MiHnn

Satisfying.

This drama is rare in the way they nailed the ending. The humour was on point. The pacing was well done. The actors were SO good. What a solid drama.

Answering this question is a BIG spoiler.

100% agree. I wait a few weeks and binge 2 - 3 at a time. It's the only way I can watch it tbh.

Interesting, I've never thought of it like that. She really has zero preservation skills.

That's the thing, she's not an imbecile. She's intelligent from the first episode. She is written as a level headed character from episode 1, regardless of how people treat her. She held her own ground and was a force to be reckoned with even though she was kind. But... In order to make the plot move, they had to make her always go towards danger so that the ML can try to save her. The way it was written, common sense went out the door during those times. - I made a comment once, and people agreed with me. The situations were similar to slasher films where they make the characters purposefully dumb to move the plot forward (eg:- instead running towards civilization, they run into the woods etc.) That's my main issue. It's not about realism. It's about character continuity. It's a sign of weak writing when you can't sustain the character you've created.

Eg:- The intelligence was back when she recorded her bully, and left again when she knew she was being targeted and decided to do it alone instead of contacting the police and being the bait. Because if the latter had happened, they would have apprehended him when he came to collect her and that entire sequence in the woods wouldn't have happened. They could have written it better.

Thanks!

Thank you

Which region of WeTV has this drama? It's not available in mine.

I don't think it's the concept. It's the writing. Everyone loved the actors and usually, plots like this get high ratings, especially because in this drama, the two leads had great chemistry. It's just that the writing was messy. FL's intelligence and common sense fluctuated too much to move the plot forward. The consistency in characterisation was lacking and people saw that. Shows like King The Land were consistent from beginning to end. This drama feels like it was written by one writer the first 8 episodes and another writer for the last 8 episodes.

That ending... I don't know if I like it, but I definitely appreciate it.

Honestly, it is a bit weird to see the new actors take the place of the original, but you have to remind yourself that the time jump is 10 years and that all the characters have changed as a result of war. They've grown up, become hardened and their personalities have changed due to their circumstances etc.

I would say that Season 1 is a set up of the world, of the characters etc. Season 2 is the actual plot of the story. Season 2 moves much faster and the actors are doing an amazing job. It's hard to know what will come next.

This is like if CODA meets the inverse of 17 Again, and it's so good! Heartwarming, sad, funny and the perfect healing drama.

It took me 4 hours to watch this episode. 4 HOURS!!! I kept getting annoyed and frustrated and pausing it to do something else before coming back to it.

There is something SO frustrating about watching a character use zero self-preservation skills.

This episode reminded me of slasher films, where they intentionally make the character dumb to move the plot forward.

That's too bad, but I understand. There are one or two actresses I cannot watch more than one or two episodes of. It happens.

I love melodrama. Thanks for the rec. I hadn't heard of it tbh.

Hi, let's clarify.

OP said they guess 'Something in the Rain' and 'One Spring Night' were not romantic comedies even though they had romance.

I said they were both classified as melodramas due to lack of comedy.

OP replied with, "That's what I said."

How, pray tell, is me saying they are melodramas the same as saying they are not romantic comedies? Can I use that logic for everything?

Eg:-
I guess "Once Again" is not an action drama.
It's a family drama.
That's what I said.

OP could have easily replied with "Exactly." Instead, OP replied saying that I "vomited" what they said.

You don't have to be that defensive unless you're backtracking.

Edit: I'm not going to continue commenting on this post because honestly, this is such a stupid thing to argue about. If there was a misunderstanding, fine. Usually people reply with "There was a misunderstanding," and clarify. And then everyone realizes they agree and move on. This is the first time someone said I "vomited" what they already said, even though I clearly provided something more than what they originally said.

Oh well. Each to their own.

LOL. You're backtracking, but okay. Suit yourself.

Romance in a drama does not equal rom-com. For it to be a rom-com, romance and comedy must be their primary genres. "Something in the Rain" and "One Spring Night" had no comedy in it whatsoever. They were both melodramas.