etoks21

Well, yeah...duh. It would be nice if they gave us some context before angel wings start appearing out of nowhere in the first episode. lol Wouldn't it have made sense to WAIT until after the insatiable angel remark has been made?

I'm looking forward to finding out what "insatiable angel" is all about. ;)

The commenter above wrote "in the first 2 episodes..." I've seen the first and recall nothing related to, let alone "romanticizing" sexual assault.

This is, once again, where the term "sexual assault" is used so frequently and loosely that it is beginning to mean nothing at all.

There you go again. You don't know what actually happened in any of the shared, remembered experiences. You have been shown two perspectives, and you've chosen to believe that JH's memories are the "real" ones.

Are you saying that JH said one thing on the phone with his buddy from the bar, and that MJ, who was ten feet away, misheard ALL of it, or as I've suggested, hallucinated all of it? Why do you choose to believe that JH's flashback memories are "correct?"

If the intention of the writers/director is that we first saw MJ's recollections of occurrences and then the "actual" occurrences (as opposed to JH's recollections), can you lay out for me where and how that is made clear for us in the script?

Perhaps JH WAS "toying with" MJ. Perhaps JH got caught and was mystified by MJ's disappearance because he's not used to getting caught.

Do you disagree that in the first 2 or 3 eps, JH was arrogant and cavalier in his attitude upon showing back up in MJ's life? He ambushed MJ eight years later, then stood there smirking through their first several conversations. Is that how you present yourself when hoping to re-engage with someone who "hurt" you but whom you are still in love?

That's another case in which the direction and writing is either confusing or actively misleading. There is no mistaking his attitude there, unless we are to believe that JH didn't really act that way and we were seeing only MJ's perceptions of how he acted. lol Where does it end?


Anyway, whatever the writers/director MEANT to convey is hopelessly obscured by their lack of skill in actually conveying it.

"In the kindest way possible, I think you're projecting."

Right back atchya.

What "cultural" thing? The wedding photo arrangement? You think that only applies to Korea? Please be specific in your references.

I'm going to ask again: What makes you so sure that the flashbacks are unbiased representations of what "actually" happened, and not representations of JH's flawed memories? Because they are shorter in length? Nah... And how do you know what is "baked into" the show?

Note to the wise: Words like "literally" and phrases like "We just don't," are NOT supporting evidence. :D

I'm reading a lot of arrogance from you, and condescension to boot. Plus, the passive-aggressive insults in statements such as "I just actually see both perspectives (meaning that I do not, of course)."

If what you have to offer in this conversation is basically "Regardless of what you write, I know what you think," don't bother me further.

I just finished the first episode and am about to start the second.
Curious: What did you see in that first ep that you felt "romanticized sexual assault?"

Episode 1: Somebody please get that dude's hair out of his eyes. Use bobby pins if he won't cut it.

It's been a long time since I've seen a mullet haircut, and it's not a good thing. There's a reason they went out of style. Regarding those front bangs...why work so hard to produce tears when the viewers can't see them anyway? How do people stand having that hair right IN their eyes anyway? The hair was moving with his eyelashes.

That said, this is the first time in nearly two years I've made it through the first episode of a Thai BL without dropping it.
Great production values.
Jin comes off as mentally challenged.
How does an actor this green and untalented get cast in a major drama production, opposite a huge star? That was not explained.
The best parts were the side characters (NOT the screaming queen gay stereotype manager duo) such as the director, the asst. director, the nasty soft drink CEO, etc., and their hilarious little remarks, all under-acted and low-key, which made them all the funnier. Loved the back and forth between the director and the CEO when the CEO kept interjecting. lol
As long as Thai BLs keep using shameless product placements, I have to admire the willingness of this show to mock the practice within the script. And good on the product company for going along with it.
I laughed out loud at the placement of the soft drink machine in a forest in the middle of nowhere. It would have to have its own solar panels somewhere. :)

Again...when Thai BLs include obviously gay side-characters and trans actors, why is there the continued impulse to present them as silly stereotypes, instead of as real people with individual personalities that aren't straight out of a homophobe's playbook? That poor guy in the horrendously over-the-top magenta eye makeup, complete with little rhinestones glued to his face! Then, he smiled and the braces! God help us. Regardless, I laughed despite myself when the management duo prayed to the little god of something or other on the dashboard. I admire the willingness to poke fun at colorful Thai religious traditions without seeming to demean them.

And wtf? with the CGI angel wings in the cops-in-the-rain scene near the end? lol
Oh, and continuity error: Did anyone else notice it was raining in the long shots but not in the closeups during the slip/fall catch? :D

OK...on to episode 2.

