UnaSpenser

Lots of fun, but why are the lead female characters killed off? Talk about women being expendable props.... *sigh* What century are we in, again?

what happened here? Was an interesting story, in the beginning and quickly became ultra-boring. There isn't anyone to care about.

I'm only in episode 4. I can enjoy a good makjang now and again. But, it does get frustrating that she never talks. Your husband shows up and you fly into a panic, because you see him on the nanny cam, at the same time. You have an entire car ride to explain. Then, after you get home and he pressures to say something, anything, and you both figure out that something is off and you mention his brother, you don't talk to him about what you've been experiencing? You just low-key threaten him with "you'd better remember what you just said"?

I know she has mental health issues and trust issues. Still, at this point, she's mentioned the brother and they both are sharing a manipulated experience. So, what stops you from giving him as much info as you can?

Also, has she been telling him about the stalker and the attacks? It seems as if he doesn't know.

Also, the stalker hasn't been caught, but she doesn't institute any safety measures?

I know you need a certain amount of superfluous drama in a makjang, but some of this seems like weak writing. And its right up front. They could figure out more plausible ways to build the tension?

Still, the acting is good and I'm definitely gonna keep watching, so I guess its doing its entertainment job adequately. ;-)

The tricky aspect to this question in a capitalist system is that monied interests are curating the "art" we get to see. In any system with hierarchy - whether that's based on money or gender or political power, etc - art is curated by those in positions of power. Especially art that would reach a critical mass of people and could have a social impact.

China's censorship is, from my point of view, mostly absurd. Deeming that its harmful to show that gay people exist, for instance. Not one single person is harmed because gay people exist. This is some patriarchal (Taoist?) "moralizing" that completely rejects human nature and imposes an erasure through the violent force of the state. Its petty tyranny.

I'm not one for banning things. If we lived in a truly democratic world, where everyone has access to food, shelter, clothing, healthcare, etc - we'd likely see a very different art landscape than what we see now. All we can do now, is speak to whatever moves us in what we are given the opportunity to see. But, we have to know that, if the accessibility wasn't mediated by monied interests, we'd likely see very different stories and styles of storytelling.

It would be an interesting experiment to have unlimited production budgets given to every filmmaker and a free streaming service for them to post their work to. After some number of years (because it would take a while for people to adjust their viewing habits), to see which types of stories people are choosing to watch.

I can see how, if one is not actively in the throes of considering suicide, this might give one something to consider.

It would be great if recognizing how surviving loved ones would suffer, could truly prevent suicide. However, in all the cases I've known, the people were very aware and still couldn't get out of their darkness. That's part of why I went through anger with them. Especially those who had young children. (I've known at least 3 people in my life - the first was the mother of friends, when I was about 12.) Those whom I knew as an adult, I know were aware, as I had spoken with them. However, the depression and despair are hormonal/chemical things in the brain. And, if their doctors can't find the right balance of medications, they simply can't get out of the destructive cycle. Its beyond painful to witness how it all happens. (In one case, a friend had the same chronic illness that I have. Her psychiatrist gave her a med that is absolutely contra-indicated for our diagnosis. It sent her into a dramatic downward spiral and within 3 days she was gone. It was shocking.)

This is why I way that the messaging here is dangerous. You can't talk someone out of the state of mind that one has to be in in order to actually go through with the act. It requires professional help.

I'm glad that you seem to be in a better place. May that continue to be the case and may grace fill your days, as you carry on.

Of course, it doesn't have to be perfect.

It is an interesting thought to think of the story as sort of expounding on that one aspect that the survivors process: the anger. I could definitely see an author writing this with that in mind.

My concern is that, in real, S Korea has an extraordinary suicide epidemic. Its an odd time to be broadcasting a story of this nature which only serves to batter those who are in so much despair that they are already fighting the urge. If someone is mired in that place and is exposed to this, the guilt-tripping and shaming directed at them could very possibly tip the scale and push them over the edge. Its not a risk I would want to take.

But, in the same way that they batter those who use drugs, even its once or unintentional, because they refuse to accept what science has shown with very solid data and evidence - that drug abuse is a result of trauma and must be treated as such and not as some "lack of will" or whatnot - they are perfectly ok with driving people to suicide. A very recent case of a very beloved actor is a case in point.

