Why Alice in Borderland Didn't Receive the Same Recognition as Squid Game
Although Squid Game and Alice in Borderland share a similar plot line, the purposes of the shows differed, making Squid Game receive more hype than AIB.
Netflix has announced that Squid Game, its newest Korean thriller, is on its way to dethroning Bridgerton as the most streamed show on their site. And although Squid Game deserves all its hype, many fans are wondering why Alice in Borderland, which became available on December 10th, 2020, didn’t receive the same recognition.
Alice in Borderland (AiB) is a Japanese thriller in which certain people are forced to participate in survival games that are based on different strengths. The show focuses on human nature at its worst, and what choices are made when faced with a life or death situation. The games in both Squid Game and AiB are very dangerous and result in more casualties than survivors. Both use the games as a way to show human cruelty when we are put in survival mode. There are huge plot twists in each, and both are pretty unpredictable. Although the premise is the same, I believe their goals are different; there are reasons for Squid Game’s success.
For one thing, Squid Game’s main talking point was its anti-capitalistic stance. All the players had the choice to participate in the games for money, and even after taking a vote to leave, many came back to play again. They realized that their lives outside of the games were just as bad as they were in them. In other words, they had the same chance of survival. Additionally, these games are run by a rich man who essentially got bored and wanted to bet with other elites on the ‘Squid Games,’ whose participants are made up of only the impoverished, in-debt, working class. The goal of this show is to depict how everyone is “equal” within the games and the workforce as a whole, when in reality, no one is equal because we are all controlled by those with money. The elites had the power and money to help these people, but instead, they watched their suffering as entertainment. This is to show the corruptness of those at the top and how the poor are stuck in a cycle of poverty because of the structure of capitalism. In AiB on the other hand, we are unaware of the purpose of the games, and therefore cannot connect them to broader societal issues. I believe the application of relatable real-world commentary in Squid Game allows for it to appeal to a wider audience. Squid Game had all the aspects that AiB did, but used a larger overarching theme that is the true reason for such cruelty.
Looking strictly at the content and not the marketing and distribution side of things, what made Squid Game more appealing? I believe one reason is that we are exposed to the Game Master, and are able to get the perspective of one of the masked soldiers. This subplot keeps audiences engaged in his mission, and wanting to know the truth behind the game. This same appeal is not in AiB. Although the Gamer Master’s identity is also unknown, there is no information for audiences to be clued in to who truly is in charge or why the games exist in the first place. The lack of knowledge intrigues viewers, but does not keep them as engaged as Squid Game does.
Another reason is that the games within AiB are much more difficult, and many of them seem unrealistic. In one scene, two characters have to run out of a tunnel that is being flushed out by thousands of metric tons of water. Somehow, they end up unscathed despite being hit by the water. In the same episode, the game involves getting past a huge cat-like animal. In this scene, a car door is used to protect the main character, something that the animal could have easily crushed. Furthermore, in the very first episode, the main character was able to piece together so many random clues to avoid death, which just seemed very unlikely. In Squid Game, the games are much more simple. They are childhood games made to reflect how the workforce is “easy” to navigate, like these games, which to the elites, is child play. The games were realistic, and easy to grasp by viewers because they had heavy implications towards the happenings of everyday life in a cruel, capitalistic society. However, in AiB, everyone in Japan seemed to magically disappear with no explanation, making this less hard hitting than Squid Game due to its lack of believability and simplicity.
AiB has no absolute ending in the way Squid Game does either. At the end of Squid Game we are able to see a clear victor and the perpetrator of the games. Although they left an open ending for a second season, they did not leave as many unanswered questions. AiB ends on the characters having to collect the last few playing cards, in order to potentially escape the dark world they were plunged into. By the last episode, viewers are still unaware of the background and details of the game.
Squid Game is much more simple than AiB, as it relies on children’s games, primary colors, and basic shapes throughout the set. This simplicity is attractive to viewers because it juxtaposes the complex idea of how capitalism is behind all of this. The simplicity brings out the main message, making it that much more impactful for viewers. On the other hand, AIB fell short, unable to convey their message to viewers in the same impactful way as Squid Game. Perhaps it is because the Squid Game creator had plenty of time to think through details as he pitched the same idea for Squid Game in 2011. Why do you think the reception between the two varied so drastically?
I’d love to hear from you all! Write your question(s) here. Leave a comment below. Thank you!
To further decolonize our minds:
Variety | ‘Squid Game’ Review: Netflix’s Global Hit Wants to Condemn Violence While Reveling in It
Epic Stream | Squid Game vs Alice in Borderland: Which Show is Better Overall?
Game Revolution | Squid Game vs Alice in Borderland: Which show is better?
If you liked what you read, be sure to subscribe above and follow us on Twitter and Instagram @invisibleasians to stay updated on Politically Invisible Asians!