I don't get why people don't feel the chemistry between In Ha and Dal Po... >.< They have amazing chemistry…
People like their own version of "chemistry" based one or many of things like, similar ideology,onscreen physical/sexual stuff, polar opposites/bickering style, mutual trust, etc.
Good story, female lead acting two personalities was quite nice, very few irrational and nonsense stuff, overall good pacing with side stories being interesting themselves.
Male lead here was like the 2nd nice male leads usually found in Korean dramas, nice ,sincere, trusting, gentleman, always ready to help etc, a refreshing change from the usual cold arrogant spoiled brat.
Male lead was a terrible guy he knew she was innocent yet he put her through hell, the whole story relied on this dumb aspect that he would not say reveal it due to the insecurity of losing her.
The misleading rating probably comes from the huge amounts of sexual assaults, kisses, physical interactions and other similar things
This would have been better as a movie than a drama
The main actress did really well playing both the good and evil sister
I really wish they could make the lead actresses have a backbone. They need to stop throwing them pity parties.…
Except BokNyeo the other three remain largely the same as they were before going to prison, the reason they keep it like this is because Korea loves Makjang, all the longer dramas which are top rated fall into this category where the leads suffer and suffer while the antagonists keep getting more and more twisted.
I really do wonder if things can work out between Do Jin and Mi Oh.
When total crazy 2nd female leads who do the worst possible things are forgiven in the end of dramas forgiving Mama boy DoJin is likely to happen especially when there is a kid and no sight of another male character near Mi Oh.
The biggest reason Mishil was a Great Villain was due to the fact that whatever evil deeds she did she would never…
This will be my last reply to this discussion since you are not offering any examples for your idealist views, your replies are subjective with a one dimensional view wearing rose colored glasses and not to the points made by me.
You are not responding what I have written instead putting your own words as mine and replying to those. I explained with examples regardless of who is in the position of monarch ( good nature or bad ), there will always be grey areas.
Even Seonduk after becoming monarch gets the help from Tang(China) to fend off Beakje and Goguryou, which requires paying tributes such as ginseng, horses and women who will be innocent sacrifice to protect her empire. Everyone will have their grey zones which they feel are necessary for their goals.
Again with the fairy tale lines instead of facts, you present nothing for your side of argument to support your broad ideal views. I have previously asked you to give examples supporting your arguments but again you write the same thing recycled over and having no context.
The biggest reason Mishil was a Great Villain was due to the fact that whatever evil deeds she did she would never…
There is no "pure" black or white it is always grey
The previous king to whom Mishil was a concubine wanted to kill her when he was about to die. He knew she was more intelligent than his people and to save monarchy for his bloodline he would have to eliminate her. She would have just died if she was trying to be a good person. This was just one of the instances and there would be many more to come.
People come from different situations, SD coming from royal bloodline would have fewer obstacles to get the throne while Mishil would have every opposition possible for a non royal bone. Monarchy is unfair to non Royals and they have to resort to bloodshed and other schemes to gain the throne which is what the first ruler of that dynasty would have done.
There is no way to really find out what happened in the ancient times with partial data from written history and archaeological evidence. Truth maybe be incontrovertible but there is no way to verify it in this situation. Historians till date take different sides as to what really happened in all these ambiguous histories.
Seonduk would have a lot of people protesting against her being a monarch as she was a female , a female as a court official itself was unheard of let alone being a monarch. We can assume that she would have to eliminate all of them to stabilize her throne just as the case was with Bidam in the end.
Monarchy is a position held with the support of nobles, scholars, religion and the people combined, the support maybe voluntary of coerced. As long as there is another worthy candidate with the support one or more of these factors he/she becomes a potential threat for the reigning monarch. Even if the Monarch and the candidate(s) are "good/nice etc" the "supporters" of each side can take their own decisions and try to replace the current Monarch for their own benefit. Monarchy is held by eliminating your potential opponents, rivals etc whether the monarch does it himself or his supporters do it.
KMR "Do you know why it is said History is written by the victors? Isn't it because we precisely know of hints that can support reasonable doubts on certain facts? And why is it so? Because of the truth...the truth on the character, the motives, the outbalanced evil and its outcome...the truth cannot be hidden...whether it's recorded history or not...so the writings are nothing, but the long run result is all"
The hints, the archaeological evidence, written history are all largely from the victors. There is no way to find the "truth" but to only assume/arrive at possible situations based on the available evidence which can be spun in many ways. You just keep stressing on truth, character, good, bad but where is the proof? again in the written history of the victor. Then you go and contradict yourself that history is nothing and result matters the most.
All your replies are broad idealist lines ( even fairy tale like ) with no examples, it would be more easier to reply with examples as there would be cause & effect in relation to the background which provides the context.
Kindly reply in paragraphs or bullet points, the wall of text is hard to read.
The biggest reason Mishil was a Great Villain was due to the fact that whatever evil deeds she did she would never…
That is the ideal situation portrayed in fictional worlds( of dramas/ entertainment media ) even the most benevolent and smart kings like Sejong, Yi San etc had to eliminate all their enemies though they did not engage in it themselves it was done by their supporters. A monarch cannot be a softhearted idealist, Prince SaDo who was about pride, honor, justice, law etc got torn apart by the Noron faction. Since it was possible to eliminate a true successor with ideal qualities like that, a hypothetical good Mishil with no power and meager background would have met her demise right away.
Don't just put "x" randomly killed "y", kindly mention when, where etc so the situation can be understood better. There is no dispute that Mishil had selfish greed but that her behavior was driven by the fact that it was the only way for her to hold on to power and save her life.
