While this episode may be one of the most difficult to stomach, it is also one of the more daring, intense, and powerful episodes of the series up until this point. It's structured masterfully, the acting is incredible, and it brings up questions that society is often afraid to answer; at what point do we go too far in the name of justice? At what point does punishment cross the line of morality and cross into the realm of sadism?
Throughout most of the episode, the audience is left just as confused as Victoria. Tension steadily arises and does not cease until long after the episode has ended. This confusion was wholly intentional, as we are meant to be seeing things exactly the way our main character is; confused, uncertain, frustrated, fearful. The only things I can complain about with this episode are the fact that Victoria can become annoying due to the fact that she is almost constantly whining, and that this episode mostly relies on its ending. Its ending is powerful, though, as we discover that Victoria is being punished on a loop, for the entertainment of a large crowd and the entirety of the internet, for a crime that she does not remember, as she is repeatedly being electrocuted heavily so that her memory is wiped. Now the audience must ask questions. We know that her crime was awful; still, though, she didn't actually kill the child, only assist in the kidnapping and be compliant in allowing her murder and recording it. Is this not the same as what is being done to Victoria? How can you punish someone for a crime they don't remember committing? If she doesn't remember it, or even who she is, is the person being punished really the same as the person who committed the crime?
Similarly to the episode "Shut Up and Dance", in season 3, episode 3, Charlie Brooker makes us ponder upon the harsh punishments given to people who have committed crimes against children. He gives us time with the character, some of the horrors they have/will experience, and then reveal the nature of their crime. Does this person deserve a fate far worse than death? It's up to us and the rest of society to decide.
Throughout most of the episode, the audience is left just as confused as Victoria. Tension steadily arises and does not cease until long after the episode has ended. This confusion was wholly intentional, as we are meant to be seeing things exactly the way our main character is; confused, uncertain, frustrated, fearful. The only things I can complain about with this episode are the fact that Victoria can become annoying due to the fact that she is almost constantly whining, and that this episode mostly relies on its ending. Its ending is powerful, though, as we discover that Victoria is being punished on a loop, for the entertainment of a large crowd and the entirety of the internet, for a crime that she does not remember, as she is repeatedly being electrocuted heavily so that her memory is wiped. Now the audience must ask questions. We know that her crime was awful; still, though, she didn't actually kill the child, only assist in the kidnapping and be compliant in allowing her murder and recording it. Is this not the same as what is being done to Victoria? How can you punish someone for a crime they don't remember committing? If she doesn't remember it, or even who she is, is the person being punished really the same as the person who committed the crime?
Similarly to the episode "Shut Up and Dance", in season 3, episode 3, Charlie Brooker makes us ponder upon the harsh punishments given to people who have committed crimes against children. He gives us time with the character, some of the horrors they have/will experience, and then reveal the nature of their crime. Does this person deserve a fate far worse than death? It's up to us and the rest of society to decide.