Maggi64

But that version only has 6 chaps and is unfinished. Can I find the complete version anywhere else?

I became interested in him about 20 years ago when I read some of his short stories in grad school. Then I discovered Asian film and BL about 3 years ago and he came up again in the BL Pink Film "Beautiful Mysteries," so I got into him all over again. He's massive in Japan -- over 10,000 people attended his funeral. No American writer could come close to getting that sort of attendance. He truly is an interesting figure.

BTW, I recognize you from being on pages for various BL's. We BL fans pop up all over the place on MDL, huh? lol

Please look up "ad hominem" because I did not once call you by a negative name and say that you were "stupid" or "ignorant" etc. Rather, I asked you to educate yourself on the history of theater. That is not an ad hominem.

I simply explained that a character is not ipso facto trans because he plays women's roles in theater. I'll add to this that a man is also not trans because he is gay and displays a gentle demeanor. Plenty of men have a gentle demeanor that sexists like to label as a "womanly" demeanor. But being gentle and gay does not make a man trans .

Only a person themselves can declare that they are trans, and labeling a person or a fictional character as trans simply because they are gentle is a bit presumptuous, don't you think? Moreover, the movie did not "code" Gong Gil as trans because Gong Gil did not act or dress like a woman at any time outside of his performances.

Now, if you want to see a movie where a character truly is coded as trans watch the 1990's Oscar winner, "Dances With Wolves." It features a minor character who is a Native American who dresses like a female and overtly behaves as a female. The other tribe members even acknowledge this and are fine with it. So I am not denying that there have been coded trans characters in film. But the character of Gong Gil is not one such character.

I suspect you were in a rush to label this character as trans because you were swept up in the current fashionable craze to play around with gender pronouns. It's just the trendy new thing that younger people are doing these days and which, I think, cheapens the cause which they naively think they are advancing. This is why I took issue with your comment.

You need to educate yourself about 16th Century Korean theater, because ALL the women's roles were played by men and this did not mean that the male actors in women's clothes were ipso facto "trans." No, it simply meant that they wore women's clothes for a role during a performance. Gong Gil, for instance, only wore women's clothes during performances, not in his personal time.

The same can be said for male actors throughout Asia at that time, not just Korea, because women were not allowed to be in the theater in Asia until the 18th Century. Indeed, it was the same in the West, where women were also not allowed to be in the theater. For instance, male actors in the Elizabethan Theater during Shakespeare's era always played women's roles. That is the explanation for why Gong Gil took women's roles. It was most emphatically NOT because he was "trans."

Hence, it is wildly presumptuous of you to identify the character of Gong Gil as a "she" when he was clearly identified as a male by both himself and other characters in the movie. If anything, he is depicted as a gay male, but a male nonetheless. So please educate yourself about the history of theater before tossing about trendy terms like "trans."

I'm from the West so I can't assess Asian drama? Huh? People from around the world watch each others' cinema, as well they should. I happen to watch nothing but Asian cinema, and hence I am capable of noting that this particular movie is absolute fluff compared to most Japanese cinema. If you watched more Japanese movies then you'd have noticed that too.

The Japanese are respected worldwide for the intensity and aesthetic ingenuity of their movies (ie, Rashomon and The Seven Samurai, and more recently Departures and Drive My Car) not for fluffy movies like this. Now, if you like fluff then power to you. But do not try to assert that this sort of thing is typical for the Japanese anymore than that American sitcoms are typical of Western cinema.

Totally agree. Whatever gay codes are in Untamed are so subtle as to be invisible to most viewers. Unlike Advance Bravely, which truly was designed for a BL audience, Untamed was designed for a general viewership, not BL viewers. That's why billions of Chinese viewers tuned in. In short, it's not even a "coded BL" but not a BL at all. The only ones who think so are those who work hard to read gay tones into it.

I know. Gong Gil is NOT a trans person. He is a gay man who dressed in woman's clothes ONLY for performances. I mean, he was so clearly a gay man in man's clothing for every scene other than some performances, that to say he was trans is more than pushing it, it is absurd.

Especially when one considers that ALL female roles were played by men in those days. The above comment was clearly made by someone who knows nothing about the history of theater. The fact is, theater groups were all men, with men playing female roles, not only in 16th century Korea, but in Elizabethan England's Shakespeare plays as well. Those actors were not all "trans" but simply men playing female roles because women were not allowed to be in the theater. It's stunning how people who are utterly ignorant to the history of theater think they sound smart by tossing around a trendy term like "trans."

I discovered his interest in kabuki theater in the Paul Schrader movie called "Mishima: a Life in Four Chapters." I recommend that since you seem to be interested in Yukio Mishima, as I am.

