Kim Yunmi

I live in the US, though I'm Korean and I'm willing to see their filming at the airport, etc in LA. I have some people who want to stalk I mean meet them. Anyone know how to get the schedule, etc? How did other fans manage it? I'd like to make "Prince of America" sign for Kwangsoo+ others.

This topic is about the drama: 艾蜜麗的五件事, Emily's 5 things. (Ai Mi Li De Wu Jian Shi) Also known as Five Missions. Currently streaming on Viki as of this writing.It's a Taiwanese drama. 2018 with romantic comedy starring Aviis Zhong, Sam Lin, Edison Wang, and Diane Lin. Description (from My Drama List): Can a magical letter in a bottle help someone face the most difficult issues in their lives? Emily (Aviis Zhong) is an assistant in a law firm that specializes in divorce cases. Although she has the help of her best friend photographer, Dou Ru, (Sam Lin) life hasn't been easy. Her boyfriend treats her more like a servant than a lover, she hasn't talked to her father in years, and she is bullied at work. One day she finds a letter in a bottle with a list of things that Emily has been avoiding. 1. Be Yourself 2. Reconciliation 3. Bid Farewell 4. Go Home 5. Rewind After her discovery, bizarre events keep occurring around her which leads her to believe that the bottle is actually cursed. Could it be that only way to break the curse is to follow the list of things Emily has been avoiding the most? **** Personally, I feel like I'm the only one that really enjoys this drama outside of Viki and kind of want deeper discussions about it. I think it would appeal to those who like things like ISWAK and In Time with You, and has the music from My Dear Boy. The slowly paced drama with a four act plot structure and thoughtful character development where the characters aren't perfect, but work through problems and come to realizations about themselves is totally my kind of drama from Taiwan.

IIRC, Sociologists also deal with creators as well. It's just a different way to approach the craft. There is a huge opening, actually in looking at the creators in both sociology and anthropology since creative studies in those fields has languished quite a bit. My own university library has all but two books on the subject of creativity in the anthrpopology field, even if this is probably intellectually how we differ from other homonids, there is very little effort to put them together. Rather than directly disagreeing, BTW, I'm more looking at causes for the disagreement and the PoVs. Since I take a cultural relativist's view rather than a Eurocentric Feminist PoV, I'm guessing this is the cause of the split. I'm favoring heavily a Korean reading of the text and a creator PoV as well and I'm not shy about stating so. But I was also hoping that this discourse might help people also investigate the text more closely from a cultural relativist PoV as well-which isn't to say an outsider's PoV is invalid, but that one should have the vocabulary to be able to switch hats. One should be able to argue both a Korean and say, American PoV when reading or consuming a text and often being able to do that makes the text richer and people are more able to engage in the finer details. Say like knowing how "Chingu" is used in Korean, even though it means the same thing as "friend" isn't used the same way in an English context or even English's use of "friend" vs. on fan forums. I hope it was educational for the peanut gallery at least through the process of investigating the differences in PoV, so they could find out about the broader cultural context and history if they didn't know it.

