Kyubin

Not two, just one week now. It will be next Thursday, the 12th.

Typical of people like you. When confronted to the truth, you run away without responding to the simple question.

Certainly not "your love". You can simply acknowledge the facts without trying to be sarcastic, that would be more clever.

Opinions no, but facts, yes.
So first, the drama clearly has a content rating of 18+ here. Learn to read.
And secondly, the drama is not available on Netflix. All you wrote about it is bullshit. And the people liking your comment just show that they are just obsessed and don't really used their brain to blindly like your comment.
You and your opinions can have a good day, I will have one with my facts. ;)

You realise that you feeling offended by this comment and writing it's harassment is totally out of proportion ?
This person has the right to express its opinion, and you can disagree of course, but writing he is harassing you by this comment is really crazy, that's out of common sense.
People really need to stop feeling targeted by the different opinions of others.

I would have agree if it was a real fictional story, but as it is based on historical events and characters I can't help to be disappointed by the differences and liberties they choose to take with the sources. For me that's the problem with fictional adaptations of History. But I'm glad that there are people who feel like you about it and I hope one day they will do a true fictional drama with that kind of spirit (well there is "Arthdal Chronicles", the first season at least, but we need more).

As you dropped the drama and already expressed hundred of times you dislike it (yes we understood the first time already...), why do you keep commenting and replying to all comments saying it's a porn show ? Do you realise how ridiculous and pathetic this looks like ? I really feel sorry for you.
There is a difference between expressing an opinion and exchanging/debating about it, and being obsessed and hateful.
Go find some positive things to do, because the constant negativity and hate you are spreading here is annoying.

He is great as playing King Gogukcheon in "Queen Woo", but it's not comparable to his role of Emperor Hui Zhong in "Empress Ki" I think. Well, the format is different, so of course it cannot really compared because with 51 episodes, we can really see the characters change and evolve in "Empress Ki", there is much more development of the characters and also more depth I think, especially with the role of Ta Hwan that remains one of my favourites of Chang Wook.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eC9xcLEihEA ;)

Well, to be be honest, he is a "Journalism and Communication" professor, so his opinion on historical accuracy isn't one of an expert on the subject. ^^
But it's true that considering the few sources of that time and the inevitable cultural and economic exchanges between people, it's totally stupid to criticise that. Especially because the critics probably come from China, so it tells it all, ad everybody know that they are awful when it comes to cultural appropriation with other asian countries. But it's also ridiculous because, in the end, it's a fiction based on historical figures, so they aren't bound to historical accuracy, they can take all the liberties they want, even if people look for it and would have like it to be historically accurate.

I disagree. At least things are clear with explicit content (and to be honest, it's like 5 minutes at most for all four episodes, so that's really not prominent enough to be a problem). To me it's more problematic to always objectifying Korean actors with shirtless or naked showers scenes focusing or their abs, and lots of implicit sexual references, but pretending that Korean dramas are pure and innocent, staying away of sex, like it's a perversion, because it's fake. Totally hypocritical. And that's just a very American/protestant puritan way of seeing things I think. Not my culture at all, so I will not agree with such puritanism.

Here in "Queen Woo", I don't see it as an objectification. I don't think all ther scenes are approriate or necessary, but that's very different of the classic totally useless shirtless scene of rom/com dramas that are just here to please the audience lust, here it has a purpose, even if we can disagree or not understand it. And it's your interpretation of what I wrote, not at all what I wrote. It's funny because if have seen some of your latest comments here and everything you wrote against those criticising the shocked viewers by nudity, applies to you and all those screaming "porn" or whatever about it too. Just like you and others can complain about nudity and sex, we can argument and complain about your puritanism on the subject.

I agree with you, except that I think that the four episodes are enough to say if someone like or dislike it. I'm looking forward to the second part too because I want to see what happens next and how they will finish the story. But I already know it will not be the masterpiece I hoped it will be, because my expectations for this sageuk are disappointed on many points (mainly because of the choices of the screenwriter on what and how he interpreted the historical sources of this event and characters), even though I don't think it's a total failure neither. I have seen far worst sageuk, for my tastes.

