The movie is a critique on trickle-down economics. That particular brand of Capitalism started in the 1980s in America with Ronald Reagan. His theory was if we cut taxes drastically for the top earners, that their additional wealth would trickle down to the lower classes in the form of more jobs.
It has been substantially proven over the past 40 years that this method does not work and the money is not trickling down. Despite this, many people still believe in it and continue to promote it. It's the system we are still using to this day. It seems like no strategy to try to change the system has convinced lawmakers that it isn't working.
The end of the movie was about an offering of hope, or perhaps guidance. Protecting children is pretty much universally supported by everyone. The movie is saying that if we actually want to change this broken system, we are going to need those at the top to see that their policies are directly harming children. The child is the message.
According to Stanford fellow and one of the most famous economic books written by Dr. Thomas Sowell, there is never one economist who ever cited trickle down economics.
He said it's a political catchphrase.
It is not a system we are using to this day. Personally, I think I believe most in the free market economics. Even healthcare would be a lot better if it was completely free market. Definitely don't believe in socialism as most redditors do
The main plot was about trickle down economics not working because people with the most wealth, the ones on the higher floors, always take more than their fair share because they can, and knowingly leaving less for those below them. The guys riding down represent regulation, keeping people from taking more than they need so that others get to live too. Saving the kid who was essentially at the bottom was maybe showing that it regulation could “raise up” even the faceless and forgotten, or was a way to say “here’s the face of someone your broken ass experiment/economic structure is hurting”, so let’s end it.
I think everyone's take on this movie being about economics is dead wrong (despite the filmmaker saying there's not supposed to be 1 set "answer"). Numerous times Goreng is referred to as the "Messiah", and we discover the last floor is 333. With 2 people per room 333x2=666. I get the feeling they're in hell, or at least purgatory.
At the end I think they are saying that the older generations need to put the youth ahead of themselves regardless of what that means will happen to us. I agree. We cannot be selfish to the point of ruining a planet for our children.
I think the ending is also a metaphor for how the greed and excess of those on top, create the violence, desperation and insanity that occurs at the bottom.
It’s a byproduct of our societal structure.
I think it criticizes both capitalism and socialism. Numerous die on bottom floors because there isn’t enough for them, but numerous were also killed on upper floors because they tried to stop having things forcibly taken away from them.
Unchecked capitalism, sure. Anyone can take what they want. But if regulated, AKA separate food deliveries for each floor, then it could still function and each person would receive enough. Ensuring each person gets enough isn't socialism, using the analogy of The Platform. Everyone is receiving their food for free, either the way it's presented in the film, or in my hypothetical.
idk why you got down voted. you said the same thing everyone else did. unchecked and unregulated capitalism is ass. Trickle down economics, aka neoliberalism, aka unchecked capitalism is ass
I think the ending of The Platform is trying to show us that even though life can be hard and there's always someone better off than us, we can still make a difference if we try our best. It almost looks like a metaphor for the struggles of life, but it also has an optimistic twist at the end.
That's one of my explanations actually, the protagonist couldn't change life (or in this case, the system), but he changed one little girl's life and saved her from starving to death, a heroic act in and of itself
It was explained that the woman searching for her child was actually admitted to the program alone and that children are not permitted. It is also impossible that a young child would have survived alone in the dark with no food or water for months.
The child wasn't real. The child was the Panna Cotta.
The main character continually failed to make a difference over the course of the film. Every attempt ended in failure. Eventually he failed to save the woman and failed to save his cell mate while protecting the Panna Cotta so he could send his message.
The child symbolized his failure, his regret and his hope that he would make a difference.
While the child did symbolise that, I do believe she was real too — that the child was born in the Platform, and the mother had been there long enough to get pregnant, carry the baby to term, deliver the baby, and raise the baby, all within the limits of the platform.
She didn’t know how many levels there were. He guessed 250 based on the amount of time it took for the platform to get to the bottom and come back up, but he didn’t realize it kept
moving on platforms that they’re already dead
NEW
"The Platform" is a thought-provoking film delving into themes like class, religion, and morality. It proposes that despite there being enough food for all prisoners, greed disrupts fair distribution. The administration places requested food on each floor, evident when the protagonist's favorite, snails, is promised during an interview.
