What are several elements that make "The Most Dangerous Game" implausible?
Aside from what seems the most obvious example--the hunting of humans as sport--I find most aspects of "The Most Dangerous Game" to be a wholly believable tale. Remember, the story was first published in 1924, so some of the events may seem impossible to believe in the 21st century. Examples might include:
- A supposedly uninhabited island (especially in the well-travelled Caribbean) with a mansion hidden from view. Impossible today, but not at the time of the story.
- The incredibly coincidental meeting of the two fanatical big-game hunters (but then that's what makes a good story--and such coincidences do happen).
- The fact that no one ever investigated all of the shipwrecks that occurred off the island with the many missing men.
- How did Zaroff continue to restock his exotic supplies of food and other luxuries without drawing attention to his secret island?