I'm so confused why people dislike it so much. I'm having a good time. It's neither badly written nor is anyone…
Here's my why:
Its not a very serious drama, for sure. I like most of the actors, a lot. They are carrying their roles well. All along though, something has felt off about this story. First, it kinda lost me when the FL starts investigating a violent crime, without letting the police know what she's learned. Two people have been murdered ("driven to suicide" is murder) and she has been stalked, with an attempted rape. But, you know, keep things to yourself and go investigate on your own. Right...... I get that she's traumatized. Its actually refreshing to see a drama where someone who has been victimized the way she has is truly struggling with PTSD. But, the sudden will and ingenuity to stalk and harass someone she suspects of murder? It came out of the blue and feels out of character.
Also, that she has, for all these years, refused to mention the conflict between her and Deng Man. Its a major point regarding Deng Man's distress and vulnerability. Your friend's death is being investigated and you have meaningful info and you're not going to say anything? Instead, you're going to mysteriously end things with the person who cares for you? Without ever telling him what was going on?
Then, we have the creepy, "protective", cop/not-boyfriend who is disregarding the autonomous will of a woman and has surreptitiously moved in next door, surveilling her. He's watching her in her private space! No. She asked him to stay away. Its her prerogative. If she's in danger, she still has the right to make her own choices. Its so patronizing. If someone did that to me, I'd cut all ties, as they clearly have no respect for my boundaries.
Mostly, though, the story thus far has been about women becoming unhinged when they are rejected by a man. One damn man is the spark for all this violence? Give me a break.
In the real world, real women are assaulted and murdered every day by men who are rejected. Women have to walk in fear and be prepared for assault at any time, because men are so dangerously fragile. The cases of women hurting men who have rejected them are extremely rare, if there are any at all. So, why is this story playing into misogynist stereotypes about women? Are we returning to the "women are hysterical" era? Its disturbing that the writers chose this direction and that producers spent money on top stars to put this in the minds of viewers. Storytelling is powerful. We all know it. That's why authoritarian governments and people like to ban books and censor things. The producers and writers know that stories leave deep impressions and this is what they want to impress in our minds?
I'm sad that such good artists are being used this way.
My opinion after watching half an episode of this drama is tired... T,T I like the concept of the story, the cast…
I also found myself empathizing with the sister. She was treated as a second class citizen in her family; came to the family's rescue when the FL put them all at risk by disappearing; accepted her fate when she couldn't marry the prince that she actually would have liked to marry; and then is constantly put at risk by the FL's stupid antics. All the while, she remains calm and emotionally torn about what to do regarding the FL. In some ways, she's the only admirable character of the bunch.
The ML is temperamental and bossy. He uses the power inequity to control the FL when he wants to. The FL is just dumb as a post. She is supposedly "saving" her sister, who asked not to be saved. And then blames everyone else when she gets into trouble for messing around in the palace. She hides her identity, while getting angry if the ML withholds anything. The ML lords over his brother, who is the one with the military accomplishments, even though the "testament" which would rightfully name who the previous king wanted to ascend the throne hasn't been found, so his place on the throne is not considered "secure." The 2ML has a guard who keeps making moves which both kill people and make him look like he's vying for power, but he doesn't get rid of him.
Both princes, who have a lot of responsibilities on their plate and are supposed to be governing a country, as grown adults, are somehow just putting everything aside because they're falling in love with someone who is too dumb to survive and seems to be about 10. Not a good look.
"Rot in prison" is just how justice should work. In reality that approach fails very often - mainly when applied…
Ok. We can call it "wrong."
Sometimes we do the wrong thing, because we think its best. We don't care if others condemn us.
I'm not arguing in support of vigilanteism. I'm noting that, as an observer of the story, I could absolutely empathize with Gilho and see why he would make that choice. Its not as simple as whether or not it was "immoral". Whose morality? We tend to want to think that morality is universal, when it is not.