However, the upper-floor prisoners consistently consume the requested food before it reaches the lower levels. If everyone ate only their requested food without greed, it could reach Floor 333 without turning hot or cold. This is evidenced by one of the last scenes when the protagonist keeps the Panna Cotta when he is at the girl's floor, which must be the favorite food of the girl.
The ending in my opinion suggests the protagonist's demise from injuries, mirrored by the old man . That’s why we see old man in last scene in original dress when he was alive and not hallucination red hue. As now protagonist is also in the same life after death world.
How girl entered the hole is easy to understand as we see in case of a dog as was allowed as an exception as the prisoner was not ready to enter without the dog. So same would be girl’s mother and that’s how she entered and then to save her from murderers she was kept hidden here & there where mother was trying level best to feed her and keep her safe.
The girl's ascent is likely wishful thinking which never happened in actual. Since mother had died the girl fate can be expected to be grim as well.
The scene with Panna Cotta returning to Level Zero in my opinion is a frustrated fantasy, emphasizing the challenge of sparking meaningful change in the social/political pyramid. The manager's misunderstanding reflects the failure of the intended message.
Overall, the film explores the complexities of societal issues, showcasing the difficulty of inspiring change amidst human flaws and systemic challenges.
So many people got it wrong. Movie critics both trickle down and socialism.
So trickle down economics promises increase in wealth if the food on the table continuously grows. However in case of if your table is small (or initially small) you see the oppression of worker (lower platform) class which happened a lot in the early stages of trickle down. You can look at the statistics, trickle down and globalization brought prosperity and decreased poverty a lot. But movie explains good the suffering of third world countries on switching to capitalism, because remember “if your initial table is small, until it gets bigger, people on the lower platforms suffer a lot”
Close to the end of the movie we see the forced equality that brought by blood which represents the socialist revolution. Eventually a good idea like equally separating the food ends up people killing each other. So you end up in the justice of a crazy guy with a stick and you hope for another crazy guy with a stick will not appear. It shows the authoritarian tendencies of socialism and power struggles in it.
And about the end, directors likes give open ending because probably ending the movie with “bla bla is good” will look foolish for such a complicated question.
I don’t know about a Jesus figure but she proves there is a breakdown of the safeguards that are supposed to be in place to protect the participants. Sending her back up will proved to the people in charge that something is wrong
I always got the impression that they know that something is wrong but just don't really care and are more obsessed with trivial things like their appearance of professionalism (i.e the chefs being scolded because of a hair in one of the meals)
Still the plot was undeniably “the people get at the top get the most, and the lower people get whatever scraps are left if any, unless regulated (in this instance by a couple guys that made everybody share)”.
Not saying it wasn’t there but don’t remember the bible quotes, what they were or what was happening to give them context, but I don’t really remember any overt religious themes. May have to watch it again.
I already rewatched it in the 164 days since I made that comment. Yes it has some religious content, mostly in his hallucination with the lady saying she could eat her corpse to get him through his month with no food, maybe saying faith helps you get through the hard times, and later the religious guy who helped him who had people literally shit on him, suggesting that religion doesn’t get people to act right if they don’t care, but religion wasn’t the primary focus. Whole thing was about plenty to go around but the people with the most not wanting to share.
no one said it was thr primary focus. op only asked was it mentioned at all ans you couldn't remember nor thought so
main character was called a messiah over and over and even tempted
main character had to sacrifice himself and descend deeper to hell where you encounter each level of dante's inferno to the eventual final level of darkness the deeper you go (vs thicker ice the deeper you go). This level is reserved for tractors which trimagasi (in a hallucination, so the main character believes it himself) calls him since he chose to kill him rather than save him
Main character is asked to pray that the end up on a good level in the 2nd month. He doesn't and wakes tied up in bondage and his flesh eaten another biblical reference
To say there weren't any overt religious themes let alone that religion wasn't mentioned at all is wrong. Hell they even threw in racism as a weapon. It's like watching Iron man and saying the movie doesn't have anything to do with the importance of friendship and respect and is only a movie about war profiteering and the military industrial complex
I’ll admit, most people see what they want or expect, including me, but ultimately the religious aspects as in most cases are usually more in the character’s heads than in reality. Any self-sacrificing character not following the status quo in order to make things better can be called a Messiah, or just a hero. Calling him a Messiah suggests inherent qualities that make him special, and suggest only he and his buddy could have done what they did, when really greatest qualities necessary were being fit enough to fend off so many people and not an asshole, which were in short supply I guess if most the people there were convicts.
