Your facts did not clearly articulate the point, nor did they explain their inclusion on a page dedicated to a fictional drama. They failed to establish the necessary contrast or engage with the current debate surrounding the dramaās characterisation as womenāempowering, particularly given the historical reality that women in imperial China were barred from sitting for the civil examinations.
This is precisely why I emphasised that the work is fictional serving, perhaps, as a way to probe for your reasoning in including those facts, rather than resorting to the blunt (and rude) question, āWhat is your point?ā
When critics cannot attack the story or the execution of the plot, they often turn their attention to the people instead. They search for flaws in the character or even in the actor or actress themselves, shifting the focus away from the work and onto the individual.
It is an interesting pattern, revealing more about the critic than the subject. When the narrative stands strong and the performance holds its ground, the only option left is to undermine the person behind it. This tendency shows how easily discussion can move from art to personality, from substance to distraction.
1 
This is precisely why I emphasised that the work is fictional serving, perhaps, as a way to probe for your reasoning in including those facts, rather than resorting to the blunt (and rude) question, āWhat is your point?ā
Heās creepy doesnāt help either hahaha
It is an interesting pattern, revealing more about the critic than the subject. When the narrative stands strong and the performance holds its ground, the only option left is to undermine the person behind it. This tendency shows how easily discussion can move from art to personality, from substance to distraction.
There was another one like that not long ago, and it was a success.
Iām sure sheās connected to the gang.
Itās refreshing to see the actor in a funny role.