MovieChat Forums > The Menu (2022) Discussion > Small plot hole regarding "the matter of...

Small plot hole regarding "the matter of the bill..."

posted a year ago by The_Rev (218)
6 replies | jump to latest

Why did Chef ask his patrons to pay for their meal at the end of the night? There's literally no reason behind it, except because it's part of the "experience..." but given the fact that Chef was planning to kill all his patrons, the staff, and himself, there's literally no point to asking for people to pay for their "meal," if you could call it that, as Chef Slowik had no intention of living through the night. He's basically just "going through the motions" in asking his patrons to close out their bill. He won't be there to enjoy the economic benefit to having his guests PAY for their food, so why bother doing it at all? Did it make for a funny scene in this dark comedy? Sure... But has no effect on the plot whatsoever. Does it show he's crazy? Sure... But we already knew that from prior scenes... I still loved the movie, I just found that bit to be trite, and essentially confirms that not only is everything Chef believed in for nothing, but he won't even be around to enjoy putting his guests in their places once and for all.

Just thought I'd point that out. Still a great movie... But I found that one scene to be totally pointless, save for being a polite adieu coming from a man who truly didn't care anymore about serving the customer well. Know what I mean?

[–] acidraindrop (3055) a year ago

Wasn't exactly pointless because it was funny, and it was also consistent with his obsessive attention to detail and procedure.

And regardless, it's not a plot hole anyways.

[–] The_Rev (218) a year ago

It was pointless due to the purpose of the dinner. You don't need money if you're going to kill yourself and everyone who works for you, including the friggin OWNER of the establishment. The ONLY rationale for it is that it's "part of the experience..." But again... Whose wallet is it going to fatten at this point, if the owner and all of the staff are dead?

[–] WaffleStaffel (1) a year ago

It appears to me that when everyone tossed their credit cards into the tray, they appeared to signal a sort of acceptance of or acquiescence to their fate. It actually looked like a point of catharsis, and as I recall, dessert came after, which no one resisted. While no money changed hands, "the check" is part of the process, and is a powerfully symbolic part of the experience of eating out. In real life it fleshes out social order in a group, it represents the "dominant" party on a date, etc., and our characters even go through this little ritual of deciding who's paying, if it's split, and whether it can be "expensed" by the employer as a cost of doing business.

[–] The_Rev (218) a year ago

Alright... Point taken. Thanks for your input. Nice to know that there are occasional non-trolls like myself floating around these here parts. :-)

[–] PhatButtttBear42 (143) a year ago

Agreed.

Although I do wonder if the audience was supposed to believe that maybe, just maybe, the customers were a part of some “crazy theatre performance”. And almost a *sign of relief* that they were being let go.

Decided to add a “simple” explanation

[–] CalvinJarrett (328) a year ago

That's a good point. Like maybe if they paid the bill, they were paying for their ability to live through the evening. I think the fact that they paid up so willingly suggests that. However, they also could have surmised that they ween't really paying at all. When their credit card statements came next month, they weren't going to be around to pay any part of them.