*cutting for length again, though I read it* Kishotenketsu is not genre, it's form. Like three acts is a form. Or Hero's Journey is a form. Or Haiku is a form. Or Sonnet is a form. That's not genre. Genre is an expected list of rules about what that poem/lit will contain, not in terms of format, but specific content, like will it be set in the past, present or future. Does it have dragons in it? Is there time travel? Is there a romance? Format is inherently thought as being "natural" with especially Eurocentric academics with story, but one should wrestle with the differences in things like say, Sonnet and how it influences the outcome of the content. Sonnet is not a genre, but a fantasy Sonnet is a thing like a horror sonnet is also a thing. Fantasy and Horror are genres. Sonnet is not. (I do call out Eurocentrism in this case because it's one of my frustrations with how story is taught in schools. Blah blah, conflict. Blah blah, three act is the only way. It's NATURAL. It's the BEST. They are full of it.. and really should examine other ways plots are made and formed and effects on audiences. Also things like influences of traditional theater and religious texts on such formatting.) This, BTW, for the peanut gallery is different from thematic and topos. (Writers tackle genre v. event chain v. character more than academics anyway. We tend to separate a lot more than academics do.) Total aside, but I wanted to argue a paper in which I would say that the three act structure is inherently flawed for feminism in rom coms and creating realistic romances, and that perhaps using other formatting and opening that up a bit more would allow more freedom to explore more feminism and something that relationship experts would recognize as a stable relationship. Just pointing out that formatting might also influence and further critical philosophy if one is willing to tackle it and the psychological effects on the audience. (Was going to use Korean, Japanese, Chinese, and US movies/dramas in comparison in a Me Too context.) It's totally worth examining just to see if one could be wrong about the approach one is having towards a particular world literature. Unfortunately an academic advisor did not materialize--I asked two so far. I still have the questions about that and I certainly don't think this is THE answer to the failing of the Rom Com within US and UK contexts, but can't find an academic advisor for it and I'm crying I can't find one. I think it would be fun, fill a gap that's sorely needed, and tackle the questions that writers are having about how to tackle feminism in a romance context when most of the tropes of romance are patriarchal in nature (which writers of the genre are well aware of and worry about). Marxism has problems with being cross cultural enough in its PoVs. Even Neo Marxism is short of the line. In order to wrestle with socio-economic inequality within Korea, I think you need to go back to basics of what Marx did to argue for Marxism, and go with Historicism, which means you need to wrestle with the history of Korea itself and how the Jaebeol (revised spelling) came to power. Because the basis of marxism came from wrestling with the European history, which is not the same way that rich people formed within Korea, which means you need to form a different philosophy in order to tackle that difference. (It looks similar, but because the system of laws was different, what Marx pointed out isn't the same thing.) Also total aside, but Marx was not very good at Feminism either. In another words, when you switch historical context, you really, really do need to examine which philosophies you are using and if and how they might not work before trying to apply them. And Marx doesn't jive since he's so Eurocentric. You have the Hegemony system of East Asia to tackle, the whole way land was granted was different, etc. Really, the formation of class, is more of Goryeo to Joseon thing and is quite fascinating to explore if you have a mind to. (I store references for that... https://muse.jhu.edu/book/12676 is good for going over some of the land granting, etc also has feminist discourses about women's positions from a Korean perspective.) That given, Joon Ho mostly eschewed being rich for the majority of the storyline. Floating here and there on apathy, saying he didn't want to take over the family business, etc, but a job is a job, which echoes in terms of storyline Roo-Da's own arc of wanting to just make it and not actively do anything. (There is a technical term for this, but I forgot what it is. The opposite of a foil...) So he spends most of the storyline escaping being rich by being ineffectual on purpose. (as he said before he came back as manager to try to save them.) In this case the Nepotism really has very little effect on the character until his inciting incident, which granted is different in timeline 1 than timeline 2. The echoing of Roo-Da's arc within Joon Ho is also probably why I'm seeing a better match as well. Often in storylines, the hero and heroine tend to go through similar change arcs (Both Asia and in the US.) though the tension may come from them doing it at different speeds. The change arc on Baek Jin Sang is different struggle. Baek Jin Sang, as I outlined has characterization problems on a writing level, from a writer's standpoint. It's what we'd call a FLAT character. Granted from a psychological standpoint this also means you can do a ton to have the audience impose traits on the character to make them more or less desirable in the audiences' eyes, and thus be useful in that context. You showed a bit of that with the whole, he must be lonely and isolation model. (It's a way that writers do manipulate their audience--present a blank slate so they can relate to them--this is why a lot of female romance characters are really, really flat in European stories pitched to women. It's because if the character is flat enough then the reader can impose themselves on the character in question creating an overall pleasing psychological effect of them being the ones in love with the hero.) But form that cold writer standpoint, he's a blank slate, and for the story being told, he needs rounding out. This is cold writer facts, rather than tackling the story on a reader level. Also, the Middle Class within a Korean context is different than within a Eurocentric context too. I kinda see it more like the UK system than a US system (since you said Middle Class, I'm guessing you're not UK--I'm not UK either, but as I said I read very widely). It's more of a division of Working Class v. Upper Class, than Middle Class v. Upper Class. With Roo Da representing more working class. Baek Jin Sang, again, is flat, so he has no such background and because he's flat you can overwrite him. But as a writer I totally refuse to overwrite him with such assumptions and go straight back to writer should have done better and not left him a blank slate and an archetype. It's true, though that Goldkiwasae is most likely dealing with the age ranking and sexism in the work place (and those dirty old men that harass women) though maybe not as well as they should have?, which is why Baek Jin Sang is 20 years older, rather than 10.... while the interests of Im Seo Ra seem more on the front of socio-economic difference. I'm not against reformation change arcs, BTW, but I am against them at the sole behest of someone else. Inspiration is OK, but if you have to do it like what? She suffered 3 arcs of trying to get him to change... then it's probably not worth the real life effort, in which case, it doesn't belong in story either. And really, both love interests should have friends and life outside of the relationship first. Repair that first, then put forward the story. But this kind of discussion I really love. Introverted Boss I broke down on why it didn't work for viewers and how I would have redone it as a writer. (I hope she comes back because she has interests in representing mental illness and does it extremely well. It's so good... makes me think she might be struggling with mental illness too. Though Bubblegum is my favorite for mental health rep from Korea thusfar.). I felt it was a shame she had to change around the plot because of one plotting mistake. She had a good arc going, but messed up the order of the scenes in the beginning. That given, she handled the dump and start over pretty much like how I would have done it. Haha. (Especially those bratty fans that hated on it for her being so blatant about mental health and trans representation and tried to blame it on other things). Here my accusation still stands... Baek Jin Sang is a flat character, but as such is easier to impose assumptions on. Because of that you can recreate him into whatever you like, but from a writer's PoV, that's just lazy writing. Around the 10th episode we should have gotten deeper motivations. It might have split the audience up, but I'm the type to like to make the audience engage and think rather than float on assumptions. *shrugs* differences in style. Give me character meat. There isn't story structure or plotting reasons for him to be so flat. Narrative arc, as I said runs on a conflict basis. But give me more. Critical reading style... I tend to use systems a lot, so LGBTQIA, Feminism (intersectional of course--I keep up on the various waves. Yes to redefining masculinity), socio-economic class, etc (heavily colored by Social sciences--Sociology, psychology and anthropology--all of which I've studied in some degree). I also blend that with knowledge of history and culture, often looking things up as I'm watching/reading if I don't know it. I spent most of my childhood watching documentaries... and then the rest of it I pull as I need it. I love using authorcism as well, and looking for internal consistencies of style. Kim Eun Sook, Hong Sisters (both sets), etc I follow by writer, writer culture and influencing writers. I pull from as many at once as applies to the text as possible and look at the greater context it sits. Also been reading world lit since I was really little, so haven't stayed solely in Europe.