You missed or misunderstood my point.
Never mind.

"...it's weird because i'm reminded that the people that you argue/disagree with on the Internet are actual people and have real lives and real jobs that they do every day."

What's weird...? So do I. People who don't like my opinions often throw this canard around but the truth is, how long does it really take to sign in, reply to comments or replies, and sign back out? Half an hour, max? Ten minutes sometimes? You made clear you don't like what I have to say; it's no surprise you're lobbing another passive-aggressive insult my way. Rest assured, nothing you say is going to shut me the f**k up.

I don't consider your questions about my work invasive, whatsoever. I'm hesitating to share a link to my art with you because the MDL Little Girls, Church Lady Prudes, and the rest of the NeoPuritan brigade are likely to descend upon me outside of MDL. I don't want that. You can understand why.

Oh gosh, look! It's taken me seven minutes to write this. I'd better sign out quick so no one here thinks I spend all my time here. lol

How do you know anything about the people who argue with me? You don't. I think a lot of them are high school and college students, who have plenty of free time.

Pffft..pot calls kettle black.

https://kisskh.do/Drama/Business-as-Usual?id=10449&q=true

What does "being reversed" mean?

I just checked out Top Form and moved it to my "currently watching" list. I'll dive in tonight. I hope it's good. I enjoy getting lost in a nice binge-watch.

I am enjoying our discussion too.

I'm not disagreeing that the second versions of events we are seeing are NOT what really happened, but if the first version is MJ's, doesn't it follow that the second version is JH's? If the second versions are what "really" happened, then the writers/director have taken sides in equating JH's perceptions with "reality."

I will take a look at Top Form. I do not outright refuse to watch ANY Thai shows, it's just that so many have been distasteful and badly done over the last three years that I found it not worth my time to check each one out, especially since 429 Thai BLs come off their assembly line every week.

Two days ago I watched a wonderful new Thai film on Netflix, called "Let's Make Millions Before Grandma Dies." It stars Billkin, of ITSAY and IPYTM fame and he is great in the part. Nice to see him further growing in his career. But he is far from the only good thing about the movie. I highly recommend the film.

Exactly...what?

"They both liked the other. They were both crazy nervous and both ended up hurt but we're expecting one person to somehow overcome that fear and hurt to ensure theyre doing and saying the perfect thing when they just want to make sure the other person is okay."

Seriously? You see JH and MH on the same psychological/emotional plain? If so, there's not any point in our engaging further because a major premise of the story is different for each of us.

I'm not "expecting" JH to do or say or be anything other than what I see on the screen. You're defensiveness regarding the character is telling. I don't "like" one more than the other, but I see and hear what I see and hear. Of course, perhaps, as in the series, our perceptions of so different as to render this discussion pointless.

I'll repeat from my last reply:
"I think you're going out of your way to rationalize JH's behavior. I think you like his character better than MJ, and thus are making excuses for him. I could be wrong, of course."

Maybe it's as simple as you finding JH more attractive than MJ. That often skews our perspective. I'll repeat another thing: I am not making excuses for MJ's behaviors. He is extremely insecure and that is exhausting for an intimate partner to deal with. And yet, we have JH pursuing him over and over and over. How many times has MJ had his say and walked away? And how many times has JH pursued him and re-engaged?

This discussion has me leaning toward the theory that JH is an emotional sadist who enjoys playing games with someone like MJ as his Pawn. There are a lot of people like that around.

"They were never going to stand together in the wedding photos because of this.'

lol Sure, if you say so.

I think you're going out of your way to rationalize JH's behavior. I think you like his character better than MJ, and thus are making excuses for him. I could be wrong, of course.

I disagree.

HBO's hugely popular and successful series "White Lotus," recently featured an incestuous make-out scene between two BROTHERS.
A new and popular feature film out of Hollywood, which is a sequel to another hugely successful film, "Another Simple Favor," features an extended sex scene between two-thirds of a set of triplet SISTERS.

Seems like someone not only DARED to make an incest movie, but at least two someones DID make an incest movie.

Seems it IS possible now, despite the tiny but loud-mouthed Neo-Puritans on the Internet.

No, not that kind of writer. I mostly write public relations and marketing materials as a freelancer: press releases, articles, speeches, annual reports, etc. I write poetry now and then for my own sake. I have sold a lot of artwork, though.