The reason the story bothered me wasn't one of it being an unacceptable piece of art. It was one of concern because it is a piece of a larger, brutal social context which is literally killing people. So, it shocked me that, in their supposed concern for their suicide rate and their dwindling population, that they would find it ok to broadcast this, at this time.

From an artistic standpoint, I can appreciate it. And even more so when I take your idea of it magnifying a single aspect of the grieving process .

I'm on episode 21. Haven't read the books, yet. Have ordered them.

The one thing that keeps coming to my mind is: why would the Trisolarans need anything from the people on Earth? Pan Han is running around trying to collect people who would , what? Welcome them? If they're technological capacity is so far advanced, they wouldn't need to be welcomed. They'd just come and do whatever they want.

As he keeps accusing the Redemptionists of doing useless things, isn't he also doing useless things? Why bother killing people? If what they're doing is useless, anyway, then why care about them?

I think he's just a psychopath using the idea of advanced aliens as an excuse for getting rid of people who don't prioritize his definition of an environmental agenda. An eco-terrorist.

Also, while I get the despair of thinking that our entire species may not exist, at some point, I don't understand why that would lead to suicide? Instead, one could just determine to live out what time they have left in whatever way they would find meaningful or joyous or relaxing or whatever. We all know that we will die at some point, We still live the best we can with whatever unknown amount of time we have.

I have to admit that I still don't quite understand the whole "physics does not exist" part of this. I've always wondered why we thought we had any absolute understanding of anything. Seems to me that there are always possibilities beyond our comprehension and that we only comprehend what we're able. So what if there is more or that our current understanding of physics might be something that is limited by our perception? I'm not really feeling the "horror" of that possibility. Perhaps this is presented better in the novel?

what is your problem?

you make very strange leaps in thinking and it lacks any logic.

These are characters. I don't hold any feelings about them at all.

And I wasn't speaking anything about the child kidnapper. I was saying that, for a victim, the duration and age of their kidnapper is not going to have much of an impact on the trauma they would experience upon being abducted.

Being taken by force and held against your will and feeling powerless, regardless of the kidnapper's reasons or circumstances is a traumatic experience. Healthy love does not come from that. These tropes are disturbing.
I'm done with this conversation.

you are something else.

When did I say "arrest that child"?

What I was referring to was that the person being kidnapped would experience it as a trauma.

Bye, now.

I also get being angry at and hurt by the person who committed suicide. I'm in my 60s and have lived long enough to know quite a few people who have done so. And anger at them is definitely a part of the process of grieving.

Still, I know that no amount of being angry with them when they were alive; no amount of pointing out that people love them; no amount of telling them to appreciate the opportunity that is life, would have changed a thing. You can't break through the darkness of despair that way. You have to address the brain chemistry that they now have. In fact, you'll make them feel worse about themselves, because they're not able to hold onto those things. On top of life being too painful, they now have lowered self-esteem.

This approach would increase the likelihood of suicide, not reduce it. This story is dangerous.

I also get being angry at and hurt by the person who committed suicide. I'm in my 60s and have lived long enough to know quite a few people who have done so. And anger at them is definitely a part of the process of grieving.

Still, I know that no amount of being angry with them when they were alive; no amount of pointing out that people love them; no amount of telling them to appreciate the opportunity that is life, would have changed a thing. You can't break through the darkness of despair that way. In fact, you'll make them feel worse about themselves, because they're not able to hold onto those things. On top of life being too painful, they now have lowered self-esteem.

This approach would increase the likelihood of suicide, not reduce it. This story is dangerous.

yes, shaming. "you selfish brat" is a form of shaming. In the end, he even says, "I am ashamed of my death." The whole story is about shaming people who commit suicide. "You should just be more appreciative." As if mental health works that way.

constantly shaming someone is a form of bullying. telling him that he was just a selfish coward? how is this helpful.

I get that loved ones are a reason to hang in there. but, what the drama completely ignores is that the social structures of injustice and inequity are what drive people into mental health crises.

The drama doesn't depict, even once, the notion of getting mental health care. Seven years, he was struggling. Growing up poor would have had an impact on his psychological health. (this has been shown to be true. cPTSD.) The trauma of seeing someone die in front of him and then, subsequently failing a job interview because he was in shock. Where is the suggestion that he be offered therapy? Where is the social support for people who are struggling?

