> What struck me is that the main family has a ton of talent. They're excellent actors and planners. In a healthy society, they could use those talents to do so

> What struck me is that the main family has a ton of talent. They're excellent actors and planners. In a healthy society, they could use those talents to do something productive You got it both right and wrong. In "Parasite", the family did indeed have talents, and they were often morally wrong: for most of the movie, they're bad-guys. But the movie is successful for the questions it raises: - why should the poor always be "good" and yet if the rich are just a little bit good, they are considered saints. - why assume that talent has anything to do with it. The poor family seemed smarter than the rich family. But how much of success is really based on "talent" rather than knowing the right people at the right time? The movie was good because it didn't really take sides on these issues, while throwing the question directly at your face. The very fact that you're asking the question means the effect was successful.