MovieChat Forums > Would You Rather (2019) Discussion > Utterly Pointless

Utterly Pointless

posted 8 years ago by jambawala
8 replies | jump to latest

I see plenty of well meaning people on these boards discussing the morality behind the "players'" decisions. Here's the problem: the entire set-up is so awfully contrived, the story loses all relevance to any discussion about morality or ethics as it relates to the real world. You will NEVER be in anything close to the kind of the situations the people in the movie went through. NO ONE would ever promise a medical or educational grant, and then force you to go through sadistic and largely fatal games to 'win' the grant. It's a premise that crumbles so swiftly, you wonder who the bigger idiots are: the filmmakers who, in their brilliance, felt this was a morality play or us, the viewers, for having sat through the whole freaking thing?

The worst part, seriously WORST part, is that the movie pretends to have a moral subtext by having the protagonist kill off an innocent character and then have the whole thing be for nothing when her brother kills himself anyway. Really? The point of that was? So that the viewer, in case he should find himself in the same situation, would avoid killing someone innocent?

Contrivances are not a bad thing - they can simplify a world and give us a premise that is cheesily fake but fun to explore in the context of a thriller. To see a totally contrived story done well, watch The Exam (2009). Brilliant film. On the other hand, Would You Rather is the kind of turd that fools us into thinking it may be entertaining, just long enough so we've basically watched the whole film and gotten duped.

[–] edwardrevans 8 years ago

It's just a movie, not based on real life.

It's also loosely in the Horror genre and I quite like it, good ending too.

[–] jambawala 8 years ago

Most movies are not based on real life. Most movies fall squarely in the fiction category. Most movies are also not this contrived. This is the kind of premise you could tell a seven-year-old and the child would raise an eyebrow and possibly stop listening.

"Really, a rich philanthropist invites a bunch of needy folks to his home on a regular basis for a sadistic and largely fatal game of Would You Rather? And none of the traumatized winners ever seek revenge or tell on him? Nobody ever gets to know? The henchmen always do his bidding? And things almost always go according to his plan? LOL, no chance."

As I mentioned in my first post, such a highly artificial and contrived scenario is not a bad thing. An effective and highly engaging film can still result from this, just like the film The Exam (2009). However, Would You Rather thinks it's more than just 90 minutes of entertainment and therein lies its biggest problem.

The biggest problem is the ending. I'd definitely like to understand better why you think this is a good ending (and I ask that sincerely). Since the entire set-up is so contrived, for the filmmakers to have this bleak ending, as if to send a message of moral comeuppance, was incredibly cringe-worthy to me.

Having said all that, my opinion is just that, an opinion, and I respect those with different viewpoints. If anything, I'm trying to understand those different viewpoints.

[–] edwardrevans 8 years ago

The ending for me was good because it was all in vain.

As for not going to the authorities, that's perfectly understandable as the last man standing is hardly innocent.

I liked Exam, but enjoyed this film more. May I suggest you take a look at "The Killing Room" which kind of sits in this genre also

[–] belizcik 8 years ago

I didn't understand what you find utterly pointless?

"revenge is a dish best served cold"

[–] jambawala 8 years ago

Belizcik,

Your excellent question is a good reminder to me of the peril of using a lot of words but not necessarily getting my meaning across.

To answer your question, I found the film utterly pointless because given the incredibly contrived scenario, I expected a fun little thriller. To be fair, a good portion of the film was like this but the film's ending was bleak, preachy and awkwardly moralistic. This rendered the overall film utterly pointless to me because the film had not earned the right to be moralistic given its incredibly nonsensical central conceit.

What message exactly was the 'sad' ending trying to send to the viewer? Here's a twist to the narrative that actually makes sense given the tone of the film: at some point in the movie, the tables turn and both the Lambricks (father and son) and the bodyguard (Bevans) are forced to play the game with each other. This would give cathartic satisfaction to the viewer within this highly artificial story's narrative. Instead, the film we got was the equivalent of a drug dealer who snitches on his clients after he sells drugs to them.

[–] TaRaNRoD (1579) 7 years ago

"Since the entire set-up is so contrived, for the filmmakers to have this bleak ending, as if to send a message of moral comeuppance, was incredibly cringe-worthy to me."

Agreed!

[–] HippieDrillSealOfApproval 8 years ago

You will NEVER be in anything close to the kind of the situations the people in the movie went through. NO ONE would ever promise a medical or educational grant, and then force you to go through sadistic and largely fatal games to 'win' the grant.

the majority of horror films involve a premise that would likely never happen in real life. it's fiction/fantasy. Just having an implausible/unlikely scenario shouldn't make a movie bad. This film was bad for a few reasons but the premise itself wasn't a problem. It could have worked with better writers.

What are words for when no one listens anymore

[–] jambawala 8 years ago

HippieDrill,

I agree with you, in fact I'm making the same point as you in all of my posts. I explicitly said in both of my previous posts on this thread that contrivances are not a bad thing - I point again to Exam (2009) as an example where the premise of the film was highly artificial but it was regardless a very enjoyable and satisfying movie.

My point is rather that Would You Rather lacks self-awareness and decides it's more than just a fun little thriller at multiple points during the film (especially the end). The ending, for instance, is awkwardly moralistic and strikes a totally false note compared to the rest of the film. Where's the sense in being moralistic when the entire premise is as sound as a four-year-old drawing a street map?