On one hand, I am happy for his comeback, on the other hand, I am anxiously cautious, because of the criticism he most likely will receive and how triggering that could be...for anyone overcoming an addiction. *I did not know he had new music out, I will check it out*
This is an interesting review...I gave this drama a 10...but that was because it was the first Korean drama I was exposed to and that was almost 8 years ago. Thinking back on it, there were many tropes and cliches that I would hate to see in today's dramas...the stalking scenes were common in most dramas back then, and I don't recall the production value being so bad(I would need to go back and review, but in 2010 I would not have high expectations for most t.v. show productions, even in the USA pay-to-watch T.V. did not raise the bar until around 2011 and that was when Game of Thrones first aired). With all that said, I would consider other dramas around that time and compare production value around to the decade it aired.
If I were to watch this show today...I would probably rate it as you may have, with a 7 or8, but I won't change my rating, because if it weren't for me accidentally watching this on Netflix, I would have never gotten interested K-dramas, learned about a culture, and its language etc...but it was fun reading your perspective (because this was not your first drama).
As I recall, this drama starts off strong(It tricks you into wanting to watch more)..I did not watch The Bloom…
I agree with you on both stances. The ML acting was very bad...this was the first and only drama I saw him in and I didn't like it...I agree the second lead was a better actor and therefore I preferred him with the FL.
I am becoming a bit critical in my ratings lately because I've seen so many dramas and so I have a high standard for what deserves 8-9 star rating. I know people have different preferences so I am thinking about making my reviews a bit more detailed in the future.
I have this...I rarely drop...but am slowly learning, NDD is frustrating because all you want to do is just finish and move on to something better...I find myself going back to dramas I liked and playing scenes to take my mind off the fact that I am watching garbage
I am watching It's okay not be okay and his role stood out...he did well portraying a man in love but knowing he had problems and wanting to fix himself before getting too serious.
Seriously is this drama worst than The Bloom at Ruyi Pavilion? I have completed watching Ruyi Pavilion and I find…
As I recall, this drama starts off strong(It tricks you into wanting to watch more)..I did not watch The Bloom at Ruyi Pavilion because of this Drama and I didn't want to suffer again. If you do watch this just be prepared for loooong drawn out issues that never(or at a late time) get resolved, a cold, cold lead that barely warms up (I got second lead syndrome I believe) I am unsure why this got positive reviews to be honest considering the awful ending (I can't say that it was happy or sad...just HUH?) I do rate shows lower than most because I come in with higher expectations since I've watched hundreds a dramas.
This show made me wish for interabled romances to enter the dramaworld.... I have never seen one without the person either dying or regaining their mobility or sight back... Please before I die, someone write an interabled drama...
This entire news story got me thinking about two things... 1.) Separating the Art from the Artist ( can you do it?) 2.) The laws on Human Life. (still thinking about this one)
Let's talk about Separating the Art from the Artist... in this case, ZS is now associated with child abandonment and breaking China's surrogacy laws. Her image paired up with a brand (say Prada) would signal to the human brain that Prada is for child abandonment... so they dropped her. Her face as the heroine in a drama is now tainted by the viewer's inability to separate the artist from the art and most of the audience will not be able to enjoy her work or allow themselves to be carried away by a new fantasy drama because of the guilt they will feel by supporting an artist associated with such a topic.
Can the artist be separated from their art? Let's look at the case of the legend Michael Jackson who was accused of pedophilia. His album sales steadily declined despite there being no proof of a crime committed. His music started fading on the radio and his name...even years after his death has a tie to said crime. Although he still has several supporters there are many that cannot listen to his music without thinking of pedophilia... this is just like the dogs in Ivan Pavlov's experiment that cannot disassociate the ringing of a bell with the promise of food.
I do not believe the art should suffer because of the artist's personal life, but I do understand the reasoning behind why it would. China banning all of ZS's art is a slap to the face of the audience, not ZS herself. The public should decide whether they want to support the work or not and ZS should suffer a penalty by herself...so that way the other people that worked on the project won't suffer. Although Michael Jackson had suffered public scrutiny in the 90's he was still able to release his album Invincible in 2001, and although it had mixed reviews, it still did well enough.
