I can understand Pleng's decision to leave 13 years ago. She didn't want to be a burden, and it was time she learnt to live on her own. But now, I must side with Wan. Was Pleng's previous decision to leave based on her wanting to stand on her own feet, or was it her running away from her problems?
Let's not debate the issue of incest in same-sex relationships specifically. Although I don't agree with Wan's "love should not depend on just one piece of paper," Pleng should still have tried to verify before preparing to run away again.
It is right for Wan to "punish" Pleng, and Pleng should learn to not give up on the first sign of trouble and instead learn to face her problems head-on.
To see from Pleng's perspective, everything's going south since she re-entered Wan's life. She learns of how much she hurt Wan by leaving her. There's no repairing Wan's marriage. Wan's mother wants her out. Ek tried to off himself just like her father, bringing back past trauma. And everything is her fault. Now she learns they are siblings and their relationship is "forbidden." Everything can be fixed by simply disappearing again.
This has a Lesbian Romance tag. Only the top tags are visible before expanding the list by clicking "Vote or add…
How does that happen? Even if no one voted for the tag, it should still only be 0%, no? Either way, it should be 0 now, since I voted it as relevant to cancel out.
Edit: nvm, marking it as not relevant makes it go negative.
So it's basically fluff and gl version of 4minutes where you can fixed a wrongdoing. Khun please don't fall for…
For those, like me, who were unaware:
"y/n" is a placeholder for your name, usually in fanfics. The writer wants you to imagine yourself as the protag, in this case, Jattawa.
When someone (or something) is described as "[x] coded," it means that they have (or it has) the characteristics of [x] but it's not explicitly stated. Example: adhd coded or queer coded.
Ngl I'm kind of tired of this notion that OWLs need to 'stop being so cautious', although I can acknowledge that…
> I'm kind of tired of this notion that OWLs need to 'stop being so cautious'
What does OWL stand for? And I get what you mean. I think there was something similar in [She makes my heart flutter (2022)]. But I don't think it's hard to understand why they are being cautious given past experiences and the environment they grew up in. Sure things have changed (I think, I wouldn't know), but a better way to show that to Hiroko-senpai would've been for Ayaka to come out herself, rather than publicly confess her love; it still has almost the same effect. Even though she did not technically out Hiroko-senpai, she is still forcing her to.
I'm trying to better understand the second half of your comment. My default state when it comes to other people and their lives is indifference. But when you say "superficial" and "show much support", I understand this as the difference between tolerance and acceptance. Lifting from Psychology Today: "For example, when a son or daughter tells a parent about an unwelcome career choice, marital partner, or sexual identity, he or she wants that information not just to be tolerated, but to be accepted."
Why force yourself to watch a show you're not enjoying? Drop it and find something else to watch - there are thousands…
Indeed, it could just be baffled curiosity. And it is me who is interpreting it as dismissive. It's a softer version, but I thought it was similar to "go watch something else then."
As an aside, I use "dismissive" and "noise" to describe the original comment I was replying to. But you read it as "attack" and "malic[ious]." The words I used are are not as strong and obviously don't assume ill will.
Scenario this. Your friend invites you to running. You try it for a once. It's horrible. You have sore muscles for the rest of the day and the next one too. You are obviously not enjoying it, so do you stop running after this? Do you drop a book after reading 10 pages (out of 200)? Do you give up a hobby (say painting) after trying it once?
So, yes, it is worth forcing yourself to do something even when you are not having the best time. It's important to give things a fair chance, be it hobbies or books or tv series. While what constitutes a fair chance depends on the individual, one episode can barely be considered so. And for what it's worth, op does not think it's a waste of time: in their response, they say, "I have watched series that I liked overall even if I not really was a fan of the first episodes." [sic]
At the same time, you also want to balance this with the sunk cost fallacy: you don't have to force yourself to watch the remaining 6h of the show you hate just because you've already invested too much time.
> have you ever done something you thought was a great use of your time, that made you think there wasn't anything of value in it at the same time?
How about living? Subscribe to hedonism/absurdism. A fundamentally meaningless life, but you are having a great time! hhahaha
Why force yourself to watch a show you're not enjoying? Drop it and find something else to watch - there are thousands…
I should qualify by saying that when I say dismissive, I mean dismissing without a valid reason. An example of a valid reason to dismiss the top-level comment as not important could be that judging the acting based on watching at 2x speed is at best cursory and likely to be inaccurate. Alternatively, since it's subjective, you can also offer your own opinion as the reply by "Phoebe Rise" does.
I'm sure "staywithme20four7" knows that they have free will (I think) and that they can choose not to watch this show. "Go watch something else if you don't like it" only add noise.
> it's good advice. not an attack on someone's opinion.
I agree that it's not an attack. I did not say that it was. I'm not sure why you wanted to clear that up.
Why is Ayaka surprised that Risa knows who the person she likes is? Didn't she tell her that she really likes Hiroko-senpai in ep 3 (timestamp 03:42) already!?
Why force yourself to watch a show you're not enjoying? Drop it and find something else to watch - there are thousands…
This seems like a common response to any critical comment about a drama. It is true that you don't have to force yourself to watch something, and that there are so many other dramas you could be watching. At the same time, it also feels dismissive.
I don't have an opinion about the acting. But, people should definitely give the show (and the actors) a fair chance (3-4 episodes) before giving up on it. Or not.
A movie where even the pretentiousness is unoriginal. To wit: a woman who smuggles drugs looks mysterious in a…
Re wig: One reason for the second woman to wear the blonde wig could be because the boyfriend (who feeds cats) (and probably involved with the missing of the Indians) wants her to. He might be interested in the first woman with the wig. She could have 2 reasons to kill him: he is responsible for the missing Indians, or if the deadline is not met, he would kill her.