"History is written by the victors" - Winston Churchill
The biggest reason Mishil was a Great Villain was due to the fact that whatever evil deeds she did she would never…
That is how every monarch gets to keep the empire, eliminate anything that poses a danger to your position or eventually lose your place. Wu Zetian ( the only female ruler of china ) did the same to all her enemies sometimes even the cruel turning them into "human pig". Even Seonduk would have done all that but she is shown through rose colored glasses except for the part of Bidam.
Fear and intimidation was even more necessary for a female to rule at that period of time. The court itself is the biggest challenge to a female ruler.
She would not run away upon losing to enemies of Shilla and help them take down her enemies along with her empire
She would sleep with powerful people to gain favors and consolidate her power
Its not killing out of anger , its zero tolerance to incompetence
Her major drawback was the greed to become the ruler herself even though she was pretty much the ruler behind the scene which ended up opening a path for others
Victors are painted to be more heroic while the ones defeated tend to be painted more demonic.
Lot of irrational stuff, the antagonists made more sense than the protagonists.
Overall poor drama with same things repeating
This is not a skin-ship, kiss, sexual assault oriented Lakorn this is a gradual development of romance type
The same old cliches but overall well put together thereby entertaining to watch
Male lead here was like the 2nd nice male leads usually found in Korean dramas, nice ,sincere, trusting, gentleman, always ready to help etc, a refreshing change from the usual cold arrogant spoiled brat.
The misleading rating probably comes from the huge amounts of sexual assaults, kisses, physical interactions and other similar things
This would have been better as a movie than a drama
The main actress did really well playing both the good and evil sister
Male lead's character was a pleasure to watch
Overall the drama was weak as annoying parts overpowered the fun parts
Male lead will doubt his wife every time and force her to prove herself hurting her emotionally all the time
Male lead would trust people who have betrayed him over people who are his closest
Male lead would let the problematic people especially his ex hang around him and his house
The female lead largely remains the same submissive doormat
The antagonists would use the stupidity of male lead to drag the story worth 3 episodes to 13
You are not responding what I have written instead putting your own words as mine and replying to those. I explained with examples regardless of who is in the position of monarch ( good nature or bad ), there will always be grey areas.
Even Seonduk after becoming monarch gets the help from Tang(China) to fend off Beakje and Goguryou, which requires paying tributes such as ginseng, horses and women who will be innocent sacrifice to protect her empire. Everyone will have their grey zones which they feel are necessary for their goals.
Again with the fairy tale lines instead of facts, you present nothing for your side of argument to support your broad ideal views. I have previously asked you to give examples supporting your arguments but again you write the same thing recycled over and having no context.
The previous king to whom Mishil was a concubine wanted to kill her when he was about to die. He knew she was more intelligent than his people and to save monarchy for his bloodline he would have to eliminate her. She would have just died if she was trying to be a good person. This was just one of the instances and there would be many more to come.
People come from different situations, SD coming from royal bloodline would have fewer obstacles to get the throne while Mishil would have every opposition possible for a non royal bone. Monarchy is unfair to non Royals and they have to resort to bloodshed and other schemes to gain the throne which is what the first ruler of that dynasty would have done.
There is no way to really find out what happened in the ancient times with partial data from written history and archaeological evidence. Truth maybe be incontrovertible but there is no way to verify it in this situation. Historians till date take different sides as to what really happened in all these ambiguous histories.
Seonduk would have a lot of people protesting against her being a monarch as she was a female , a female as a court official itself was unheard of let alone being a monarch. We can assume that she would have to eliminate all of them to stabilize her throne just as the case was with Bidam in the end.
Monarchy is a position held with the support of nobles, scholars, religion and the people combined, the support maybe voluntary of coerced. As long as there is another worthy candidate with the support one or more of these factors he/she becomes a potential threat for the reigning monarch. Even if the Monarch and the candidate(s) are "good/nice etc" the "supporters" of each side can take their own decisions and try to replace the current Monarch for their own benefit. Monarchy is held by eliminating your potential opponents, rivals etc whether the monarch does it himself or his supporters do it.
KMR "Do you know why it is said History is written by the victors? Isn't it because we precisely know of hints that can support reasonable doubts on certain facts? And why is it so? Because of the truth...the truth on the character, the motives, the outbalanced evil and its outcome...the truth cannot be hidden...whether it's recorded history or not...so the writings are nothing, but the long run result is all"
The hints, the archaeological evidence, written history are all largely from the victors. There is no way to find the "truth" but to only assume/arrive at possible situations based on the available evidence which can be spun in many ways. You just keep stressing on truth, character, good, bad but where is the proof? again in the written history of the victor. Then you go and contradict yourself that history is nothing and result matters the most.
All your replies are broad idealist lines ( even fairy tale like ) with no examples, it would be more easier to reply with examples as there would be cause & effect in relation to the background which provides the context.
Kindly reply in paragraphs or bullet points, the wall of text is hard to read.
Don't just put "x" randomly killed "y", kindly mention when, where etc so the situation can be understood better. There is no dispute that Mishil had selfish greed but that her behavior was driven by the fact that it was the only way for her to hold on to power and save her life.
"History is written by the victors" - Winston Churchill
Fear and intimidation was even more necessary for a female to rule at that period of time. The court itself is the biggest challenge to a female ruler.
She would not run away upon losing to enemies of Shilla and help them take down her enemies along with her empire
She would sleep with powerful people to gain favors and consolidate her power
Its not killing out of anger , its zero tolerance to incompetence
Her major drawback was the greed to become the ruler herself even though she was pretty much the ruler behind the scene which ended up opening a path for others
Victors are painted to be more heroic while the ones defeated tend to be painted more demonic.