I don't understand the Chinese government stepping in to cancel people's projects and my prediction is that will change over time. An actual murderer can still write his or her story from prison and the public can choose to ignore or read it. Hitler's 'Mein Kampf' can still be bought with annotations and somehow still manages to sell millions of copies well into the 2000's. If broadcasting is so concerned about public opinion, they should put a note expressing that their form of art is not a green light for child abandonment and some of the proceeds will go toward protecting children's rights or something to that effect.
(IMO being a celebrity is probably one of the worst jobs alive, but people treat it like some sort of privilege. If ZS worked in a nail salon would the government step in and ban her from ever doing nails? Give her time to make amends(be responsible for the current situation) and learn from her mistakes....16 or 29 or 60 or 80 years of age...people will always do dumb ish...just because you've aged does not mean you suddenly should know better.)
Now...I did cry over this story...I felt so awful for the children that had to go through this...I never really deeply examined the problems of surrogacy and now I am reflecting on them. Is the Laws of Human Life so fragile that it cannot span across two countries...why are these babies' lives in limbo over some paperwork?
I just watched Cherry Magic and the scene where Adachi's co-worker was calling him unreliable this actor can depict absolute silent rage so well...what a good actor, looking forward to future works.
Although I feel the use and abuse of illegal drugs are wrong, I do not believe we should punish everyone that is addicted to drugs with jail time. I've read the comments here on both sides, and feel that although we make choices that may lead to negative consequences, some of those choices may have been predetermined by our own personal circumstances.
People would not tell an obese child that they should stop eating unhealthy, most would point fingers at the parents and a select few will evaluate the environment (home, finances, access to healthy food, safety of the community... etc). Overall, it is the child that suffer the consequences or takes charge to make a change in their eating habits later in life
. The system could punish the parent, make changes to the environment and create healthier choices...yet the damage may be almost to the point of no return for that child and intervention may be needed to redirect such a state from the carnage.
It is as such...all addicts should not be the blame for their addiction. Some people may be forced to take drugs (including naive young celebrities, Billie Holiday anyone?) Or child trafficking cases were children are forced on drugs to be compliant. Also some may get hooked on prescription drugs due injury (Michael Jackson).
As an adult, one must take responsibility for their own actions and life personal circumstances, When an adult has been addicted to drugs( or anything else) their punishment should result in helping them with this heavy responsibility. Sitting in a jail cell will not suffice in MOST cases and in only severe circumstances...when the abuse has become habitual, with much help and interference already offered...jail may be necessary in order to prevent a tragedy.
I did read a comment that the addict supports the dealer and therefore are at least partially responsible for the crime in the community. I agree with this statement 100 percent. However, I also believe that a criminal will find ways to commit other types of crime if their means of revenue has been cut, committing more deadlier types of atrocities in order to achieve their bottom line. I am aware of this kind of activity because I have lived in unsavory neighborhoods during a dry spell and understand that carjackings, store robberies and burglaries goes up which equates to a higher death rate...in that aspect...an addict supporting drug dealers... in away....lower certain areas of crimes from my own personal hellish experience.
Overall I can see this is a much debated topic and people have varying opinions which pique my interest...I usually do not like to debate these sorts of things because as I get older and I continue to experience life, I realize I am not always firm on controversial topics such as this one. I like to keep an open mind as people come from different backgrounds and experiences which may help me gain a new perspective in the future.
If I were to watch this show today...I would probably rate it as you may have, with a 7 or8, but I won't change my rating, because if it weren't for me accidentally watching this on Netflix, I would have never gotten interested K-dramas, learned about a culture, and its language etc...but it was fun reading your perspective (because this was not your first drama).
I am becoming a bit critical in my ratings lately because I've seen so many dramas and so I have a high standard for what deserves 8-9 star rating. I know people have different preferences so I am thinking about making my reviews a bit more detailed in the future.
1.) Separating the Art from the Artist ( can you do it?)