There are several things which make this story compelling. Gilho's anti-hero trajectory is one of them. If we're at all empathetic, we are forced to at least think about the conundrum a bit.
What I would hope is that more and more of us see that, if we let things go on too long, people are driven to darker places and their sense of morality shifts. He's a character who has absolutely no reason to believe there is any justice that will come "the system." He's not even in the system, as an undocumented person. So, he feels no obligation to adopt its morality. Especially, since he's witnessed what people in power, in that system, are truly like.
I guess, instead of jumping to call out the immorality of his act, I wish that people were more compelled to discuss how the social construct he's living in created him. That's a more important thing to explore than whether he was in the right or wrong.
I find it funny that people are complaining about the plot, or wanting more character development or fleshing out. It's based on real events. The plot was decided by history. The characters had whatever relationships they had. Those involved didn't have the time to stop and learn about each other's histories. You can't force them to be more involved with each other than they were. It's not a piece of a fiction where a writer is crafting all the details to suit a story aesthetic or theme.
For me, that's what makes the story so chilling. Real people. Some who are just trying to survive. Some who would do anything to make money. People crossed paths at this particular junction in life and, for those who survived, they simply had to keep going on with their lives. People who weren't connected before, had no reason to stay connected. There weren't any big personality changes or dramatic life re-directs. That's pretty much how it is in real life.
Cute... Agreed.But TWOE is a classic, its hard to reach that level.
also, this is based on a true story.
and, that's the thing with real life evil. it's not as "interesting" as fiction, because a fiction writer sets out to tell a story for a particular reason. They have a theme or message in mind. Or they want to highlight a particular kind of relationship. So, the story is written to enhance what they want us to feel or perceive. Real life just happens. Often without any meaning.
To me, that's what makes it so much more chilling. This was a real life depiction of what people are capable of, simply for the sake of money. None of them had any big agenda beyond their personal gains or losses.
"Rot in prison" is just how justice should work. In reality that approach fails very often - mainly when applied…
Is it morally wrong? A little friendly thought challenge:
That man was a sociopath and had already caused so many deaths. With all of his money and connections, he probably would have, at minimum, been able to flee the country and do more harm elsewhere.
He needed to die, for the sake of others. Gilho is more realistic than the cop, the prosecutor and the daughter, because he knows exactly what happens and that, with certain people, the only thing that will stop them is death. He's lived his entire life around the devastation of these people. Only those who have had a sheltered life and are somewhat distanced from it, have the luxury of citing "morality." He's willing to be the anti-hero in order to protect others.
If it doesn't costs the lives of people you know, its a bit easier to moralize and feel that its the high ground. Gilho doesn't have that distance. He's been dragged through the mire of their death cult for as long as he can remember.
This is more entertaining than I thought it would be.
But, what's with all these dramas where the plot involves invested members (family or partners or shareholders, etc) sabotaging their own business in the name of taking it over? Sure. Run it into the ground and take over a failed business. That makes sense.
Also, how many times can the same characters pull the same BS and their authoritative characters a) keep believing their stories and b) don't ever punish them or remove them from any position where they could keep doing that shit?
This is satire, so I'm kinda going with it. But, even here it just seems so implausible. Why are writers so into these scenarios?
ZYC's isn't human any more and he survives. Wen Xiao is a goddess. Only PSJ is actually a full, normal human.
Wen Xiao is only ever seen punishing demons. The power of the Baize Token is used to trap them. Did we ever see the Baize Goddess punish humans? The so-called peace that she maintains is kept by keeping demons in check. She has now power over humans at all. That she's a peacekeeper is the propaganda. A very thinly-veiled metaphor.
Its a point made in the story a couple of times. I'm not just pulling my perception out of thin air.
I suppose I could alter my original statement to say "those who were originally human." No matter what setup the plot gives for why some die and some don't, when you step back, you see the pattern.
ZYC's isn't human any more and he survives. Wen Xiao is a goddess. Only PSJ is actually a full, normal human.