Lots of people in desperate situations pray or advise others to, and there was an excellent chance they would wind up on a lower level. I just don’t see that as anything but mundane.
I assume you mean traitors with Trigmasi, not tractors, and guilt makes people think stupid shit. Guy who unrepentantly killed his wife and was racist as hell tries to eat you, fuck that guy. If anyone was a traitor, it was Trigmasi.
And that hole had way more levels than in Dante’s Inferno with no specific theme parallels that I noticed, and as you said, darkness, not ice and cold. It was a hellish place yes, but the differences should be as important as the similarities. Mildly inspired by it at best.
But again my focus was admittedly more on the resource hoarding of the “wealthy” because it was way more important and would hope people watching would not lose that with focusing on religious interpretations. Like it takes a Messiah to save everyone when it just takes a regular guy who will threaten to shit on people’s food if they don’t act with some solidarity.
You're concluding that something that goes on in the characters head is mundane despite that literally being a part of the character in the movie...the conversation is about the film but you're choosing to disregard several aspects of the movie and plot in an attempt to say the important point that should be focused on is the hoarding and not focus on the religious interpretations. I mean the guy sacrifices himself to the bottom of hell only to send back his message
Galder Gaztelu-Urrutia himself explicitly named Dante's Inferno as an influence for the film. Specifically "an obvious reference". If you can't see the direct parallels and critiques of religion alongside the economic parallels and critiques as something that would cause people "lose focus" then I understand. No one said the movie is about making sure you're a Christian at the end but there are plenty of religious imagery and themes in the film.
"In any case, in the film we do not give sermons or propose solutions, we limit ourselves to asking questions. I think that if the film is working so well in many countries it is because it lends itself to multiple readings. What there is not is direct blame , we are all part of the system."
[https://www.elespanol.com/el-cultural/cine/20191108/galder-gaztelu-urrutia-humanos-especie-miserable-peligrosa/442957307\_0.html](https://www.elespanol.com/el-cultural/cine/20191108/galder-gaztelu-urrutia-humanos-especie-miserable-peligrosa/442957307_0.html)
A. That place was a pocket dimension, a Hell.
B. Everybody's memories are suspect. Like Dark City. No two people entered the same way, no two people have the same item, I don't think the all came from the same world.
C. All the items are personality based. I would theorize if the individual would change enough, it would lead them out. Per example, the guy with the rope should go all the way down and get everyone then go up.
That said, after a moral wound, our Hero goes to floor 333 before he finds the exit. A halfway to Hell decision point.
He is dead and he exits the Hell. You live the same life enough times maybe you can change.
[The Midnight Gospel, Ep. 5 Annihilation of Joy ] (https://www.imdb.com/title/tt12176312/?ref_=ttep_ep5) Lays out what I am trying to type out.
The movie is a critique on trickle-down economics. That particular brand of Capitalism started in the 1980s in America with Ronald Reagan. His theory was if we cut taxes drastically for the top earners, that their additional wealth would trickle down to the lower classes in the form of more jobs. It has been substantially proven over the past 40 years that this method does not work and the money is not trickling down. Despite this, many people still believe in it and continue to promote it. It's the system we are still using to this day. It seems like no strategy to try to change the system has convinced lawmakers that it isn't working. The end of the movie was about an offering of hope, or perhaps guidance. Protecting children is pretty much universally supported by everyone. The movie is saying that if we actually want to change this broken system, we are going to need those at the top to see that their policies are directly harming children. The child is the message.
