been dubbed in a booth and not performed on set. Hindi isn't Prithviraj's mother tongue, and acting doesn't come naturally to Ibrahim. He shows up only after the first act, when Harman inexplicably escapes from the clutches of his captors and reappears in his parents' lives. For some reason, his mother, played by Kajol, is still married to Vijay, even after he abandoned Harman and left him to die. Had Sarzameen shown us what happened during those eight years, her decision would've made sense. But because it doesn't, you're left to assume that the only reason she stuck around is because she has a job to fulfil in the film's third act. Unlike Brody from Homeland, who was closely monitored by the CIA after he returned from captivity tried to begin his life afresh, Harman is simply allowed to go home to his parents. They barely recognise him. He no longer has a stutter, and he seems more confident than he used to be. Vijay is convinced that he's an imposter — the fact that he believes Harman would be the same person who 'died' eight years ago is bananas. Vijay knows that Harman was living with terrorists; he knows that Harman was probably tortured and brainwashed. And still, he welcomes Harman into his house without having him cleared first. Sarzameen seems to think that the dramatic conflict of these scenes rests in whether Harman is Vijay's son, and not whether he's a terrorist. The more suspicious Vijay becomes of Harman, the more you want to lean in and remind him that it's all his fault. Consequently, you root for the kid to shoot him in the face. This almost happens in the pre-interval scene, by the way. But the scene ends with a twist so wild that its sole purpose, seemingly, is to disarm you for the further insanity that Sarzameen has prepared for the climax. Let's talk about it. It is revealed that Harman was, indeed, a militant brainwashed against his father, who, it wouldn't be a stretch to assume, is the living manifestation of India. The villains didn't have to work too hard; Vijay did have him murdered, after all. The movie would've been far more complex had Harman come from a loving home, or if it had shown Harman commit a terrible crime before resurrecting himself. It's almost as if the most interesting chunk of the story — the eight years that Harman spent away from home — was deliberately edited out. Read more – Ae Watan Mere Watan: Heartbreaking, the worst film you've seen just made some strong political points Vijay, of course, has an awakening. But nothing can redeem him; he's like the dad from Udaan, but if he was also a child-killer. The real twist — and Abbas Mustan would be so proud of Kayoze — is that Kajol's character was a double agent all along. It's like they're gifting the Saiyaara generation with their own version of Gupt: The Hidden Truth. She was sent to spy on the Indian Army, but she fell for Vijay and had a child with him. Why she fell in love with a man like him isn't something that the movie feels confident enough to explain. And, having seen what sort of guy he is, it's impossible for the viewer to fill in the blanks either. Sarzameen is, after all, a movie that paints an Army officer as the villain and projects militants as morally justified in their actions. So, why can't it be appreciated like the scores of films made about America's war crimes after 9/11? Why does Sarzameen have more in common with Kajol's own Fanaa — the film's Harry Potter connections deserve a separate article — than it does with something like The Forever Prisoner, a film that understands the difference between empathising with a wrongdoer and actively cheering them on. By relying on trivial tropes, the movie does a disservice not only to its own characters, but also a very real geopolitical issue.
