Korean Game (ft. MAMAMOO) – “007 Bang” Review and Guide

MAMAMOO – Silent 007 Bang (Video
Example)

Korean Game – “(Silent) 007 Bang”

Reviewed
on November 21, 2015

image

Personal Message:
As said in the prior review, a bonus
post was in mind: a review and guide to the Korean game of “007 Bang.” If
readers are curious as to why I am making this post, MAMAMOO, in addition to being
featured players for this review/guide, did play it in episode 7 of “MMMTV”
(refer to my shamelessly self-advertised video link above; I still, however,
recommend readers watching the entire, official video). Thus, an idea spawned of
how there may be fans that are unfamiliar with the game and would desire an
explanation. After all, MAMAMOO are not the first idols to play this game on
camera; EXO, for example, has also played it, and fans there may also be
curious.

Now before beginning, I will leave disclaimers:
Similar to how passed-down stories change in details, my teaching of this game
may vary from others and the “official” version. This is due to how I personally
have learned the game, and thus, will be teaching according to my learned
version. As a result, some rules may be inaccurate, but regardless, the general
idea should hold. Secondly, with the upcoming pictures used to help explain the
game, I will directly apologize (if confused on what is being apologized for,
briefly scroll down and see—and laugh). Writing with a computer mouse is
incredibly difficult, and given that I already have unattractive print writing
in general (and that my main writing style, cursive, is equally questionable),
the pictures appear as if a very young child, one that is still developing her/his
hand-eye coordination, wrote the words. Effort is what matters in this case,
and I very much am proud for my work. Mostly embarrassed, actually.

In terms of the game, though more
will be discussed in the guide itself, “007 Bang” is a fun, prop-less activity
that people of any age can play. Although according to one friend that this
game is meant to be played with drinking alcohol (on a side note, if drinking
games are chosen to be played for whatever reason, do remember to drink
responsibly—during and after the game), it is still an enjoyable and comical
game for casual moments. If chosen to be played as a drinking game, a drink is
taken per received penalty, but as hinted, I do not wish to share “007 Bang” as
a drinking game nor do I actually encourage drinking games at all (but, to each
her/his own; again, be responsible). Addressing the purpose of the game,
depending on how it is set up, it may be used for “elimination,” but generally,
there is no “win” goal; the game is for fun and laughs.

As for why the title is called “007
Bang,” it is in reference to James Bond, the fictional spy agent. Many should
be familiar with this character and his story since it falls along every other
White, male, heterosexual, rich, muscular, apathetic, monotone saving hero
story. I slightly
promise that was in no way passive-aggressive
. Players are, essentially,
spy agents “shooting” at one another while attempting to be stealthy—hence the
title (but, it may be due to other reasons; this is my suspected idea). That
said there are two versions to the game: the silent version and noise version.
Overall, there are no differences between the two versions minus, as the labels
refer to, whether or not noises are made. I will cover both in the guide.

To slightly digress (since I
probably will digress for a while, feel free to read the guide and review now)
on my satirical note of James Bond, I hope no reader feels individually
offended. I am mocking James Bond not in the sense of who he is (or actors who
have played his character), but rather, what he is: the epitome of privilege, moreover
in the context of America (but still very much applicable elsewhere). Due to
various reviews discussing social privileges be it in race, gender,
heterosexual, and so forth, such as Girls’
Generation’s “You Think,”
I will not discuss that in this review.
Reiterating the linked review’s point, however, should there be any reader who
feels disturbed, looking into and acknowledging privilege are the first steps.
For example, while I am disadvantaged in race (in America), I am privileged in
gender, sexual orientation, somewhat in class, and thus, have to realize I am
privileged in those aspects and even many others. Even with, for example, strongly
advocating and discussing gender equity and equality in reviews, because I am a
male, I have to realize that my very being does bring unearned advantages and
that it brings females disadvantages—even if I have done no personal harm, and
in my case, have done positively via attempting to bring in gender equality. It
all does not matter; being a male—being privileged in gender—means having
unearned bonuses in life (refer to reviews that examine cases of what male
privilege can appear as).