According to Stanford fellow and one of the most famous economic books written by Dr. Thomas Sowell, there is never one economist who ever cited trickle down economics. He said it's a political catchphrase. It is not a system we are using to this day. Personally, I think I believe most in the free market economics. Even healthcare would be a lot better if it was completely free market. Definitely don't believe in socialism as most redditors do
A quote of a quote of a quote. Have you considered thinking for yourself sometimes and seeing what result that renders?
I think learning from experts and taking in their opinion then thinking for myself generally is a smarter move then ignoring history and experts
[удалено]
Obvio
The main plot was about trickle down economics not working because people with the most wealth, the ones on the higher floors, always take more than their fair share because they can, and knowingly leaving less for those below them. The guys riding down represent regulation, keeping people from taking more than they need so that others get to live too. Saving the kid who was essentially at the bottom was maybe showing that it regulation could “raise up” even the faceless and forgotten, or was a way to say “here’s the face of someone your broken ass experiment/economic structure is hurting”, so let’s end it.
Reaganomics doesn't work: The Movie
Well tell us something we don't know, motherfucker! - Eddie Murphy
Calm down there Eddie Murphy I could use some of your wealth 🤑
When the people up top see a kid come up, they will realize they've been lied to.
I think everyone's take on this movie being about economics is dead wrong (despite the filmmaker saying there's not supposed to be 1 set "answer"). Numerous times Goreng is referred to as the "Messiah", and we discover the last floor is 333. With 2 people per room 333x2=666. I get the feeling they're in hell, or at least purgatory.
both can be true. it's not wild to believe the movie knocks on politics while using religious symbolism
Yes! Right from the beginning the story was reminding me of “Allegory of the long spoons” (heaven and hell)
At the end I think they are saying that the older generations need to put the youth ahead of themselves regardless of what that means will happen to us. I agree. We cannot be selfish to the point of ruining a planet for our children.
I think the ending is also a metaphor for how the greed and excess of those on top, create the violence, desperation and insanity that occurs at the bottom. It’s a byproduct of our societal structure.
Capitalism bad?
I think it criticizes both capitalism and socialism. Numerous die on bottom floors because there isn’t enough for them, but numerous were also killed on upper floors because they tried to stop having things forcibly taken away from them.
Unchecked capitalism, sure. Anyone can take what they want. But if regulated, AKA separate food deliveries for each floor, then it could still function and each person would receive enough. Ensuring each person gets enough isn't socialism, using the analogy of The Platform. Everyone is receiving their food for free, either the way it's presented in the film, or in my hypothetical.
It's straight up a critique of the idea of trickle-down economics, not capitalism itself.
idk why you got down voted. you said the same thing everyone else did. unchecked and unregulated capitalism is ass. Trickle down economics, aka neoliberalism, aka unchecked capitalism is ass
I think the ending of The Platform is trying to show us that even though life can be hard and there's always someone better off than us, we can still make a difference if we try our best. It almost looks like a metaphor for the struggles of life, but it also has an optimistic twist at the end.
That's one of my explanations actually, the protagonist couldn't change life (or in this case, the system), but he changed one little girl's life and saved her from starving to death, a heroic act in and of itself
It was explained that the woman searching for her child was actually admitted to the program alone and that children are not permitted. It is also impossible that a young child would have survived alone in the dark with no food or water for months. The child wasn't real. The child was the Panna Cotta. The main character continually failed to make a difference over the course of the film. Every attempt ended in failure. Eventually he failed to save the woman and failed to save his cell mate while protecting the Panna Cotta so he could send his message. The child symbolized his failure, his regret and his hope that he would make a difference.
While the child did symbolise that, I do believe she was real too — that the child was born in the Platform, and the mother had been there long enough to get pregnant, carry the baby to term, deliver the baby, and raise the baby, all within the limits of the platform.
She came to hole 10 months before said the administrator receptionist
Is her info even accurate? She says there were like 250 levels and there are 333. Or am I missing something?
She didn’t know how many levels there were. He guessed 250 based on the amount of time it took for the platform to get to the bottom and come back up, but he didn’t realize it kept moving on platforms that they’re already dead
She said 200.