I mean, S Korea drives people to suicide if they are even suspected of drug use. (see very recent famous case) There is no acknowledgement of what is scientifically known: that addiction is a result of trauma and cannot be addressed without trauma treatment. Instead, these victims are bullied into a self-shaming spiral and they end up committing suicide.

There is definitely bullying of him by Death here. The whole "game", where he has no choice but to "play" and is subjected to so many traumas is nothing but bullying to supposedly "teach him a lesson."

Its brutally cruel and very well reflects exactly what the culture is and why the suicide rates are so astronomical there.

All the performances here are quite good. The story construct itself is interesting.

That said, an entire series devoted to shaming and guilt-tripping suicide victims? Bullying at its finest. Art imitates life, as it were. Brutal.

Its hard to stomach.

Is there no collective social responsibility for the milieu that drives people to this? Is there no understand of mental illness in S Korea?

WTF?!

" I kept waiting for the part where someone's kidnapped"

"here's what actually happens for others interested in watching: the FL kidnapped the ML briefly..."

The fact that the writers turned it into him falling in love with her, doesn't make it less toxic. That's just writers with a toxic sense of romance.

Kidnapping is kidnapping. Age and duration don't change that.

If iQiyi had already purchased the rights, their contract might inhibit the ability to sell the rights elsewhere, even though they are not airing it.

this is horrifying. so dystopic.

I understand that there was criticism. It’s not a realistic show, though, so I don’t get why people get all worked up. And that the producers of a fantasy would feel that they have to make such dramatic adjustments to appease.

I hear it has a bigger international audience, than a S Korean one, so, if everyone starts complaining that they preferred Season 1 styling, would a (hypothetical) Season 3 revert? Why isn’t the production team allowed their artistic choices? It doesn’t impact the story or the acting. It disconnects the two seasons to have so much change. I wish I hadn’t rewatched some before starting Season 2. Oh well.

I totally get that the twins had to start presenting more similarly. I think I would have preferred a gradual change. But, I guess we’re supposed to assume that happened during the time skip. I find myself distracted with silly questions:, such as: why would Saya have cut his hair? I can see Eun Som letting his grow. Hair being so culturally important, though, why would Saya have cut his?

Anyway, none of it really matters to the story. I simply found it jarring. The aesthetic and the cinematography feel very different. With the change in actors, too, I had a hard time adjusting without mentally noting things along the way.

There are some subject matters where it is very problematic to treat them so lightly. Storytelling is powerful. Continuing to present stalking victims as if they wouldn’t be hyper vigilant, constantly anxious, and seeking support from everyone around them - family, friends, bosses, the people at the places you regularly go - is absolutely the wrong message to send to young women, who may end up thinking that they are “bad” if they aren’t blithe about it, the way these characters are.

A victim of stalking needs every person they know to be aware, so that when there is contact or you are exhibiting unusual behavior, they know what might be going on and can step up to help. If they’re going to put such a terrifying thing in the story, at least do the minimal to make the character’s reaction be at all plausible. And to demonstrate what she and the people around her might do. Or demonstrate the feelings of betrayal when people around you don’t take it seriously.

Yes, drams are often preposterous. It’s one thing when we’re talking about harmless things. It’s another to take very dangerous, terrifying behavior and treat it like nothing, in a world where so many women don’t get the support they need, and are killed, in real life.

It was lazy writing. They just couldn’t find a way to force the situation they wanted.

There are more options than her co-workers. I’ve had a stalker. Trust me, you don’t go places alone. You enlist anyone you can to accompany you.

I don’t like it when writers out stalkers in stories, but they write the victims’ attitude as though they wouldn’t do anything differently. Or that they’re not constantly anxious about it.

That’s not how it works. It’s a terrifying experience, even when nothing happens in the end. Writers need to talk to people who have been stalked and take this dramatic device seriously. It’s dangerously misleading to keep portraying characters as if they simply go about their life without taking any precautions,

No one being stalked would all into that scenario. Also, they’d tell their bosses and friends and no one around them would leave them unattended. Everyone around you becomes highly vigilant.