News18
an hour ago
- News18
Saiyaara Box Office Day 10: Ahaan Panday-Aneet Padda Film Makes A Whopping Rs 30 Cr On Second Sunday
Last Updated: Saiyaara, directed by Mohit Suri and starring Ahaan Panday and Aneet Padda, has crossed Rs 300 crore worldwide in nine days. On day 10, it earned Rs 30 crore in India. Saiyaara box office collection day 10: Ahaan Panday and Aneet Padda have officially arrived. Their debut film Saiyaara is proving to be a box office beast, and it's doing what most romantic dramas rarely manage — pulling massive crowds and raking in serious money. Directed by Mohit Suri, the film has crossed the Rs 300 crore mark worldwide in just nine days, making it one of the biggest box office stories of 2025. According to early estimates as quoted by trade tracker Sacnilk, Saiyaara earned around Rs 30 crore (India net) on its tenth day, that is Sunday. With strong word of mouth and no real competition at the moment, the film's theatrical run is expected to continue at full throttle into the coming week. On Day 10, the film's Hindi (2D) occupancy rates remained solid across the board: morning shows clocked in at 23.21%, afternoon at 56.38%, and evening shows peaked at 63.46%. The numbers are strong, and the audience interest shows no signs of slowing down. At this pace, Saiyaara could soon surpass the lifetime collection of Kabir Singh (Rs 377 crore) — which would make it the highest-grossing Indian romantic film of all time (non-inflation-adjusted). All eyes are now on how it performs in its second full week. Meanwhile, a report by The Times of India revealed that the makers have closed a deal with streaming giant Netflix for the film's OTT release. However, owing to the film's ongoing theatrical momentum, the digital premiere has been delayed. Saiyaara is now expected to debut on Netflix around Diwali, offering audiences a festive treat later in the year. Saiyaara is a 2025 Indian Hindi-language musical romantic drama directed by Mohit Suri and produced by Yash Raj Films. The film marks the acting debut of Ahaan Panday and also stars Aneet Padda in a leading role. Loosely inspired by the 2004 Korean film A Moment to Remember, Saiyaara tells the story of Krish Kapoor, a troubled musician who finds an unexpected emotional connection with Vaani Batra, a quiet and introspective poet. Released on 18 July 2025, the film opened to largely positive reviews from both critics and audiences. Praise was particularly directed at the performances of Panday and Padda, Suri's sensitive direction, and the soul-stirring soundtrack. First Published: Disclaimer: Comments reflect users' views, not News18's. Please keep discussions respectful and constructive. Abusive, defamatory, or illegal comments will be removed. News18 may disable any comment at its discretion. By posting, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Time of India
7 hours ago
- Time of India
'I've never loved and hated a waiter so much': Jason Kelce jokes about Travis' Happy Gilmore 2 role in post with their dad
Instagram Jason Kelce just gave fans a crossover moment they didn't know they needed, football meets Hollywood comedy. In a new Instagram post, the former Philadelphia Eagles star shared what he called 'one of my favorite photos ever,' featuring Adam Sandler, his dad and his brother Travis Kelce, who apparently snagged a cameo role in Netflix's Happy Gilmore 2 . Jason's excitement was clear, and fans are already buzzing about this unexpected blend of NFL and movie nostalgia. Jason Kelce praises Adam Sandler for bringing back a childhood classic Kelce congratulated 'the Sandman' for reviving the beloved Happy Gilmore franchise, writing: 'Congrats to the Sandman for bringing Happy back to life in glorious fashion, haven't looked forward to a movie this much in awhile.' The original Happy Gilmore remains one of the most iconic sports comedies ever made, and Netflix's sequel has quickly become a major streaming event. Travis Kelce surprises fans with his new role Jason also shouted out his brother: 'And congrats to my brother for nailing his role and being involved in the sequel to one of the pinnacles of our childhood.' He even joked with Travis in the caption: '@killatrav I've never loved and hated a waiter so much!' Why this crossover moment matters for fans This isn't just about a movie cameo, it's a cultural moment. In the film, Kelce plays an arrogant waiter who mocks and ultimately fires a young golfer during a country-club dinner. The tension spirals into a surreal fantasy sequence where the waiter is tied to a post, covered in honey, and nearly attacked by a bear. It's slapstick, chaotic, and unmistakably Sandler's brand of comedy made even funnier by Kelce's straight-faced delivery. Adam Sandler himself publicly praised Kelce's performance, calling him 'funny and cool as hell' and 'a stud' during a television interview. Sandler said Kelce was easy to work with and had 'great comedic instincts,' which explains why the cameo has become a highlight of the sequel. FAQs: Q: What is Travis Kelce's role in Happy Gilmore 2 ? He plays an over-the-top country-club waiter who appears in a comedic dinner scene that turns into a wild fantasy sequence. Q: Is Happy Gilmore 2 streaming now? Yes, the film is currently available on Netflix. Q: Does Ed Kelce, Travis and Jason Kelce's dad, appear in Happy Gilmore 2 ? A: Yes. Ed Kelce reportedly appears briefly as an extra in a dining scene. Also read - Matthew Stafford to miss more training camp time: how serious is this for LA? For real-time updates, scores, and highlights, follow our live coverage of the India vs England Test match here. Catch Rani Rampal's inspiring story on Game On, Episode 4. Watch Here!
