CoNeTrIC

That ending sounds a little like Burnt Money (2000), a tragic love story and one of the best gay films ever. We should be so lucky.

Yes! Brooding Shin Woo and his barely contained rage. You're so right about him. Looks like Tae Kyung is the only one who can pull him back before he goes over the edge.

This show isn't deep, but it seems to have a dark subtext.

Da On's plastered-on smile reminds me of The Stepford Children, a 1980s sci-fi horror movie based on a novel from the 70s. In the movie, the men of a small upscale town replace their wives and unruly teenagers with android lookalikes that are compliant and accomplished but lack personality.

Tae Kyung is robotic and expressionless, but he has a mind of his own. So "nice" Da On seems way more creepy.

Is Shi Woon the only one of the four who hasn't been traumatized somehow? Maybe he covers it up more convincingly.

Good point about Emil. His character has a lot of potential.

Don't get me wrong. The boys are hella sexy, and I'd be pissed if they'd toned that down too this season. I don't think you're shallow.

The female lead freaked out constantly and had no real self-awareness, but she looked amazing in every scene. Maybe that's why I kept watching. Also, the series was short, so it wasn't hard to tolerate the mild annoyances.

BTW, I've seen only a few Korean dramas, yet somehow I saw two this week in which one or both lead characters had a quirky cognitive perception impairment temporarily cured by love/attraction. Weird.

This show has lost its soul. Benjo's and Emil's social class differences, interconnected family histories, and sexual discovery were important in the first season, making the show special and daring. In the second season, the show relies only on sex and theatricality, and it has become less interesting and socially relevant.

Duterte supporters and Marcos apologists became outraged and hysterical when the first season's storyline focused on political violence and historical negation. Perhaps the Duterte-linked social media trolls got in the producers' heads.

Second trailer is very different from the first, Most of the story line seems to be about typical relationship stuff, like getting on each other's nerves and trying to keep the passion alive. Everyone can relate to that.

You should not feel outraged. Try to have empathy for both characters.

Hyung Ki is weak, desperate, selfish, irresponsible, and jealous. His character is a foil, highlighting Ji Woo's independence and steadfast morality. By the end, he stopped making excuses for his bad choices and tried to undo some of the harm he caused. Now he's on the road to redemption. Good for him.

Ji Woo is indifferent toward everyone and very defensive from the start. His main concern is protecting himself from disappointment. Unfortunately, we learned very little about his backstory. Growing up gay in Korea without class privilege was probably not easy. It's a harsh, judgmental world. He deserved to find love and true friendship with Seo Joon.

The child-like, never-been-kissed Si Qi character in the second couple is the stock shoujo heroine/protagonist who falls for an older sempai. So cringe. It's too much, even for this show, which is all about the tropes.

Yeah, I think you're right. The musician/rapper appears in the video at the end.

I really didn't expect to like this so much. I only watched it because I enjoyed the movie sequel. But the characters were surprisingly mature. Acting and writing were believable too. They made excellent use of quiet moments to tell the story.

What amazed me most was seeing how these kids learned what love is (especially the girls). Love is not about getting butterflies or winning someone over. It has little or nothing to do with one's own status, ego, security, or need for attention. Rather it's about wanting happiness for that person more than you want it for yourself. Sometimes love requires sacrificing or letting go. Unfortunately, this seems to be a lesson most people miss out on their entire lives.

Ah, that clarification helps. My only disagreement then is a minor one. I think "the best interest of the child" was important but not foremost in Nagisa's mind when he decided to settle. He rightfully believed he and Shun were better parents for Sora. However, giving up custody was his sacrifice. That sacrifice was made out of contrition. It went along with the apology he made in court. So, the main driver of his decision-making was guilt.

As you said, life is hard, and so is making amends. I wish more films were as real as this. Like you, I appreciated the honest and fair portrayals. Thank you for this exchange.

I watched the movie without any awareness of the prequel series. I didn't feel like I was missing any necessary background information.

Why do you think Nagasi would have excluded his ex-wife from the picture if he had continued the case and won custody? The final scene could have been the same if the mother was visiting her daughter (instead of the daughter visiting her father and Shun). I don't think the outcome of the custody battle was the best for Sora necessarily. The mother learned she needed to be more empathetic and to change her priorities, but she is still struggling to be a decent parent. The grandmother is still toxic to the mother and Sora. The people in the small town rallied behind the new young family as best they could, and Sora might have been happier growing up in their community. (Nevertheless, both Nagasi's sincere apology and the exposure of the mother's hypocrisy were positive developments in the court case.)

Gillian Vicencio is underrated I think. Sometimes, a supporting character is a big driver of the plot and makes the main story line work. That was the case with Crystal, I think. Her character was kinda annoying in the web series but much better and more important here. And Vicencio's performance was very effective.

I watched the web series and expected the movie to take things further. And, TBH, I wasn't sure Tony Labrusca could pull that off. He did. Lots of small touches here and there added so much to his performance. He was always very natural and credible in this, keeping within his normal personality and character. Kudos! I'm glad for him. JC Alcantara was very good too, never giving too much or too little.

I should have mentioned 'Still' was written and performed by Miguel Odron.

Thanks for the conversation. I'd like to end by reminding you that, really, we don't disagree about what internalized homophobia is, how it manifests structurally in our culture, or what causes it. It seems we do differ in our sensitivity to internal threats to "queerness" (e.g., the homophobic bakla vs. the homonormative mainstream gay politics).

Grateful for the bonus scenes. One gave us a bit more character development for Emil. I missed the matchmaking professor in episode 7, so seeing his weirdness again was very welcome. And we got a sexy montage too!

Internalized homophobia is common but, based on what we've seen, this isn't that. Neither main character is claiming to be straight. Neither is wishing he weren't in love with or attracted to a man.

Emil just hadn't self-identified yet. If I had to describe the character, I'd say he's bisexual (or possibly heteroflexible) and I would say he is not gay. It's normal to reject 'gay' as an identity if that label does not accurately describe who you are. Characterizing him as being ignorant, irrational, or homophobic because of that crosses a line into bisexual erasure.

Also, you should consider that your overemphasis on the performative aspects of queer identity may be rooted in a classist bias.