Isolde Kroll

Honestly, I've been thinking for a long time about whether to write a review. ..why? Because you can find so many reviews here that you might think it would be a portal for aspiring psychologists who write their doctoral thesis. Everything is said or written. . I go 60% with a lot of analysis, but I really don't understand the rest. The rest is that the four main actors can actually be seen from the outset. It seems that a general social problem is revealed in that one is frightened, insecure, full of doubt and naivety, nevertheless looking for the only true love, but cannot live his actually good attribute, because he had to grow up without a father and thus lacks important abilities to act. In short, he doesn't want to be seen as a mother's son. The second main character, branded, disappointed, suspicious, traumatized, full of longing but also calculating and surrendering to the seemingly inevitable fate. The two meet and are so similar that they should actually understand each other blindly and the drama could actually have a happy ending after the fifth episode. But the author wanted not just one chewing gum but a whole pack. Thus, he made both of them to remain silent or to make the audience despair with two or three dialogues per scene. I thought about all the drama 100 times, seriously now?? I wanted to cancel, but then they decided to assign an apparent test person to each of them. And two types, completely opposite from the social stand, to ask the question, what do you think? Do you think love only works with someone who is intellectually and materially equal to you, or can you overlook pre-sense views..??? That would probably be the first moral club to make you think. Only in the drama are both out and used to distract from deficits of the two main protagonists. So that the two don't have to talk a syllable more than usual. OMG .. For me, this is all very unrealistic, because it would never take place between two people, although the topic is quite real. It's like with bad journalism. The headline is not compatible with the report. The only honest character is the friend who has the objective view, but is based on false consideration, because everything seems too stupid for him.
The acting performance can be evaluated neither positively nor negatively. positive, because there were only two human emotions. Anger and grief..ok ok..maybe there was off and a smile on the rigid lips and all that was played oscarriri..negative, because nobody in reality, in emotional situations, freezes to the salt pillar. And that happened more often than one would like..
On the whole, I could not understand why a topic such as toxic, cowardly, hypocritical, self-serving but also deep, intimate, perfect and honest love and affection got so little dialogue. To compensate for this, there was too little physical use through facial expressions and moving charisma.
I really like the two main protagonists, but I didn't convince myself, including drama.