Now, this does not mean I bask in
privilege without challenging it. Very much, it is now a social responsibility
to challenge my gender privilege, but the first step is to acknowledge that:
that I am privileged and deserve to be critically analyzed, picked apart, and
in certain cases, even rightfully insulted. Race is perhaps a clearer example.
Being White in America can be conflicting: Whites in the past have done
atrocious, blunt racist acts, but now it appears that Whites in modern time are
taking the blame, even if many Whites are genuinely not racist. That is not the
point. Racism still very much does actively thrive (think of race disparities
in crime, jobs, education, wealth, and think of micro-level incidents of
non-Whites being discriminated against), and thus, White privilege does exist
(in America specifically and perhaps elsewhere; in South Korea, for example, “Korean
privilege” is the case) and that certainly brings unearned advantages, even if
not personally desired. Therefore, though it is hurtful to be insulted for
being White or any other social privilege, rather than retaliating back with actual
oppression (“reverse oppression” is false, as discussed in my horrible writing
of Dal
Shabet’s “B.B.B”)
, understanding should occur. Personally, with being a
male, there have been incidents where I have been attacked for such: “You have
no place to discuss gender equality,” or more broadly of “You’re stupid because
you’re a boy.” In either cases, with being a human and admittedly moreover a sensitive one who cries very
easily
, it does hurt. But, to claim that those sayings are “sexist”
is nowhere near what females experience in the realm of being socially
disadvantaged—in the realm of real sexism. In fact, for other incidents such as
being told not to use makeup or to not even care about makeup since I am a boy,
that idea indeed stems into actual sexism: undervaluing femininity to
masculinity (refer to reviews for this topic).

Overall, returning to the main
point, my mocking of James Bond should be, at the very least, understood;
whether or not that was acceptable is debatable, but unequivocally, it is
justifiable because of James Bond’s possessed social privileges—fictional character
or not. In terms of what I did desire to truly discuss, however, there is a
question I have yet to address that a few readers may have rightfully wondered:
am I excessively critical of everything? Given that this review/guide
significantly digressed over a simple mentioning of James Bond, besides reinforcing my sensitive
side
 that question is definitely valid.

In answer, I do confess to being
critical of everything, especially with being someone who actively digests
(Korean) pop culture. However, being critical is not an issue, and in fact, the
lack thereof is more problematic than being “overly” critical. Using an
example, if a music video sexualizes females (I plan to soon discuss “sexualizing”
and “sexual/sexual expression” in a future review; the two are oftentimes
mistaken as being the same, and that does lead to huge issues), if I lack a
critical mindset, then that is merely accepting a sexist standard of reducing
down women. It is better to be critical so that that standard is challenged.
Rarely is it possible to be “overly” critical. Homogenous to the terms of “feminazi”
or “social justice warrior,” calling out those who are “overly critical” is to attempt
to downplay their voice and, usually, serious points. With my satirical take
with James Bond, is it truly being excessively critical? Is it not true that
James Bond is the epitome of privilege and that his sheer popularity is
concerning since, from my knowledge, there are very few non-privileged heroes
that are equally as famous?

Concluding, I may be exceptionally
critical at times, as proven by my many digressions in reviews, but it is all
to bring awareness and discussions. What matters is being open to discuss these
subtle yet impactful social topics, and to see from multiple perspectives. I
have no right answer nor does anyone else. I am moreover concerned on the
meaning of an answer, not so much on whether it is “right or wrong.” I care
more on knowing why it is wrong for non-Whites (or non-Koreans; again, based on
the “dominant group” of a place) to be discriminated against on the basis of
race, or why it is wrong that females have to be subjected to males’ objectification
and sexualizing. Conversely, I also care more on knowing why people may argue
that it is justifiable to claim that females and non-heterosexuals are inferior
to males and heterosexuals. I strongly disagree with that, but I do care of that
perspective because I am interested in its meaning—not if it is “right or wrong”
necessarily.