Re song: I think she listens to the original, not Beach Boys' version. It's a good song, and some people (me included) do listen to songs on repeat. In one of the conversations with the policeman, she says she might be interested in going to California. Towards the end, they were supposed to meet at California (a restaurant). She doesn't show up; instead she quits her job and says that she is going to California (the place). The letter she leaves is a "boarding pass" dated for a year later. The destination can be assumed to be California, I suppose. She returns a year later, dressed as a flight attendant, and says California was nothing special. Can you really say that the song had no significance?
Re critics: The movie does not have a non-linear narrative; I don't know where you read that.
My thoughts: I do agree that story/plot-wise, the movie is lacking. Maybe the details don't really matter because that's not the point. The first part is shot at night time and the second during the day. The two segments are different stories and only related to each other thematically: love, loneliness and brief encounters.
Conclusion: While I did not find the movie to be pretentious, it is not my cup of tea. Many do seem to enjoy the vibes and the visual aspects (camera, colors etc). Whether it's snobbery or simply different tastes, I don't really care as much.
Let's not debate the issue of incest in same-sex relationships specifically. Although I don't agree with Wan's "love should not depend on just one piece of paper," Pleng should still have tried to verify before preparing to run away again.
It is right for Wan to "punish" Pleng, and Pleng should learn to not give up on the first sign of trouble and instead learn to face her problems head-on.
To see from Pleng's perspective, everything's going south since she re-entered Wan's life. She learns of how much she hurt Wan by leaving her. There's no repairing Wan's marriage. Wan's mother wants her out. Ek tried to off himself just like her father, bringing back past trauma. And everything is her fault. Now she learns they are siblings and their relationship is "forbidden." Everything can be fixed by simply disappearing again.
Edit: nvm, marking it as not relevant makes it go negative.
"y/n" is a placeholder for your name, usually in fanfics. The writer wants you to imagine yourself as the protag, in this case, Jattawa.
When someone (or something) is described as "[x] coded," it means that they have (or it has) the characteristics of [x] but it's not explicitly stated. Example: adhd coded or queer coded.
Correct me if I'm wrong.
What does OWL stand for? And I get what you mean. I think there was something similar in [She makes my heart flutter (2022)]. But I don't think it's hard to understand why they are being cautious given past experiences and the environment they grew up in. Sure things have changed (I think, I wouldn't know), but a better way to show that to Hiroko-senpai would've been for Ayaka to come out herself, rather than publicly confess her love; it still has almost the same effect. Even though she did not technically out Hiroko-senpai, she is still forcing her to.
I'm trying to better understand the second half of your comment. My default state when it comes to other people and their lives is indifference. But when you say "superficial" and "show much support", I understand this as the difference between tolerance and acceptance. Lifting from Psychology Today: "For example, when a son or daughter tells a parent about an unwelcome career choice, marital partner, or sexual identity, he or she wants that information not just to be tolerated, but to be accepted."
As an aside, I use "dismissive" and "noise" to describe the original comment I was replying to. But you read it as "attack" and "malic[ious]." The words I used are are not as strong and obviously don't assume ill will.
Scenario this. Your friend invites you to running. You try it for a once. It's horrible. You have sore muscles for the rest of the day and the next one too. You are obviously not enjoying it, so do you stop running after this? Do you drop a book after reading 10 pages (out of 200)? Do you give up a hobby (say painting) after trying it once?
So, yes, it is worth forcing yourself to do something even when you are not having the best time. It's important to give things a fair chance, be it hobbies or books or tv series. While what constitutes a fair chance depends on the individual, one episode can barely be considered so. And for what it's worth, op does not think it's a waste of time: in their response, they say, "I have watched series that I liked overall even if I not really was a fan of the first episodes." [sic]
At the same time, you also want to balance this with the sunk cost fallacy: you don't have to force yourself to watch the remaining 6h of the show you hate just because you've already invested too much time.
> have you ever done something you thought was a great use of your time, that made you think there wasn't anything of value in it at the same time?
How about living? Subscribe to hedonism/absurdism. A fundamentally meaningless life, but you are having a great time! hhahaha
(sorry for the long comment)
I'm sure "staywithme20four7" knows that they have free will (I think) and that they can choose not to watch this show. "Go watch something else if you don't like it" only add noise.
> it's good advice. not an attack on someone's opinion.
I agree that it's not an attack. I did not say that it was. I'm not sure why you wanted to clear that up.
I don't have an opinion about the acting. But, people should definitely give the show (and the actors) a fair chance (3-4 episodes) before giving up on it. Or not.
Re song: I think she listens to the original, not Beach Boys' version. It's a good song, and some people (me included) do listen to songs on repeat. In one of the conversations with the policeman, she says she might be interested in going to California. Towards the end, they were supposed to meet at California (a restaurant). She doesn't show up; instead she quits her job and says that she is going to California (the place). The letter she leaves is a "boarding pass" dated for a year later. The destination can be assumed to be California, I suppose. She returns a year later, dressed as a flight attendant, and says California was nothing special. Can you really say that the song had no significance?
Re critics: The movie does not have a non-linear narrative; I don't know where you read that.
My thoughts: I do agree that story/plot-wise, the movie is lacking. Maybe the details don't really matter because that's not the point. The first part is shot at night time and the second during the day. The two segments are different stories and only related to each other thematically: love, loneliness and brief encounters.
Conclusion: While I did not find the movie to be pretentious, it is not my cup of tea. Many do seem to enjoy the vibes and the visual aspects (camera, colors etc). Whether it's snobbery or simply different tastes, I don't really care as much.