It feels like a normal B-level film, which has been blown a bit too far. First of all, its intention seems to be that human nature is evil. The proof process is biased. The setting of the entire platform restricts people from promoting goodness. For example, if you can’t store food, people have to eat immediately when the platform arrives. There is no food stored. Under normal circumstances, most people are not able to persist in doing good, let alone such extremes. Condition. For another example, the random layer change every month is to stimulate conflicts between people and let revenge defeat rationality. These conditions are as if the experimenter made some problematic operations during the experiment in order to obtain a certain result. Secondly, if the intention of the film is to observe human nature in a bad situation, then someone is actually trying to change it, trying to do good. Finally, if such a few people are used as a metaphor for the political system, the sample is too small. It seems that the film does not mention the background of people other than the male lead. These people may all be supporters of a certain system, so other systems will naturally not work. Even if these people can represent all human beings, the institutional metaphors mentioned in some film reviews are not valid. Because the resources of this platform are insufficient, productivity itself has problems. It is inappropriate to draw conclusions and analyze various political systems without considering productivity and resources.
To sum up, this film discusses human nature, but it has too many restrictions, which makes its conclusions not universal, let alone over-interpretation, or even use it as a metaphor for some complex issues.
View more about The Platform reviews