Returning this post to, if possible,
what originally was to be pure fun and laughs, “007 Bang” will be reviewed and explained.
Mentioned earlier, it is a universal game that can be played with young and old
players, while sitting or standing, and no props are necessary (minus at least
three players, though four is recommended for the lowest). MAMAMOO’s example
will be used as a reference point for this review and guide, but I do hope the
following writing is organized and clear enough. All that said, to codename
reader Ms. 007/Mr. 007, a training mission awaits you. We will be looking
forward to your return and
disgusted reaction at the worst transition yet to date.

_______________________________________________________

Explanation/Guide:
Recovering from horrendous, corny
lines, truthfully I cannot look at the current pictures without at least
grinning. I am, clearly, not artistic whatsoever. This may explain why friends
are reluctant of me applying makeup for them and that I should preserve personal
eyeliner use for the far future. Jokes aside, “007 Bang” is a straightforward
game. After observing one game and attempting to try it, it should come
naturally.

To begin the game, a starting player
must be selected. There are no advantages necessarily to being first, so
manually picking or having a rock-paper-scissors battle are fine options. Once
the first player is selected, she/he must draw a square to alert players that
the game has begun, and from there, she/he may “shoot” (point).

In a “round,” four shots is the
limit before a “bang” occurs from the fourth shot (I will explain these
terminologies). A “shot” constitutes as pointing once at either one’s self or
at another player. A player can shoot anyone, including themselves, up to four
times (the fourth shot is the “bang”). There are rules, however. For one, a
player can only “bang” themselves or a player twice consecutively; shooting
anyone with the fourth shot for more than two times will lead to a “penalty.”
For example, Solar points to herself four times—a “bang,” and then does it once
more. She then, however, does it once again. This would be a “penalty” (over
two consecutive same-“bangs”) and thus, she will receive the punishment.
Likewise, if Wheein shoots herself three times and shoots Solar with the fourth
and causes a “bang,” and then afterwards repeats the same method and “bangs”
Solar, but then repeats all that for the third time, she will also get punished
since she same-“banged” a player for more than two times.

Elaborating shooting, shooters are
switched according to whether a player has been shot. A player shooting
himself/herself will be able to carry the next shot (since they were last shot),
but if a player shoots another player, then the player who got shot will be in
control. So, Player A can shoot themselves, for example, two times, and then
shoot Player B. Afterwards, Player A is no longer the shooter, but if Player A
still decided to shoot after shooting Player B (this mistake occurs in MAMAMOO’s
game, as to be explained), they will get punished. Remember: The player who
gets shot is now the shot—the shooter.  

image

An example of a game in progress
will be used to further explain such (and the game in general). In the picture
above, Solar has shot herself twice via pointing at herself twice. She
initiated the game, and thus, had the first shot. The first shot was used on
her, and as a result, she was still the active shooter since she was still the
last player hit. She then chose to shoot herself again. Now, two shots have
already been fired, and she is in control of the third shot.

image

A change arrives: she then shoots
Moonbyul with the third shot. The current round now has a total of three shots
fired, and as explained, upon shooting another player, they then become the active
shooter. Thus, Moonbyul is now the armed woman to be feared—and rightfully so
with her possessing the fourth bullet, the “bang.”

image

Moonbyul now decides to shoot at
Wheein, who is now “banged” because the fourth shot is the “bang” bullet.
Interestingly, however, it is not Wheein that has to be scared; her flankers
are the ones who have to be alert.

image

Whoever is hit with the “bang”
bullet (the fourth shot/pointing) is not in peril, but the people who are next
to the “banged victim” are. “Flankers,” the players on either side of the
person who gets “banged,” have to both raise their hands up. If one flanker forgets
to or is incredibly slow, they get punished (I will go over the punishment
later). If both flankers forget or are equally slow, they both get punished.
Now, once the game gets intense and very fast-paced, other players may occasionally
make a mistake as well, such as by wrongly raising hands when they are not the
flanker (or by laughing too loudly in the silent version; I will cover this).
In these instances, these mistaken players are punished. Hopefully my beautiful
markings on the picture showcase this.

image

After a “bang” moment occurs, a new
round takes place. The new shooter is the player who was last shot. In MAMAMOO’s
case, since Moonbyul “banged” Wheein, Wheein is the next shooter up.