2.) The laws on Human Life. (still thinking about this one)
Let's talk about Separating the Art from the Artist... in this case, ZS is now associated with child abandonment and breaking China's surrogacy laws. Her image paired up with a brand (say Prada) would signal to the human brain that Prada is for child abandonment... so they dropped her. Her face as the heroine in a drama is now tainted by the viewer's inability to separate the artist from the art and most of the audience will not be able to enjoy her work or allow themselves to be carried away by a new fantasy drama because of the guilt they will feel by supporting an artist associated with such a topic.
Can the artist be separated from their art? Let's look at the case of the legend Michael Jackson who was accused of pedophilia. His album sales steadily declined despite there being no proof of a crime committed. His music started fading on the radio and his name...even years after his death has a tie to said crime. Although he still has several supporters there are many that cannot listen to his music without thinking of pedophilia... this is just like the dogs in Ivan Pavlov's experiment that cannot disassociate the ringing of a bell with the promise of food.
I do not believe the art should suffer because of the artist's personal life, but I do understand the reasoning behind why it would. China banning all of ZS's art is a slap to the face of the audience, not ZS herself. The public should decide whether they want to support the work or not and ZS should suffer a penalty by herself...so that way the other people that worked on the project won't suffer. Although Michael Jackson had suffered public scrutiny in the 90's he was still able to release his album Invincible in 2001, and although it had mixed reviews, it still did well enough.
I don't understand the Chinese government stepping in to cancel people's projects and my prediction is that will change over time. An actual murderer can still write his or her story from prison and the public can choose to ignore or read it. Hitler's 'Mein Kampf' can still be bought with annotations and somehow still manages to sell millions of copies well into the 2000's. If broadcasting is so concerned about public opinion, they should put a note expressing that their form of art is not a green light for child abandonment and some of the proceeds will go toward protecting children's rights or something to that effect.
(IMO being a celebrity is probably one of the worst jobs alive, but people treat it like some sort of privilege. If ZS worked in a nail salon would the government step in and ban her from ever doing nails? Give her time to make amends(be responsible for the current situation) and learn from her mistakes....16 or 29 or 60 or 80 years of age...people will always do dumb ish...just because you've aged does not mean you suddenly should know better.)
Now...I did cry over this story...I felt so awful for the children that had to go through this...I never really deeply examined the problems of surrogacy and now I am reflecting on them. Is the Laws of Human Life so fragile that it cannot span across two countries...why are these babies' lives in limbo over some paperwork?
People would not tell an obese child that they should stop eating unhealthy, most would point fingers at the parents and a select few will evaluate the environment (home, finances, access to healthy food, safety of the community... etc). Overall, it is the child that suffer the consequences or takes charge to make a change in their eating habits later in life
. The system could punish the parent, make changes to the environment and create healthier choices...yet the damage may be almost to the point of no return for that child and intervention may be needed to redirect such a state from the carnage.
It is as such...all addicts should not be the blame for their addiction. Some people may be forced to take drugs (including naive young celebrities, Billie Holiday anyone?) Or child trafficking cases were children are forced on drugs to be compliant. Also some may get hooked on prescription drugs due injury (Michael Jackson).
As an adult, one must take responsibility for their own actions and life personal circumstances, When an adult has been addicted to drugs( or anything else) their punishment should result in helping them with this heavy responsibility. Sitting in a jail cell will not suffice in MOST cases and in only severe circumstances...when the abuse has become habitual, with much help and interference already offered...jail may be necessary in order to prevent a tragedy.
I did read a comment that the addict supports the dealer and therefore are at least partially responsible for the crime in the community. I agree with this statement 100 percent. However, I also believe that a criminal will find ways to commit other types of crime if their means of revenue has been cut, committing more deadlier types of atrocities in order to achieve their bottom line. I am aware of this kind of activity because I have lived in unsavory neighborhoods during a dry spell and understand that carjackings, store robberies and burglaries goes up which equates to a higher death rate...in that aspect...an addict supporting drug dealers... in away....lower certain areas of crimes from my own personal hellish experience.
Overall I can see this is a much debated topic and people have varying opinions which pique my interest...I usually do not like to debate these sorts of things because as I get older and I continue to experience life, I realize I am not always firm on controversial topics such as this one. I like to keep an open mind as people come from different backgrounds and experiences which may help me gain a new perspective in the future.