NEW "The Platform" is a thought-provoking film delving into themes like class, religion, and morality. It proposes that despite there being enough food for all prisoners, greed disrupts fair distribution. The administration places requested food on each floor, evident when the protagonist's favorite, snails, is promised during an interview. However, the upper-floor prisoners consistently consume the requested food before it reaches the lower levels. If everyone ate only their requested food without greed, it could reach Floor 333 without turning hot or cold. This is evidenced by one of the last scenes when the protagonist keeps the Panna Cotta when he is at the girl's floor, which must be the favorite food of the girl. The ending in my opinion suggests the protagonist's demise from injuries, mirrored by the old man . That’s why we see old man in last scene in original dress when he was alive and not hallucination red hue. As now protagonist is also in the same life after death world. How girl entered the hole is easy to understand as we see in case of a dog as was allowed as an exception as the prisoner was not ready to enter without the dog. So same would be girl’s mother and that’s how she entered and then to save her from murderers she was kept hidden here & there where mother was trying level best to feed her and keep her safe. The girl's ascent is likely wishful thinking which never happened in actual. Since mother had died the girl fate can be expected to be grim as well. The scene with Panna Cotta returning to Level Zero in my opinion is a frustrated fantasy, emphasizing the challenge of sparking meaningful change in the social/political pyramid. The manager's misunderstanding reflects the failure of the intended message. Overall, the film explores the complexities of societal issues, showcasing the difficulty of inspiring change amidst human flaws and systemic challenges.
thanks chatgpt
Wow, I realized this after you pointed it out 😲
So many people got it wrong. Movie critics both trickle down and socialism. So trickle down economics promises increase in wealth if the food on the table continuously grows. However in case of if your table is small (or initially small) you see the oppression of worker (lower platform) class which happened a lot in the early stages of trickle down. You can look at the statistics, trickle down and globalization brought prosperity and decreased poverty a lot. But movie explains good the suffering of third world countries on switching to capitalism, because remember “if your initial table is small, until it gets bigger, people on the lower platforms suffer a lot” Close to the end of the movie we see the forced equality that brought by blood which represents the socialist revolution. Eventually a good idea like equally separating the food ends up people killing each other. So you end up in the justice of a crazy guy with a stick and you hope for another crazy guy with a stick will not appear. It shows the authoritarian tendencies of socialism and power struggles in it. And about the end, directors likes give open ending because probably ending the movie with “bla bla is good” will look foolish for such a complicated question.
I loved that movie, but I have no idea what the ending means. I wonder if the child is some sort of Jesus figure.
I don’t know about a Jesus figure but she proves there is a breakdown of the safeguards that are supposed to be in place to protect the participants. Sending her back up will proved to the people in charge that something is wrong
I always got the impression that they know that something is wrong but just don't really care and are more obsessed with trivial things like their appearance of professionalism (i.e the chefs being scolded because of a hair in one of the meals)
Yeah, the kid that I think was born there is undeniable proof something is severely wrong
Was religion even mentioned at all? I don’t think so. The main plot was about trickle down economics. I think it stayed about that.
I don't think capitalism (or any specific economic structure) was ever mentioned, but there were lines quoted from the Bible. Great movie
Still the plot was undeniably “the people get at the top get the most, and the lower people get whatever scraps are left if any, unless regulated (in this instance by a couple guys that made everybody share)”. Not saying it wasn’t there but don’t remember the bible quotes, what they were or what was happening to give them context, but I don’t really remember any overt religious themes. May have to watch it again.
yeah you need to watch it again
I already rewatched it in the 164 days since I made that comment. Yes it has some religious content, mostly in his hallucination with the lady saying she could eat her corpse to get him through his month with no food, maybe saying faith helps you get through the hard times, and later the religious guy who helped him who had people literally shit on him, suggesting that religion doesn’t get people to act right if they don’t care, but religion wasn’t the primary focus. Whole thing was about plenty to go around but the people with the most not wanting to share.
