The production of Spanish director Galder Gaztelu-Urrutia has attracted the attention of subscribers to Netflix. Released in September 2019, science fiction starring Iván Massagué, who lives Goreng, has a simple synopsis, however, some of the mysteries remain after the credits go up. In an interview with the British website, the director answered some of them.
The film that won the People’s Choice Award for Midnight Madness at the Toronto International Film Festival in Canada, tells the story of a character who will be in an installation for six months. The rule inside the well is clear: everyone chooses a favorite food before entering, so they can eat it when the platform with the banquet goes down 333 levels. In practice, however, things get out of control, as sharing is totally ignored in the midst of the chaos.
This story contains spoilers from the movie, from Netflix.
Many fans have theorized about the messages the film wanted to convey. And also about the smallest details, like the name of the protagonist, Goreng, which refers to the national dish of Indonesia, (fried rice).
A general consensus, and even obvious (as one of the characters would say), is that Netflix’s new success is an explicit criticism of capitalism. Whoever is on top does not look down, whoever is below has less than crumbs to eat and whoever is in the middle is fighting for the remains of the privileged of the month, who were lucky enough to be in one of the upper levels.
The system created by the administration promotes wildness among the 666 trapped in the well. The fear of not having something to eat tomorrow, when at one of the lowest levels, makes the characters forget about their humanity.
The lower, the more animalized prisoners become, they even eat human flesh to stay alive, because the food is not distributed correctly. There are some with much, many with little and hundreds with nothing. As in the real world.
However, according to the director, the film’s criticisms are not only focused on the capitalist system. More than that, it is a criticism of existing economic systems in general, both capitalism and socialism.
We certainly believe that there is a better way of distributing wealth, but the film is not strictly about capitalism.
Said the director of the feature in an interview with
A former administration employee, Goreng’s second-level companion is a woman diagnosed with cancer and who knows she will soon die. Imoguiri, played by Antonia San Juan, tries to convince the other prisoners to eat only the necessary amount of calories and prepare portions for those below.
However, the “spontaneous solidarity” that the character hoped for has no effect. From that point, Goreng and Baharat take radical steps to socialize meals.
There may be a criticism of capitalism at first, but we also show that when Goreng and Baharat try to put socialism into practice, appealing to the goodwill of others in sharing food, they end up killing half the people who wanted to help.
The Spanish director said to the vehicle
In the end, that’s where most of the theories live, since the plot ends openly. Was Goreng a kind of martyr inside the well? Would the child, sought from the beginning by his mother, be the result of a delusion after so much suffering? Many questions were left on the air and the public and the specialized media wove theorized about them.
In a video explaining the end of the film, the duo, Fabio Gomes and Load, present two different interpretations. In the first, the child would have arrived at the administration after having eaten the panna cotta, thus carrying the message that the well system was flawed, since children under 16 would not pass the screening. Although they died, Goreng and Baharat would have managed to get the message across.
The second theory is more obscure, because the child would not exist, being just a hallucination. The delicacy would have gone up intact, but the administration would not have understood the message, because, in the middle of the film, the person in charge of the kitchen appears scolding an employee after having found a hair in the same dessert. According to this more pessimistic view, the effort would have been in vain.
For me, the last level does not exist. Goreng dies before reaching him, and what we see is just an interpretation of what he felt he should have done.
Galder Gaztelu-Urrutia replied when asked about the end of
The film does not portray anyone in particular as a hero or villain; it’s about what you would do if you were at level 200, or at 48. It is about the limits of your own solidarity and how easy it is to be a good person when you are comfortable at level 10, but difficult when you are at 182 .
Completed the director
Check out the full interview, in English, on the British entertainment website. Some of the translated excerpts are available in the matter of.
Watched and got that “I want more” taste? A film with a very similar theme is the one, directed by Oscar winner Bong Joon-ho.