tilted-sun

I hope this doesn't come across as rude but I think you are coming at this from a place without understanding the cultural elements at play. There is a big drinking culture in Korea which the Korean government in the last few years have been campaigning to change, the start of this was in 2018 when they made punishments for driving under the influence stricter called the Yoon Chang-ho Acts named after a uni student who lost his life to a drunk driver.

The views of the general korean public is to see DUIs as a form of 'attempted murder' which sounds harsh but is the basis of why they are so critical when celebrities are caught, because whether or not you did hurt someone you drove knowing you could. Further the high population density means there are more people and more chances to hit people. Its also because Koreans saw the risk between their drinking culture and driving so they built an entire industry of replacement drivers to avoid this issue, they built the infrastructure so people wouldn't make this choice.

You might have done it and gotten away with it, but that's on you and I hope thats something you've learnt from. The argument shouldn't be 'everyone does it' (which we don't btw) because Korea is literally doing everything they can to make it so that isn't a true statement.

(also she hit an electric transformer box, caused a power outage and then drove away during 8am rush hour traffic, of course she got caught. She also endangered everyone else on that road because the power outage stopped the traffic lights working. To be fair to you I think the article downplays how much damage she did so its easy to assume her as being a little over and just swerving )

Not when the writer has themselves said they take inspiration from their husband in her writing and wants to use it to 'bridge the gap' between the prosecutors she knew and the general public. its how about how she has acknowledged how these relationships effect her writing

They have spoken out... in Korea. There was a big deal this month about the writer taking inspiration from the real activist Yun Isang and 20 scholars wrote an open letter to Disney+.
If you like the drama, I'm glad but its misinformation to say they haven't kept speaking out

My aunt was a student protestor in 1987 so yeah I know how the families feel. I know it really well.
I don't like censorship, thats why I said watch it if you like. I don't even care if you watch it. I care you minimise the criticisms actual korean people and the concerns they have about why this specific writer felt the need to tell this specific story. A concept you ignored to put the emotional labour back on the victims by asking what their agenda was rather than acknowledging the intent of the writer.

Listen, I'm not going to argue further, I don't have the emotional capacity to spend my time arguing neither are going to agree with the other on. If you like the show, i'm happy for you, I think the actors are good. And as I said I don't think this show was made for Korean audiences so its doing it job. But please don't diminish the voices of victims in your support of it.

I'm saying the writer's experience of the time period is part of the reason there was distrust and that she herself has previously been linked to right-wing politicians. I don't know what her politics are now.
The article mentioned they were upset that Koreans didn't wait for it to air before making comments, I was giving context to why there was a distrust in why this author had to tell this specific story. Especially when she herself has cited her husband as the inspiration of a lot of her work and said she has used it 'bridge the gap' between the prosecutors she knew and the general public.

The drama was written by someone whose husband was a prosecutor during the time period this is set who has know connection to right-wing politicians, and they had to change a character name because it referenced an actual protestor. The nazi thing doesn't work either because a. time difference and b. the sympathetic nazi stories aren't usually told or backed by large German production companies.

Listen, if you want to watch this, then watch it. The actors are good and it had a lot of money backing it so the production must be good. But its disingenuous to say you aren't going to comment because you aren't Korean to then spend paragraphs commenting how you believe the Koreans who took offence are wrong. ~You don't get to decide how victims (because a lot of people who commented were either victims or family members) respond and you shouldn't dismiss the lack of trust having this specific writer and the early failures of the production company bred.

But lets be honest, this show wasn't actually made for Koreans. It was backed by Disney to draw on an international audience and for that its doing exactly as intended.

I disagree, I think it makes sense to be Pran crying. We very rarely in the show see the consequences of the feud effect Pat individually and personal. Whereas Pran is nearly always shown being dealt the consequences: the transfer of schools, the giving up of guitar, ect. It effects him more personally so we see him take it more personally.

This isn't a seme/uke thing its a very clever story device, where Pran's mum was the victim so in her fear she made her son take on more of the victimhood of the feud. Its a way of maintaining the original dynamic of the catalyst of the feud. Pran's emotions aren't because he is an 'uke' but because he experiences the feud in a different way where his mother can be the victim of her story and low key the 'villian' of his and that conflict in emotions is overwhelming. Further its escalated into his mum being physical with him and he is now likely blaming himself knowing her story.
Pat's low key arc, on the other hand, has been him separating himself away from his father's expectations, (I think thats why we saw so much of Pat's father pressuring him to take on the same things he did at uni, so we could see Pat push against it slowly and establish himself as a separate entity to his father). If Pat was the one crying I think it would go against his development as it could easily be taken by an audience as him feeling some sort of the responsibility for what his father did.