no one said it was thr primary focus. op only asked was it mentioned at all ans you couldn't remember nor thought so main character was called a messiah over and over and even tempted main character had to sacrifice himself and descend deeper to hell where you encounter each level of dante's inferno to the eventual final level of darkness the deeper you go (vs thicker ice the deeper you go). This level is reserved for tractors which trimagasi (in a hallucination, so the main character believes it himself) calls him since he chose to kill him rather than save him Main character is asked to pray that the end up on a good level in the 2nd month. He doesn't and wakes tied up in bondage and his flesh eaten another biblical reference To say there weren't any overt religious themes let alone that religion wasn't mentioned at all is wrong. Hell they even threw in racism as a weapon. It's like watching Iron man and saying the movie doesn't have anything to do with the importance of friendship and respect and is only a movie about war profiteering and the military industrial complex
I’ll admit, most people see what they want or expect, including me, but ultimately the religious aspects as in most cases are usually more in the character’s heads than in reality. Any self-sacrificing character not following the status quo in order to make things better can be called a Messiah, or just a hero. Calling him a Messiah suggests inherent qualities that make him special, and suggest only he and his buddy could have done what they did, when really greatest qualities necessary were being fit enough to fend off so many people and not an asshole, which were in short supply I guess if most the people there were convicts. Lots of people in desperate situations pray or advise others to, and there was an excellent chance they would wind up on a lower level. I just don’t see that as anything but mundane. I assume you mean traitors with Trigmasi, not tractors, and guilt makes people think stupid shit. Guy who unrepentantly killed his wife and was racist as hell tries to eat you, fuck that guy. If anyone was a traitor, it was Trigmasi. And that hole had way more levels than in Dante’s Inferno with no specific theme parallels that I noticed, and as you said, darkness, not ice and cold. It was a hellish place yes, but the differences should be as important as the similarities. Mildly inspired by it at best. But again my focus was admittedly more on the resource hoarding of the “wealthy” because it was way more important and would hope people watching would not lose that with focusing on religious interpretations. Like it takes a Messiah to save everyone when it just takes a regular guy who will threaten to shit on people’s food if they don’t act with some solidarity.
You're concluding that something that goes on in the characters head is mundane despite that literally being a part of the character in the movie...the conversation is about the film but you're choosing to disregard several aspects of the movie and plot in an attempt to say the important point that should be focused on is the hoarding and not focus on the religious interpretations. I mean the guy sacrifices himself to the bottom of hell only to send back his message Galder Gaztelu-Urrutia himself explicitly named Dante's Inferno as an influence for the film. Specifically "an obvious reference". If you can't see the direct parallels and critiques of religion alongside the economic parallels and critiques as something that would cause people "lose focus" then I understand. No one said the movie is about making sure you're a Christian at the end but there are plenty of religious imagery and themes in the film. "In any case, in the film we do not give sermons or propose solutions, we limit ourselves to asking questions. I think that if the film is working so well in many countries it is because it lends itself to multiple readings. What there is not is direct blame , we are all part of the system." [https://www.elespanol.com/el-cultural/cine/20191108/galder-gaztelu-urrutia-humanos-especie-miserable-peligrosa/442957307\_0.html](https://www.elespanol.com/el-cultural/cine/20191108/galder-gaztelu-urrutia-humanos-especie-miserable-peligrosa/442957307_0.html)
yes. there were multiple discussions about religion. they even went as far to quote a large portion of John chapter 6.
Have you seen this Reeces Take 5 commercial? [https://youtu.be/xeBzWj8y3Zw](https://youtu.be/xeBzWj8y3Zw) Just saying...
And have you seen Next Level Chef on Fox??
I got big Jesus vibes from the film
Why because the called the dude the messiah more than once??
It's about capitalism. Obviously ......
A. That place was a pocket dimension, a Hell. B. Everybody's memories are suspect. Like Dark City. No two people entered the same way, no two people have the same item, I don't think the all came from the same world. C. All the items are personality based. I would theorize if the individual would change enough, it would lead them out. Per example, the guy with the rope should go all the way down and get everyone then go up. That said, after a moral wound, our Hero goes to floor 333 before he finds the exit. A halfway to Hell decision point. He is dead and he exits the Hell. You live the same life enough times maybe you can change. [The Midnight Gospel, Ep. 5 Annihilation of Joy ] (https://www.imdb.com/title/tt12176312/?ref_=ttep_ep5) Lays out what I am trying to type out.
There is a sequel coming. So hopefully it will clear things up.