If it is necessary to know the content of the original novel or supplementary explanations outside the work by the director or actors in order to understand the context of a drama, it is an indication that the work has failed as an independent piece. The final episode of this drama seems a prime example of such a failure. Whatever the reason, it is still a failure.
How one then evaluates that failure will vary from person to person. One person might consider the failure fatal and conclude that it destroyed the entire drama, while another might consider it not a major blemish, but an insignificant flaw compared to the far deeper impression they had received leading up to the final episode.
Though I myself am closer to the latter, it is not impossible to understand the former view. This comment section is valuable to me in that it gives me many different perspectives that are difficult to notice alone.
Hi all, just to point out that each and every single parts of the series can be interpreted differently by viewers…
You still seem to be unaware of your own self-contradictions. While you say "Each and every points shared in the streams of comments below are valid," you are trying to contain some kind of opinions. When you say "let's not," you are wrong.
When someone states that the ending is irredeemably tragic and therefore the drama is a piece of junk, this is not the objective fact about the drama, but merely an expression of opinion based precisely on that person's personal character and experiences. Exactly as you say, what you may perceive as something, may very well be seen very differently by others. And they can feel free to write down their opinions, just as you do. Your seemingly neutral call is unconvincing in that it is transparently intended to exclude anything you don't like.
Reading some of the comments, it seems some are hell-bent on whacking this series to pieces, totally discrediting…
The point of your claim is not clear.
If you are condemning an act of ranting without citing evidence, the first thing to check is whether the evidence is really not presented, and whether the evidence is so clear to the person making the comment that they omitted to present it because they expect others to understand it as well. Then, if it is really just a rant without any evidence, there is no need to be anxious about the impact of the comment because its credibility will be greatly diminished.
If you recognize the freedom to express that you do not like a work, but condemn the act of not recommending such a work to others, then you need to explain the essential difference between the two. You say "cross the line", but it is not obvious why the line can be drawn there. Even if it is an expression that requires others not to act, they should be given the freedom to express that opinion, as long as it is not mandatory. The attitude of forbidding that kind of statement is structurally no different from that statement. I am not forbidding you to argue against the opposition. I just want to challenge the notion that you are different from your opponents.
Finally, if you fear that many readers who read poor quality comments warning others not to watch this wonderful drama actually act accordingly, you are simply underestimating people's literacy. Or am I being too optimistic?
Yes, it has cons, but I really enjoyed this relatively long journey and I'd like to thank everyone involved in this work.
Tofu's mission was to solve Nut's problems on behalf of Tharn, which he fully understood and accomplished by near-suicidal means, so it is understandable that he had to return to his original form.
What makes me sad is that we can see a faint loneliness that cannot be hidden in Tofu's expression after completing the mission. He knew perfectly well what he had to do, and he told himself that it was also his own happiness to do it. But from his expression, it would appear that even he himself was not entirely convinced by this persuasion. If he had looked radiant and clear without a single cloud, the ending might have been more satisfying.
Okay guys but because of this love-triangle/mothers with Alzheimer/people in a coma we are forgetting the REAL…
Glad to know that the comrades of the "Rescue Ms. Left Slipper" alliance have not given up yet. As far as the drama "The Tuxedo" is concerned, I was most concerned about Shogun's current situation. Though they never told about it, perhaps to compensate for that, they introduced a new turtle at the end of the story. Even that drama, which gained a reputation for its terrible plot, was able to provide a kind of solution to a thing that disappeared early in the story. There is no way that something similar could not be done in this masterpiece. Let's look forward to the coming episodes.
There seems to be something sweet smelling between Nut and Sven. From what I saw in the first episode, I thought Nut was just expressing the fact that the man he saw in the graveyard looked like the same man who saved them at the pub. But we can see more than that in the expressions on their faces during the rescue scene in the second episode. And afterward Nut seemed uneasy in the scene with his "girlfriend" on campus. Can we expect to see their story unfold?
The images of Joong crying I saw on Twitter lured me into watching the first episode. Though I didn't expect much, it seemed a pretty good introduction, a harmonious blend of seriousness and comedy. It is my inevitable rotten nature to expect something between Nut and M, but unfortunately that is not going to happen.
Maybe that will be the setup for season 2? The Tuxedo 2: Sho-Gun's Return.
After finishing all the episodes, I found that season 2 is a love story between Sho-Gun and Kun-Chieng. They are going to overcome various obstacles and build a happy family.
It seems a lot of people mistake this for a BL drama, but this is simply an advertisement for ice cream. Unfortunately, however, it also seems to fail as an advertisement.
This series serves quite well as an experiment to see how much viewers can tolerate incoherent storylines. The production team must have thought that season 1 alone was insufficient to confirm that.
https://www.instagram.com/rrewarddd/
How one then evaluates that failure will vary from person to person. One person might consider the failure fatal and conclude that it destroyed the entire drama, while another might consider it not a major blemish, but an insignificant flaw compared to the far deeper impression they had received leading up to the final episode.
Though I myself am closer to the latter, it is not impossible to understand the former view. This comment section is valuable to me in that it gives me many different perspectives that are difficult to notice alone.
When someone states that the ending is irredeemably tragic and therefore the drama is a piece of junk, this is not the objective fact about the drama, but merely an expression of opinion based precisely on that person's personal character and experiences. Exactly as you say, what you may perceive as something, may very well be seen very differently by others. And they can feel free to write down their opinions, just as you do. Your seemingly neutral call is unconvincing in that it is transparently intended to exclude anything you don't like.
If you are condemning an act of ranting without citing evidence, the first thing to check is whether the evidence is really not presented, and whether the evidence is so clear to the person making the comment that they omitted to present it because they expect others to understand it as well. Then, if it is really just a rant without any evidence, there is no need to be anxious about the impact of the comment because its credibility will be greatly diminished.
If you recognize the freedom to express that you do not like a work, but condemn the act of not recommending such a work to others, then you need to explain the essential difference between the two. You say "cross the line", but it is not obvious why the line can be drawn there. Even if it is an expression that requires others not to act, they should be given the freedom to express that opinion, as long as it is not mandatory. The attitude of forbidding that kind of statement is structurally no different from that statement. I am not forbidding you to argue against the opposition. I just want to challenge the notion that you are different from your opponents.
Finally, if you fear that many readers who read poor quality comments warning others not to watch this wonderful drama actually act accordingly, you are simply underestimating people's literacy. Or am I being too optimistic?
Tofu's mission was to solve Nut's problems on behalf of Tharn, which he fully understood and accomplished by near-suicidal means, so it is understandable that he had to return to his original form.
What makes me sad is that we can see a faint loneliness that cannot be hidden in Tofu's expression after completing the mission. He knew perfectly well what he had to do, and he told himself that it was also his own happiness to do it. But from his expression, it would appear that even he himself was not entirely convinced by this persuasion. If he had looked radiant and clear without a single cloud, the ending might have been more satisfying.