climax of the film is at the back, the beast fight begins, and everyone is hungry. Two of them have eaten the so-called "monkey meat", which is human flesh. The other one couldn't even eat the meat because the gums were loose and the meat couldn't bite. Except for the three of them, all became monkeys. People who don't eat human flesh become even more afraid. Afraid that they would eat themselves, in order to protect themselves, they said they had a bomb. Later, an old fox tricked him into getting the bomb. This small circle is also cheating, all for their own survival to the end.
The old fox deceived the bomb, and it became the most favorable index of survival among the three people. And the other two are weaker and allied to bully him.
In the end, the old fox sat on the mountain and was forced to surrender. After negotiating the conditions with the other two, he was killed by one of the people with a gun, and he was also eaten. There are too many reasons to hate the old fox. I used to bully him. And at this time, another person killed the cannibal, and he couldn't stand the scene of such people killing people. No matter how hungry a normal person was, he would never reach the level of cannibalism.
What morality is there when survival is at stake?
View more about Fires on the Plain reviews