Not that I owe your tiny mind an explanation, but I ran into a discussion of Old Boy on another forum and came back here to re-read the synopsis/comments as I considered giving it another try. I saw your sad comment and replied. What are YOU doing here, answering replies to your comments 5 MONTHS AFTER the fact? Are you bored with life? What's your excuse?

You are tragically naive. Who said it happens "often?" This film is about the people it is about and what happened to THEM, not anyone else. If films presented only events as approved by prudes and scolds like you, they would all be boring.

You're also attempting misdirection and outright lying. The MC was not hypnotized and had no idea who this young woman was when they first became involved. They later hypnosis thing is one of those wild, improbable, but fascinating things we see all the time in all kinds of movies. The fact that this one tickles your naughty parts is no one's problem but yours.

"Triggered," one of the lamest Internet insults, meant to imply my argument comes from a place of irrational hysteria. Cuts no ice with me, psycho.

Why are you so freaked out?

Very well said and written. I appreciate you so clearly laying out your perspective. I will try to be brief in responding, as my intent is not to change your mind but to further clarify my own take.

But yes, we have different takes on what went down here in episode 5. I made it clear above that I am well aware of MJ's insecurities, and that it is not JH's job in life to protect him from awkward but common situations. No healthy relationship would survive that.

In comparing the wedding photo situation, and their wedding attendance as a whole however, I feel strongly that JH's behavior was lax. As I said, what he did in leaving MJ to fend for himself in the photo situation is plain rude and inattentive to one's companion, whether they be male or female. The group was mostly made up of JH's friends, especially his male friends, and it was his etiquette-based responsibility to include MJ. Don't forget MJ wasn't going to attend; it was JH who insisted he join him, making it a kind of date. Therefore, in my eyes, it was on JH to treat MJ well.

Surely, you'd agree that it would have been odd and pushy for MJ to follow JH into the middle of the group of JH's male friends, elbowing people aside to aggressively insert himself next to JH. Again, the name and gender of his date is beside the point. I'm talking about being kind, courteous, and attentive to someone HE insisted accompany him. Alternatively, JH could have waved off his friends and stayed with MJ on the edge of the photo; nothing wrong with that either.

When they were in the hallway with JH's friends after the ceremony, it would have been obnoxious to the max for MJ, after again being introduced as a friend, to boldly and obnoxiously say "Well, actually, JH is being less than truthful here; the fact is we are big, fat, gay lovers, so deal with THAT." :D How would that have gone over after JH just deliberately implied the opposite, that they were only friends?

The bit with JH's father all of a sudden being inserted as the stereotypical BL Chaebol, Nazi dad, was so poorly done that I don't take it into consideration. When I first saw them standing stiffly six feet apart in the hallway, not saying a word as they awaited MJ's entrance into the scene, I laughed. The neck scarf was a hilarious touch.

I don't want to come off as if I like MJ better or dislike JH, and that's the reason for my position on this. That's not the case. I find MJ's insecurity exhausting. I find JH's push-pulling obnoxious. Thing is, I am not sure how much of that is intended to be a result of who these characters are, and how much of it is bad/lazy writing. I like a lot of the issues being presented in this plot, but I think they are beyond the capabilities of the writers and director to effectively handle.

Over and over, when we see flashbacks of a common experience but from the two character's differing viewpoints, both dialogue and even physical positioning have been changed. At the diner a few episodes back, were JH and his friend outside leaning against the glass with the friend's arm around JH, leaning in and chatting intimately, or were they ten feet away from the window, chatting in profile to the window? It can't have been both.

Likewise, in the early scene where JH left the bedroom after sex and took the phone call from his friend at the bar, his dialogue with the friend was ENTIRELY different from what we heard the first time around. So is MJ misinterpreting/misunderstanding, or is he hallucinating? If it's the latter, he needs to be institutionalized before he harms himself.

If the writers/director INTEND these major changes, not only in perspectives on events, but in the events themselves, then I don't see the point of comparing them at all. The major differences in their views of the diner thing are extreme to the point that one of them is delusional, not merely interpreting a common experience differently, and it's likely MJ, but they're not going there with the story.

The memory differences thing is fascinating, because it's true and happens all the time. We think we share memories of shared events, but the fact is, they are significantly different from one participant to another. After all, we inhabit different bodies, which if nothing else, means our eyes and ears receive information about the event that is skewed from what is received by someone else right next to us. Add to that the fact that we come to each experience with entirely different life histories and attitudes, and it would almost be strange if we remembered things exactly the same as everyone else.

OK, I said I'd be brief, so it's obvious I accidentally lied. In summary, I feel the issues of memory and perspective being addressed here are beyond the capabilities of the writers and director.