Where did you find this? I saw the Paul Schrader film, "Mishima: A Life in Four Chapters" on Fshare, but don't know where to watch this.

Oh, it's definitely about Yukio Mishima. In fact, it's acknowledged as such by all the American critics who reviewed it (eg, Variety and Time Out magazine). They all describe it as a parody skewering Mishima's closeted homosexuality and the way his little army of pretty boys were overtly homoerotic whether Mishima admitted it or not.

The biggest thrill is seeing how much Mishima adored being confronted by the opposing students. He seemed to relish the opposition, especially because it came from young, vital attractive young people. A must see for any fan of Yukio Mishima.

This wasn't quite a character driven movie since we learned nothing much about their characters except that one is a photography student, one likes to cook, and that they both get along well. Character driven means that you see a deeper side of a character's psychology and get a deep view of their backstory and life history. This movie was just a bit of fluff. I mean, it was pleasant fluff, but just fluff all the same.

A lot of the comments are about whether it was a BL or a Bromance. I thought it was clearly a BL because these boys are in an exclusive relationship, with or without kissing. So I did not have a problem with that. No, my problem was the fact that the performances were so amped up. The blonde, Aki, delivered every line of dialogue as if he were in the throes of a manic high. Real people are not that energetic and happy every second of the day.

Also, there was no conflict, climax or any discernable plot construction. It was just 90 minutes of 2 boys doing things together while utterly amped up every moment while doing so. The bit about Haru going to England introduced a teensy bit of conflict, but that did not exactly constitute a plot. Essentially, the movie is plotless. Nevertheless, it was a pleasant 90 minutes and an easy, relaxed viewing experience. It's just not anything special or anything I'd rewatch.

I agree that the final 30 min were a bit unbelievable because gangsters would not have punished 3 high school boys that severely for a one-time prank. Gangsters only demand finger-cutting for fellow gangsters who've betrayed them, or cost them a lot of money or something. Not for a one-time teenage prank.

But I still really liked this film. All the actors put in terrific performances and the pacing was excellent -- it just zoomed forward with no lulls in the action right to the very end. It was also a brilliant depiction of the power of peer pressure among teens because peer pressure is what incited the first act that propelled the downward spiral for the boys thereon. So I gave it an 8.5

I only gave it a 6.5. But the overall rating is 8.2 That's really high. I think the J-BL One Room Angel is better yet it only has a 7.7. I seem to never agree with MDL ratings for BL's. I agree for most feature films, but rarely BL's. The Thai BLs get artificially high ratings, and the Japanese BL's seem inordinately low.

If Why R U is a Thai BL, then I don't watch Thai BL's at all. They are factory assembly line trash. I am worried that the Koreans are going to go the same way now that they are putting out so many. The only good one this year was the Eighth Sense. Most are thinly plotted bits of fluff, and nothing memorable.

As for people being harsh on this, they gave it an 8.2 which is very high on MDL. Few things ever break an 8.0 on this site. The Thais only get high scores cuz they use marketing companies which in turn use bots to boost ratings.

But he's got his arm around the guy. I'd watch it again, but it's too boring. And other flashbacks are not in order, such as saying he's going to transfer in one scene with Do Hyun upset, to the next flashback where he's still at the school and all is fine.

LOL, you're right. That means the Koreans haven't put out anything great all year. They are not as bad as the Thai BL's, but they are all so mediocre. That's what happens when you shoot for quantity over quality.

Flashbacks most certainly are there to tell the story. Why else would they be there? If they are out of order it's usually to add to impact of a narrative. But in this show it adds nothing. To the contrary, it's just sloppy. In one case, the result is that we have no idea why Dong Wook is sleeping with Do Hyun in the first flashback, because they don't even meet until the next flashback. In another case Dong Wook says he's transferring and Do Hyun is upset, but the next flashback shows him still there as if nothing happened. Putting those scenes out of order was a result of sloppy editing. Nothing more, nothing less.

The problem is that we can read that line either way. But given the show's insomnia plot line and how Dong Wook can only sleep with Do Hyun, I am guessing it's about the insomnia. And he feels used. But it's an absurd conflict around which to build a show. It's also impossible to follow because after that rain scene about Dong Wook transferring, they are shown together as if nothing happened. It's out of sequence. Dong Wook also sleeps with Do Hyun and puts his arm around him in the first flashback scene, and then proceeds to introduce himself in the next flashback scene. Either he slept with a stranger or those scenes were also out of order. I am guessing the latter, cuz this show is a mess in so many other ways as well.