image

Continuing, Wheein decides to shoot
herself once, and then uses the second shot on Solar. Expectedly, Solar is now
the shooter since she was last shot.

image

Solar decides to shoot herself
twice. In this case, the player “banged” is herself since the fourth shot is on
her, but as explained, it is not the “banged” victim to be concerned, but instead,
those around her/him.

image

Both Wheein and Moonbyul follow
through with raising their hands since, as seen, they are the “flankers” to
Solar, the person who was “banged.” No punishment has occurred yet for MAMAMOO.
Yet.

image

Eventually, though, given the nature
of the game, mistakes do occur. At one point, Moonbyul gets “banged,” and her
flankers, Solar and Hwasa, act accordingly with raising their hands. Jocularly,
though, Wheein also raised her hands when she was not a flanker at all. Thus,
she will receive the “punishment.”

image

What is the punishment? Whether
standing or sitting, they will have to bend over to reveal their back (in
certain cases, “gentle force” may be required), and from there, every player
can slap his/her back quickly. Again, “gentle force” is used—unless if all the
players happen to be somewhat violent females and males. (In the drinking
version, this may occur, but for sure, a drink/shot will be taken.)

Other common mistakes will also be
covered. Also, to explain the difference between the “silent” and “noise”
version, that is solely it: noise or lack thereof. In the silent version,
pointing is all done without sound, and furthermore, laughing is prohibited and
will lead to the seen punishment. With the “noise” version, every shot must be
accompanied with the numbers of “007” accordingly (first shot is “0”; second
shot is “0”; third shot is “7”). The fourth shot, however, takes the form of “bang,”
hence the game’s title. Additionally, flankers must yell “ah” when raising
their hands. In contrast to the “silent” version, the forgetting of a sound can
lead to punishment.

image

image

To now explain the mistakes seen in
the video, at one point Solar points (no pun intended) to Wheein when,
certainly, no one shot her. Therefore, she was not the active shooter, and
shortly after, was punished despite her clever attempt to disguise the mistake.

image

Later, Moonbyul ends up laughing
amidst shooting. As covered, that is not allowed in the silent version of  “007 Bang.” Her back paid the price.

image

Lastly, for the mistake that made me
personally guffaw (though the others were equally hilarious), Wheein shoots
Solar not once, but four times. Repeating the rule, once a player is shot,
she/he becomes the wielder of the gun—the shooter. Thus, it is simply
impossible for Wheein to be able to shoot more than once, let alone four times.
A mistake that was well worth it. Not for Wheein’s back, of course.

_______________________________________________________

Review: Assuming
my explanation is not awful, readers should now have a general idea of the
game. Since a review was not the intended goal, I will purely leave minimal
comments. Overall, “007 Bang” is fun and can be very comical, especially once
it becomes very fast-paced and players begin shooting five times, overly shooting
players, or mistakenly raising their hands. Biasedly, I will claim the silent
version is more fun due to the level of stealth and speed, and that it is not
as obnoxious and embarrassing as the noise version, but both are exciting. For
the biggest drawback to the game, though “winning” is certainly never the goal
of these types of friend-games, it does become lackluster and almost pointless
after a while since, simply put, there is no goal. A friend has attempted to
solve that through her version of adding “lives” in that, after three
punishments, a player is out. There is a large issue with that, however, since
the final two players cannot play against each other, and with final three, the
game becomes too easy as there will always be flankers, and thus, players are
ready to raise or not raise hands.

_______________________________________________________

In
the end, it is a game worth trying and sharing, or at the very least, I do hope
this guide brings an understanding to the game so that when idols play it, less
confusion exists.

Though
this was not a song review, thank you very much for reading. Surprisingly, it
took many hours to write this as I had to create the pictures, but it was a
wonderful change in routine and that readers may very much enjoy this. Expect
iKON’s music video of “Airplane” to be reviewed shortly. To the requester,
apologies for further delays, but it will absolutely be the next review to
finish. Stay tuned for it, and also, for readers, I am glad to see that you,
Ms. 007/Mr. 007, have returned safely [s]only to face more cringe-worthy endings.