If Pat does breakdown as he comes to terms with what his father did I would rather that be done with Pa and not Pran because I think that might be more narratively interesting and also allow the narrative a way of separating the 2 conflicting emotions.

(I don't know if any of this made sense, so please ignore me if it didn't)

I will disagree on one point and its the last one. We know homophobia exists in the universe since Pran's mother made a point of bringing up that she wasn't homophobic acknowledging that that could be a genuine issue.
( I kinda get the impression P'Aof is acknowledging there is homophobia but is trying to avoid it being a main obstacle because thats a very common plot point in BL and therefore is a bit predictable. So I think rather than it being a world without homophobia, its just not something the narrative wants to dwell on)
I'm both sympathetic to Wai as a character and very critical towards him, I think Jimmy is doing a very good job making him seem more likeable because he is very charismatic and brings a nice nuance to Wai when he is acting as him.

Did you read my comment?
Because you are arguing something i didnt argue.
Listen if you want to watch the show and enjoy the show then do it.

But dont say people arent allowed to be concerned when the production company has done so much wrong that makes them suspicious of it. I was giving context and you decided that meant i hate the cast? You are creating arguments and arguing them rather than looking at my points.
Heres the thing if you want more context you can look at the writer having right wing associations, her husband being a prosecutor, the use of an actual protest song in the song, the name references to actual protesters.

But it aint on me to do the emotional labour to teach you. If you like the show thats fine, but didnt you answer your own question in this comment.
You asked why another show set in the 80s didnt get this response, maybe you should actually analyse that and figure out whats different

(Also you are spamming a blog post so you are in no position to criticise twitter. Especially when i have never made any inidcation i use twitter, in fact i did say my source was my aunt who was a korean student in the 80s so you are once again arguing something i didnt say)

dude you are going hard to defend this. we are trying to tell you this is having actual consequences for the victims and retraumatising them and you are here demanding more emotional labour.

If you like the show then just like the show, but you should take a step back to analyse why you are going so hard. Is it because you don't believe the criticisms or if you acknowledge it as valid you think that will be some sort of attack on your own morality?
There is nothing innately wrong about liking problematic things, but there is an issue when you are trying to change narratives to hide issues to make yourself feel better. Because here is the honest to god truth, the show might be fictional but the consequences of it are real.
If this is the hill you want to die on, then go ahead but don't expect us to play into your strawman

Its not secure because its a random link on the interenet and malware exists.
I dont know if it goes 'against the narrative' because i havent opened it.
And yeah i am repeating something i heard... from my aunt who was a student in Korea in the 80s. Further my criticism wasnt even fully about the show but the ways i believe the production company failed.
If you enjoy the show and think there is no issue with it, thats fine, its got some good actors in it so im sure its very well acted.
But that doesnt mean people cant have concerns, criticism and issues considering how JTBC have handled it so far.

Yeah i dont open links i dont know are secure. Especially if its being spammed on every comment. Just an internet safety tip for everyone there

I agree with a lot of previous comments but will add I think marketing also had a role. Gen Y was marketed as a MarkKit story and by extension a KimCop show. This was meant to be their first time leading a show together and yet the final few episodes they were barely in it. Especially with how the 2Moons production ended, this was seen as a second chance almost and for it to come back to the 2moon mains again at the end felt off I think.

So people were going into the Wayu/ Thanu story already a little frustrated because its not the story people had started the show for. I think Wayu is better regarded because a. a lot of fans already were attached to the 2moons versions and b. he was Mark's best friend and played that best friend role. But Thanu is not a character already known to the audience, he is in a weird love triangle that doesn't full fit the rest of the story and so I think he sits in the weird turbulent space where he is the link to many of the weirder aspects of the show whilst not having a foundation with the main pair that grounds it. I don't know if that makes sense, but he wasn't established as Kit's old friend first so when he brings in the weird love triangle its feels disjointed because I have no basis for who he is.

For context for this because I'm seeing a lot of 'its just a show' in the comments.
This show is set in a time in real Korean history where the government were taking people protesting for democracy (mostly young students) off the streets, torturing them and sometimes killing them under the disguise of them being north korean spies. This wasn't in the distant past. It was the 80s, it traumatised my parent's generation.

