I thought the acting in this movie was really good. I loved all the children. But what is this movie about?
Is this movie just about a game or what an actual war would look like if it was fought by children? Are we supposed to take everything that happened literally or is it all a metaphor? If the first is true, this movie is very messed up and should come with a warning before people watch it.
In the opening scene, Kenney throws a paint balloon at the fat kid, killing him in the game. He then asks who else is still alive on his team and attempts to beat him up for not telling him. He is then stopped by his team captain PK. At this point I thought Kenney was just a big bully and that the movie would pick up soon. It turns out he is one of the most sane characters. He is later abused even worse by the other team and PK is reluctant to do anything about it. We are supposed to believe that this is the good team and PK is a kind and honorable soldier who follows the rules, is kind to his teammates, and will do anything to protect his friend. (He is only 12)
Early on in the movie Skinner declares tyranny over the former team captain simply because Skinner is a psychopath, yet no one seems to object. Skinner then kidnaps Paul, PK's best friend. He then tortures him and I'm pretty sure he tries to murder him. (This is just a game right?) Skinner blames Paul for all the bad things that have happened to him. Paul has no idea what happened and for some reason Skinner won't tell him. Paul escapes and goes back to his team. PK tells him to go back to his prison, which Paul does for the team, but mostly out of loyalty to PK. Paul returns to prison and Skinner tortures him some more. There a bunch of other subplots, but none of them are that interesting. In the last 10 minutes of the movie PK shows up. Skinner reveals that he and PK were best friends before Paul moved to town.
Why does he wait till now to tell Paul? What does he hope to get out of torturing Paul for something he didn't know he did? It is also unclear how long Paul has been in town and why this has never come up before. Skinner offers to be friends with both PK and Paul, which Paul does not seem to object to. What was the point of kidnapping and torturing Paul if Skinner was willing to be friends with both of them? It seems Paul had nothing to do with ending their friendship. PK stopped being friends with Skinner because he's a psychopath, and who could blame him? Sadly, PK shows to not be much better.
Though PK has technically already won the war, Skinner declares himself the winner. He agrees to give up his claim if PK cuts Paul with a knife. PK has two choices: Keep his honor, accept Skinner's pointless self-declared victory, prove to be a great best friend, prove to be a great leader, and stand up to a psychotic bully. His other choice is to betray and physically harm his best friend, show his weakness in leadership, achieve the victory he already had, and show that he will give in to Skinner's bullying. PK ignores the obvious right choice and attempts to cut Paul. While watching this I was sure this was all a trick. He was going to beat Skinner the right way and show his loyalty to his friend. I was wrong. PK claims it was an accident, but we all saw him hold the knife to Paul's neck and attempt to cut him. PK cares more about victory than his best friend. They stop being friends. Paul, the only nice and rational kid in this movie, fights in a war he doesn't understand for the sake of his best friend and then has his neck cut by that friend.
The central conflict of this movie was interesting and I wish it could have been revealed more than 10 minutes before the end. I wish they could have given us some resolutions?
I know this movie is about 12 year olds, but 5 year olds should have a better sense of logic. I'd expect children who play in the woods with dangerous weapons and have no adult supervision to be more mature than 5 year olds. As far as we know, there is no prize for winning other than satisfaction. Apparently that's worth losing all your friends, physically harming and possibly killing other children, and putting your own life in danger; even if the victory is not legitimate. Even by 12-year-old logic, how can you blackmail someone into being your friend. If you have any idea of what friends are, you know that this defeats the entire purpose of having them.
I'd like to hear what other people think. Feel free to agree or disagree with my comments.
Is this movie just about a game or what an actual war would look like if it was fought by children? Are we supposed to take everything that happened literally or is it all a metaphor? If the first is true, this movie is very messed up and should come with a warning before people watch it.
In the opening scene, Kenney throws a paint balloon at the fat kid, killing him in the game. He then asks who else is still alive on his team and attempts to beat him up for not telling him. He is then stopped by his team captain PK. At this point I thought Kenney was just a big bully and that the movie would pick up soon. It turns out he is one of the most sane characters. He is later abused even worse by the other team and PK is reluctant to do anything about it. We are supposed to believe that this is the good team and PK is a kind and honorable soldier who follows the rules, is kind to his teammates, and will do anything to protect his friend. (He is only 12)
Early on in the movie Skinner declares tyranny over the former team captain simply because Skinner is a psychopath, yet no one seems to object. Skinner then kidnaps Paul, PK's best friend. He then tortures him and I'm pretty sure he tries to murder him. (This is just a game right?) Skinner blames Paul for all the bad things that have happened to him. Paul has no idea what happened and for some reason Skinner won't tell him. Paul escapes and goes back to his team. PK tells him to go back to his prison, which Paul does for the team, but mostly out of loyalty to PK. Paul returns to prison and Skinner tortures him some more. There a bunch of other subplots, but none of them are that interesting. In the last 10 minutes of the movie PK shows up. Skinner reveals that he and PK were best friends before Paul moved to town.
Why does he wait till now to tell Paul? What does he hope to get out of torturing Paul for something he didn't know he did? It is also unclear how long Paul has been in town and why this has never come up before. Skinner offers to be friends with both PK and Paul, which Paul does not seem to object to. What was the point of kidnapping and torturing Paul if Skinner was willing to be friends with both of them? It seems Paul had nothing to do with ending their friendship. PK stopped being friends with Skinner because he's a psychopath, and who could blame him? Sadly, PK shows to not be much better.
Though PK has technically already won the war, Skinner declares himself the winner. He agrees to give up his claim if PK cuts Paul with a knife. PK has two choices: Keep his honor, accept Skinner's pointless self-declared victory, prove to be a great best friend, prove to be a great leader, and stand up to a psychotic bully. His other choice is to betray and physically harm his best friend, show his weakness in leadership, achieve the victory he already had, and show that he will give in to Skinner's bullying. PK ignores the obvious right choice and attempts to cut Paul. While watching this I was sure this was all a trick. He was going to beat Skinner the right way and show his loyalty to his friend. I was wrong. PK claims it was an accident, but we all saw him hold the knife to Paul's neck and attempt to cut him. PK cares more about victory than his best friend. They stop being friends. Paul, the only nice and rational kid in this movie, fights in a war he doesn't understand for the sake of his best friend and then has his neck cut by that friend.
The central conflict of this movie was interesting and I wish it could have been revealed more than 10 minutes before the end. I wish they could have given us some resolutions?
I know this movie is about 12 year olds, but 5 year olds should have a better sense of logic. I'd expect children who play in the woods with dangerous weapons and have no adult supervision to be more mature than 5 year olds. As far as we know, there is no prize for winning other than satisfaction. Apparently that's worth losing all your friends, physically harming and possibly killing other children, and putting your own life in danger; even if the victory is not legitimate. Even by 12-year-old logic, how can you blackmail someone into being your friend. If you have any idea of what friends are, you know that this defeats the entire purpose of having them.
I'd like to hear what other people think. Feel free to agree or disagree with my comments.