Details

  • Last Online: Apr 1, 2025
  • Gender: Male
  • Location:
  • Contribution Points: 0 LV0
  • Roles:
  • Join Date: January 15, 2025
The Scandal of Chun Hwa korean drama review
Dropped 4/10
The Scandal of Chun Hwa
1 people found this review helpful
by AhWeng
Feb 16, 2025
4 of 10 episodes seen
Dropped 6
Overall 5.0
Story 5.0
Acting/Cast 5.0
Music 5.0
Rewatch Value 5.0
This drama is rated 18+ for nudity and suggestive sexual scenes, making it unsuitable for viewing with young children, especially if you are uncomfortable explaining the birds and the bees.

Initially, I wondered who would care about a person's fabricated scandals. However, according to Wikipedia, Chunhwa refers to the Korean erotic art tradition, primarily from the Joseon era.

**Warning: Spoilers Ahead!** The first half of the first episode truly lives up to the drama's title, "The Scandal of Chun Hwa," as the ladies become captivated by the erotic drawings. It is amusing to see one of the maids display comical astonishment while perusing the graphic content. It is a riot when the prince visits a brothel to lose his virginity, and his sister, the princess disguised as a man, also goes there to secretly witness the grand occasion. When the prince's fiancée learns of this, she storms into the brothel to demand what is rightfully hers. After punishing him, she takes him to another location to address the issue of chastity. Later, they even engage in the sedan chair shaking in broad daylight, which leaves her servant feeling embarrassed.

My curiosity was piqued, so I queried Deepseek whether people in the Joseon period were promiscuous based on the Chunhwa erotic art. Deepseek responded that the existence of Chunhwa (春画, "spring paintings") does not imply widespread promiscuity in Joseon society.

While the first two episodes were humorous, the third and fourth episodes became somewhat perplexing. I acknowledge that this is solely my issue; therefore, to prevent negatively impacting other viewers, I should stop here.
Was this review helpful to you?