I understand the plot steps. Still, in the end the humans (those who were originally human) are the only ones who survive, even though its the humans who caused all the misery in the first place. Why does the story have the victims of humans sacrificing themselves?
ZYC's isn't human any more and he survives. Wen Xiao is a goddess. Only PSJ is actually a full, normal human.
ZYC gives all his demon power away. So, he's back to human. (All his markings are gone.) Wen Xiao is human, she just has the Baize Token which gives her power. She's not an actual god, like the mountain gods. And, she's tasked with punishing demons, so that would be the only reason she would be exempted.
The message here is pretty awful: while we may tell ourselves that we'll stop othering you, we still expect that everyone who is not us, even if they've been oppressed by us, will sacrifice themselves to solve a crisis that we created. You'll always be second-class and expendable, while being expected to be the better person.
Noting that they pulled a Buffy: spent an entire series teaching us that the beings who aren't human aren't the problem, then killed off everyone on the team who wasn't human.
Its not a very serious drama, for sure. I like most of the actors, a lot. They are carrying their roles well. All along though, something has felt off about this story. First, it kinda lost me when the FL starts investigating a violent crime, without letting the police know what she's learned. Two people have been murdered ("driven to suicide" is murder) and she has been stalked, with an attempted rape. But, you know, keep things to yourself and go investigate on your own. Right...... I get that she's traumatized. Its actually refreshing to see a drama where someone who has been victimized the way she has is truly struggling with PTSD. But, the sudden will and ingenuity to stalk and harass someone she suspects of murder? It came out of the blue and feels out of character.
Also, that she has, for all these years, refused to mention the conflict between her and Deng Man. Its a major point regarding Deng Man's distress and vulnerability. Your friend's death is being investigated and you have meaningful info and you're not going to say anything? Instead, you're going to mysteriously end things with the person who cares for you? Without ever telling him what was going on?
Then, we have the creepy, "protective", cop/not-boyfriend who is disregarding the autonomous will of a woman and has surreptitiously moved in next door, surveilling her. He's watching her in her private space! No. She asked him to stay away. Its her prerogative. If she's in danger, she still has the right to make her own choices. Its so patronizing. If someone did that to me, I'd cut all ties, as they clearly have no respect for my boundaries.
Mostly, though, the story thus far has been about women becoming unhinged when they are rejected by a man. One damn man is the spark for all this violence? Give me a break.
In the real world, real women are assaulted and murdered every day by men who are rejected. Women have to walk in fear and be prepared for assault at any time, because men are so dangerously fragile. The cases of women hurting men who have rejected them are extremely rare, if there are any at all. So, why is this story playing into misogynist stereotypes about women? Are we returning to the "women are hysterical" era? Its disturbing that the writers chose this direction and that producers spent money on top stars to put this in the minds of viewers. Storytelling is powerful. We all know it. That's why authoritarian governments and people like to ban books and censor things. The producers and writers know that stories leave deep impressions and this is what they want to impress in our minds?
I'm sad that such good artists are being used this way.
The ML is temperamental and bossy. He uses the power inequity to control the FL when he wants to. The FL is just dumb as a post. She is supposedly "saving" her sister, who asked not to be saved. And then blames everyone else when she gets into trouble for messing around in the palace. She hides her identity, while getting angry if the ML withholds anything. The ML lords over his brother, who is the one with the military accomplishments, even though the "testament" which would rightfully name who the previous king wanted to ascend the throne hasn't been found, so his place on the throne is not considered "secure." The 2ML has a guard who keeps making moves which both kill people and make him look like he's vying for power, but he doesn't get rid of him.
Both princes, who have a lot of responsibilities on their plate and are supposed to be governing a country, as grown adults, are somehow just putting everything aside because they're falling in love with someone who is too dumb to survive and seems to be about 10. Not a good look.
