Episode #1.4

My Korean drama journey with Trigger maintains its gripping, albeit often bleak, progression. Ep 4 shifts from raw spectacle to the unsettling repercussions of the crisis. While Ep 3 was an exhilarating car chase and intense shootout, Ep 4 delves into the personal and societal fallout, and the law's struggle to cope with unprecedented chaos.

Detective Lee Do (Kim Nam-gil) navigates increasing bureaucratic hurdles and moral ambiguities. His frustration and isolation grow as he fights the rising tide of illegal firearms.

This episode highlights the fragility of public order, showing desperate individuals empowered by easy access to weapons, making choices that complicate the volatile situation. It explores deeper societal implications beyond mere action.

Moon Baek's (Kim Young-kwang) influence remains a chilling undercurrent, shaping the chaos with disturbing detachment.

Unlike Ep 3's overt explosions, this instalment builds tension through human desperation and systemic vulnerabilities. It's a testament to the writing that it maintains such a tight grip without constant high-octane action. Performances remain compelling, drawing one deeper into this disturbing reality.

Ep 4 is a thought-provoking and psychologically charged continuation, masterfully demonstrating how society unravels when trust erodes and fear takes hold.

In Trigger, episode 4 shows:

Most of the people who register to receive guns are victims of social injustice: being humiliated, cheated, exploited, despised, but have no legal tools or spiritual support to fight back.

They are forced into a situation where "they can only endure silently", meaning that society has abandoned them.

👉 At that moment, giving them a gun is like giving them "the last right to demand justice".

But the problem here is:

A gun is not just a real-life weapon, but a metaphor for "absolute power".

Once they use it to shoot their enemies, they immediately relieve injustice, but at the same time they also:

Become criminals immediately.

There is no turning back, because society will see them as murderers, not victims anymore.

The "liberation" by guns is actually a double-edged trap:

Helping them satisfy, but cutting off their future.

Giving them power, but taking away their lives.

I think the director intentionally pushes the audience into this contradiction:

On the one hand, the audience understands and sympathizes with them ("If I were you, I would probably want to shoot you").

But on the other hand, we also see that guns are not a truly fair solution, but only a way to "turn despair into destruction".

👉 In short:

The "ultimate weapon" in the film is a symbol of despair cloaked in power. It helps people take revenge, but at the same time kills both the victim and the perpetrator.