There’s something uniquely compelling about watching ordinary people thrust into extraordinary circumstances where survival hinges on their wits and moral choices. The recent surge in death game narratives has given us two standout series that, despite their surface similarities, approach this brutal premise from fundamentally different angles. Both Alice in Borderland and Squid Game tap into our collective anxieties about modern society, but they do so with distinct artistic visions that reveal more about their creators’ philosophies than about any supposed copying between them.
What fascinates me most about this comparison isn’t which show is better, but how each series uses its premise to explore different aspects of human nature. Squid Game presents itself as a stark commentary on economic inequality, using simple childhood games to highlight how desperation can turn people against each other. The beauty of its approach lies in its brutal simplicity – these aren’t complex puzzles requiring genius-level intellect, but basic games that anyone could understand, making the characters’ failures and betrayals feel all the more relatable and horrifying.
Alice in Borderland takes the opposite approach, embracing complexity and intellectual challenge as its central theme. The games aren’t just obstacles to overcome but intricate puzzles that reward clever thinking and pattern recognition. This creates a different kind of tension – less about the raw desperation of poverty and more about the psychological toll of constant problem-solving under life-or-death pressure. The characters in Borderland aren’t just fighting to survive; they’re fighting to understand the rules of their new reality, which adds a layer of existential dread that Squid Game touches on but doesn’t fully explore.
Where these shows truly diverge is in their treatment of character development and emotional stakes. Squid Game builds its narrative around Gi-hun’s personal journey, using his relationships with other players to explore themes of trust, sacrifice, and redemption. The emotional weight comes from watching these connections form and shatter under extreme pressure. Alice in Borderland, meanwhile, often sacrifices deep character exploration for the sake of moving through its complex game sequences, creating a different kind of engagement that prioritizes intellectual curiosity over emotional investment.
The ongoing debate about which show is superior misses the point that both series succeed precisely because they approach similar material from different angles. Rather than seeing them as competitors, we should appreciate them as complementary explorations of the same dark fascination with survival scenarios. Their coexistence in the cultural landscape speaks to our enduring interest in stories that test human limits, whether through economic desperation or intellectual challenge, reminding us that the most terrifying games are often those that reflect our own societal anxieties back at us.
About the Author