Also, she's a girl. Not a woman. That's the only way one could even begin to explain the childish behavior and expressions. She acts as if she's 10.
The problem with that is that both grown princes are in love with a dumb child?
One can make a goofy romance without having the FL being so immature that its super uncomfortable to think of men pursuing her.
Sometimes we do the wrong thing, because we think its best. We don't care if others condemn us.
I'm not arguing in support of vigilanteism. I'm noting that, as an observer of the story, I could absolutely empathize with Gilho and see why he would make that choice. Its not as simple as whether or not it was "immoral". Whose morality? We tend to want to think that morality is universal, when it is not.
There are several things which make this story compelling. Gilho's anti-hero trajectory is one of them. If we're at all empathetic, we are forced to at least think about the conundrum a bit.
What I would hope is that more and more of us see that, if we let things go on too long, people are driven to darker places and their sense of morality shifts. He's a character who has absolutely no reason to believe there is any justice that will come "the system." He's not even in the system, as an undocumented person. So, he feels no obligation to adopt its morality. Especially, since he's witnessed what people in power, in that system, are truly like.
I guess, instead of jumping to call out the immorality of his act, I wish that people were more compelled to discuss how the social construct he's living in created him. That's a more important thing to explore than whether he was in the right or wrong.
For me, that's what makes the story so chilling. Real people. Some who are just trying to survive. Some who would do anything to make money. People crossed paths at this particular junction in life and, for those who survived, they simply had to keep going on with their lives. People who weren't connected before, had no reason to stay connected. There weren't any big personality changes or dramatic life re-directs. That's pretty much how it is in real life.
This was some brutal realism.
and, that's the thing with real life evil. it's not as "interesting" as fiction, because a fiction writer sets out to tell a story for a particular reason. They have a theme or message in mind. Or they want to highlight a particular kind of relationship. So, the story is written to enhance what they want us to feel or perceive. Real life just happens. Often without any meaning.
To me, that's what makes it so much more chilling. This was a real life depiction of what people are capable of, simply for the sake of money. None of them had any big agenda beyond their personal gains or losses.
That man was a sociopath and had already caused so many deaths. With all of his money and connections, he probably would have, at minimum, been able to flee the country and do more harm elsewhere.
He needed to die, for the sake of others. Gilho is more realistic than the cop, the prosecutor and the daughter, because he knows exactly what happens and that, with certain people, the only thing that will stop them is death. He's lived his entire life around the devastation of these people. Only those who have had a sheltered life and are somewhat distanced from it, have the luxury of citing "morality." He's willing to be the anti-hero in order to protect others.
If it doesn't costs the lives of people you know, its a bit easier to moralize and feel that its the high ground. Gilho doesn't have that distance. He's been dragged through the mire of their death cult for as long as he can remember.
But, what's with all these dramas where the plot involves invested members (family or partners or shareholders, etc) sabotaging their own business in the name of taking it over? Sure. Run it into the ground and take over a failed business. That makes sense.
Also, how many times can the same characters pull the same BS and their authoritative characters a) keep believing their stories and b) don't ever punish them or remove them from any position where they could keep doing that shit?
This is satire, so I'm kinda going with it. But, even here it just seems so implausible. Why are writers so into these scenarios?
that's not humorous and I don't get why its so often portrayed that way. find another way to get comic relief from the heavy content.
The observation/critique of the message that sends remains the same.
Its a point made in the story a couple of times. I'm not just pulling my perception out of thin air.
I suppose I could alter my original statement to say "those who were originally human." No matter what setup the plot gives for why some die and some don't, when you step back, you see the pattern.
The message here is pretty awful: while we may tell ourselves that we'll stop othering you, we still expect that everyone who is not us, even if they've been oppressed by us, will sacrifice themselves to solve a crisis that we created. You'll always be second-class and expendable, while being expected to be the better person.
its pretty gross.
Half demon/half human? dead. Half god/half demon? dead. Great demon? dead.
Only humans survive. Why?