Mailyn

I hope not, too.

I agree with you in that both the pace and the suspense has slowed somewhat. Its not keeping me on the edge of my seat now. Many people would blame it on the script writers but I think that often it is down to the director. But, as you say, it is still a very good drama.

Yes, I thought that right from the first time he appeared in the drama. Also, when the emperor referred to the two other princes who were not made crown prince in the past, (when he was talking to Zang Hai) it made more sense to me. Not only that - this is dramaland. The brother or the uncle of the emperor or prince is always the culprit.

That's if the director didn't forget and created a big plot hole!

In dramaland we can't have the mother of the love interest being the baddie so I was not surprised when it transpired that she was not the enemy. I had even guessed that she had known his father personally by the time they were in the carriage together.

Why do you think that? I am up to ep. 24 but I have seen nothing to suggest as much. Regardless, if it is so, we need to start seeing him in some scenes - whether masked or unmasked. If not, it won't tie in well.

Yes, he acted very well in that scene and yes, that can be very dangerous - something akin the Stockholm Syndrome.

Did anybody catch the identity of the man who was fixing his roof, 'Mr Black's' (the FL's friend) father? I was just wondering if he was the sensor or assistant censor that the marquis sent his servant to fetch. If so, I think that he could be the third person. Comments, anyone?

A question or two about the third person. See spoiler, below.

Thanks for your reply. No, I don't have a block (that I know of) but I don't need to see them. I was just curious because I couldn't see them, that's all. I see enough such comments everywhere else.

Paxxie: Which people where? Are these (angry) comments on this page? (I looked, but did not go back far.)

SreejeshSaji:
I get your point but your analogy fails here given that the cow would likely show more appreciation than the persons whom you are here addressing. It is well known that cows respond well to music.. Hence many farmers play music to cattle.

Uvimolla:
1. If you are mad at having to see his face, and hate the drama (as you have stated elsewhere) why are you even visiting, let alone posting, on this page? That is not psychologically sound. Are you one of these unhealthy antifans?

2. Why are you mad? Nobody is forcing you to watch his dramas. If you just prefer to watch dramas in which your idols act, that is fine. When it comes to viewing pleasure, many people do that and there is nothing wrong with supplementing one's fantasy life in this way. But to be angry because of it, and denigrating the actor just because of his looks, is within the realm of the real and not the fantasy world. Psychologically, that makes you shallow at best.

I came across this article re - change in cast. I don't know how helpful it is. I can't be bothered to check all the names.
https://en.taicike.com/juqing/17854229.html

I think that the 'not really' remark could have been in response to your "drunk driving at 100mph" or "as expected" (if not both) but I could be wrong.

Just how long will we have to wait to find out, though. (deep sigh)

Does anyone think that perhaps his shifu has another identity? I am starting to question him - and the butler. Does anyone else think it possible that the ML's identity was known to at least one enemy and that he was only saved in a plot to get him to investigate his own father and thereby find the seal?

Yes. I wondered whether he worked for the group which saved him or for somwbody else.

Hi, Jennieha. Can you be a bit more specific about what you want to know? Kings always have the support of councillors so it is hard to tell what you mean without clarification. (I can't remember specifics as I watched that episode weeks ago.)

MilicaB. I never said anything about dumb and cheesy the first time (or the second time). That was another poster. You ask me (a different poster) the question again. I can not answer a question about that that which I never said.

Also, I am not nor was I offended by your original post - part of which - (as I said in my response) - that I agreed with.

Parenthetically, your comment to me "f you want your opinion heard and understood, then you must state your opinion very clearly. I am listening...." I did state my opinion clearly in MY post about your comments to the FIRST poster. You need to redirect this question to the person who used said terminology (which would be childish for someone of my age to use). Do you need me to tell you who it was?