I'm all for freedom of speech, but there is a grace to show these sorts of events and a responsibility. Do I think JTBC have gone about this production in a good way? absolutely not. I think this show would have been taken better if JTBC had done better and this statement above is an example of that. If the character descriptions were better thought out before release, if the FL's name didn't have to be changed because it referenced a real life activist, if the show wasn't being released during a time where there is a resurgence in a right wing movement? I genuinely think the release would have gone down differently.

I don't want this show cancelled, I think they should get to tell the stories they want to tell, but they could have done it better and now they have to listen the criticism and there is a lot of criticism to make.

(Further Disney + should never have had a hand in this. If you can't get why, think how westerns would react if an asian company like Weibo backed a show set in nazi germany where the female characters name was Anne and the first character sheet you saw was about Heinrich Himmler being a 'just and righteous man ' right next to a sentence about the SS ( now imagine that show coming out only 40 years after the actual event). )

Dude the events they are 'fictionalising' were the brutal torture and murdering of students protesting for pro-democracy by a government under the disguised of being North Korean spies. An event that traumatised a generation. Its not a fictional event, it was time when your friends would disappear and you didn't know if they were going to come back alive.

Listen if you want to see this as gen z overreaching thats your own bias buts that your right.

But don't dismiss peoples concern of what a western corporation (disney +) backing a korean show that attempts to decontextualize a horrific event when you put it in the context of the resurgence in right wing movements that is happening right now

I think a writer confirmed on reddit it was Wai.
Also I don't think its the fact Pran is a guy thats upsetting them ( at least I speculate its not), I think its more that Pran is Pran. It was set up in early episodes that the friend groups especially don't get along even more than just architecture vs engineering, they had that rivalry with the bus stop so had to deal with each other more than the average eng and arch students. Further Pran is the architecture student president so he is seen as the 'leader' of the group.
I'm hoping the issue isnt gender but the status of Pran in his group if that makes sense.

I think its less gmmtv and more Ohm and Nanon.
Ohm has mentioned he wants to do more shows other than BLs since he wants to branch out and avoid being type cast and Nanon doesn't do BLs often. He agreed to do Bad Buddy because of p'Aof and Ohm and only after he knew story details.
I think it might take a little while before they announce another BL series together because they want to work on things that are on the same level as Bad Buddy and that might take time with either waiting for p'Aof to be free or finding another director of his level and finding a story that they both enjoy.

I think you've just accidentally answered why there was an issue with the original question. Its because BLs perpetuate this stereotyping and to ask this question furthers that rather than challenging it to improve the industry.

This isn't an attack on you because the term 'bottom' and 'top' do have their (important and valued) place within the queer community however there is an issue when the response to gay characters is to instinctually reduce them down to their preferences in the bedroom because that leads to fetishization and the representation being based on that fetishization. I'm not saying I think you are doing that but that it is in an industry wide issue with the storytelling and how those stories have taught us to interact with the characters.

Furthermore, the heteronormativity, homophobia and misogyny in the way these stereotypes are portrayed in BL is an issue and shows larger industry issues. 'Bottoms' are usually written to be physically smaller, submissive and more 'feminine' but are very rarely shown as what is considered to be more 'camp'.

The concepts of reducing complex relationships down to bedroom preferences results in very narrow representation. And regardless of the bigger implications that can lead to a stagnation in the storytelling. If you only see 2 types of main characters because the writers are trying to fit them into the stereotype of 'top or bottom' then the industry never grows.

Listen I love BLs, I love the messy plots and messy characters, I love the lighthearted nature of a lot of it. But I think that we as viewers should challenge when it falls into stereotypes rather than be complacent in the 'norm' both for the sake of better representation but also better stories and one of the ways we can do that is by not falling into the trap of reduction ourselves.
In this case Pat and Pran have an interesting dynamic that is recognisable and are challenging that stereotype in a way maybe the books didn't and I think that is going to give us a really interesting story that I'm excited to see unfold.

(sorry about the long post, I wrote a paper on stereotypes in queer media and fandom so I have lot of thoughts, please feel free to ignore if I overstepped)

It wont. The production company burnt all those bridges with the abuses and inappropriate act behind the scenes

Are there any eng subs that doesn't need a vpn? My vpn doesn't work on SBS/ HBO