There is nothing to hate indeed, it's just a drama after all, but there might be a lot to dislike, or not, as everyone have different tastes. ;)

But there is no excuse to be given here, because the warning that the content will be explicit is clear.
And that doesn't change the fact that people who criticise this because Korean dramas are supposed to normally don't show nudity/sex in their heads are hypocrites, as the reality is that there is always shirtless scenes or implicit sexual content in all Korean dramas.

And these critics/comments are really hypocritical too, because I don't know a single Korean drama that don't take the chance to show the abs and pectoral of any actor as soon as they can, or shoot a shower scene, whatever the genre is. So criticising the explicit scenes claiming they like Korean dramas because there is no nudity/sex in it is funny. Korean dramas, like the music, is partially based on an hyper sexualization of actors/idols, so claiming some more explicit scenes are a shame is ridiculous.
I am the first to question the need and meaning of some of these scenes, but because of historical or relevance arguments, not because theyre are explicit in itselves.

It's not "these days" unfortunately, it's been years like this. But I have seen worst comment sections than here. ^^

Yes I agree, "Bloody Heart" is one of the few great sageuk produced these past few years.

As I feared after watching the trailers, the screenwriter took a lot of liberties with the historical facts, and they choose a path for this sageuk I don’t really like unfortunately. It’s too far from the original characters and history that is known.
As an avid watcher of sageuk, I like it better when they stick to the historical sources as much as possible, or, on the contrary, totally go fictional. The fictionalisation of true events is often disappointing for me because they change too much things, or create too much, and that’s the case here after the first four episodes of part one.
Choosing the five brothers theory over the actual version that is accepted by historians was actually interesting, as it added a more dramatic effect for the battle for the throne. And adding characters and other casualties was inevitable as it’s is based on a very ancient period and little is actually known, but why make characters like the queen’s older sister ? Why was it necessary to create this lesbian relationship with the shaman ? This is totally useless, and only to appeal to some viewers of our days. That’s totally unnecessary in a sageuk like this one. Just like the sex scene with her. I don’t mind nudity and sex scenes, on the contrary, but this one, when they mix it with her having sex with both the shaman and the king, was totally pointless.
The kind of rivalry between the King and Eul Pa So ? Unnecessary. They added a funny character of course, the coachman. Unnecessary. Too many little things like these kind of ruin the original potential of the historical source for me.
Making the queen a warrior is also to appeal to some 21th century feminism. That’s stupid and totally ignores how women could be in power without fighting. In a way, it’s putting a man characteristic to a woman to make her more valuable, which is for me even more diminishing to women. It’s not a symbol of equality.
The sudden death of the king, killed, is also a choice I don’t understand and don’t like. I find this quite lazy from the screenwriter, they could have come up with something more clever.
The overall quality is good, except for CGIs that are quite bad, but it’s always the case with Korean dramas, so I’m not surprised. I don’t have complaints with the cast, but the acting is not very breathtaking neither.
I am satisfied with Chang Wook playing King Gogukcheon, he never disappoints, but I don’t like how they decided to portray this great king. Why make him look, in a way, like a bad character ? Him, like other characters, lack depth I think, they are made like caricatured characters to me.
It’s a good sageuk, but it’s far from the masterpiece I hoped and expected it to be unfortunately.
Let's wait and see the second part now.

It's not a rom-com, so saying is role is a "SML" doesn't makes sense here. There are six main characters/roles for this drama, and they are presented that way since the beginning, that's it.
Applying the structure of cast for a romantic comedy to a sageuk like this one is pointless.

Do you know what a cameo is ? Because an "extended cameo" isn't a thing...
He is playing a main role of the drama, not a cameo. The information given here are from original sources, it's not just people making up things. If he was a cameo his character would be registered as it.