Did a search for: 艾蜜麗的五件事 Emily's 5 things. (Ai Mi Li De Wu Jian Shi) Didn't come up under any of them. It's a Taiwanese drama. 2018 with romantic comedy starring Aviis Zhong, Sam Lin, Edison Wang, and Diane Lin.

*deleted above to make post shorter not because I didn't read it* Some of it might be also that I also analyze the plot from an Asian plotting context a bit too, so I often look at the characters from realization rather than conflict-driven plot points. This is not to directly disagree with you, but to give some perspective of where I'm coming from. I'm detailing that understanding below not because I think you don't know it, so you are on the same page. Not as an insult to intelligence but more like to see where you are in understanding Asian plotting, characterizations, etc. The plot structure does follow some of the conventions of a three act plot from Western PoV (drama) often with the episodes following it fairly closely with a 2-episode spread of the three act structure. (This is kinda typical for a lot of especially network, over cable dramas--cable tends to experiment a lot more with plot structures... for example, Another Oh Hae Yeong played heavily with the plot structure blending philosophies of Buddhism and Mugyo--the local shamanism into the plot structure. Also borrows heavily from what is called the Dream Record. Religion oddly does influence plot structure culturally quite a bit, but that's another dissertation for another time.) But it also follows some of the plotting that would be familiar to Chinese Wuxia fans, the small local plots fold in together to become an epic plot. There are plenty of examples of this. Though for some reason I smell more of the Japanese flavor of this which is quite popular in the mysteries they tend to write. There are so many examples... I won't bother listing, but I will trust that you probably seen this plot structure already. (It's a bit less common in the US side, at least, though Doctor Who has done smaller scale versions of this UK side.) It's not Jo Ha Kyu.... not quite (People hate Jo Ha Kyu for the lack of endings, but again, Buddhism is influencing the plotline). I haven't found the official name for it yet. There are also hints of the larger plot structure having Kishotenketsu, and I think this is where we are diverging here. Kishotenketsu I'll link up for you. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kishōtenketsu BTW, most Eurocentric-story-watching viewers complain that Kishotenketsu is not action-filled enough. It's too slow, and it demands too much attention to detail for them to get anything. But as a plot structure, it de-empahsizes a lot of the events--which means you don't really need conflict. It's not the first priority. Instead, characters and what they come to realize in their day to day lives comes first. Kishotentketsu, though really really sucks for things like action-filled stories. It's good for slice of life though. The majority of the character development if you break character development into change (this can be permanent or temporary), realization (things already in their character the character realizes was always there--which is Roo-Da's whole can't stand to be silent in the face of injustice change. It's half realization, half change. Outlined again this episode...), background (family, history, etc) and evolution (permanent change), for most of the story is a realization rather than change/evolution standpoint. (This is different from Wants and Needs of character, which often can conflict with all of the above) Most Eurocentric-conflict-based stories follow a conflict-based character arc and look straight for evolution with the most amount of permanent change possible trying to cure every fault of the character, but personally, as an author, I really, really dislike this sole emphasis since you can do a whole lot more by stringing in things like realization, temporary changes, etc to make the story much more dynamic). I tend to favor a more realistic approach that characters WANT to change, not only due to circumstances, but for themselves and that all change is temporary, rather than evolutionary (But I clearly diverge strongly from a lot of European plotting conventions--I also play around a lot more with plotting structures). I find when the characters are change for a person only them, it's clunky... and you eliminate so many good story possibilities--its' not just bad characterization, it's terrible plotting too. But these days, a lot of Asian stories do more of the realization (which has roots, BTW in Buddhism). (This is much stronger in Japanese media, BTW, which has a lot less direct borrowing like my own Korea does--Korea has a long history of both straight up borrowing and then innovating. Metal Movable type, for example, is a really good example of this type of thing. Also the made up hanja Korea made instead of being like Japanese and taking traditional characters wholesale.). I didn't dismiss ageism, but I did say Age ranking has a direct effect on sexism in the workplace, for example... senior men, often in positions of power will require that all younger women clean their desk for them, make them coffee, bring that coffee, etc. So it's the power of age+sex that creates an extra dimension of a power dynamic, which means that often older men press on younger women inappropriately as they feel that difference in power and it still not quite count as sexual harassment since it's expected, traditional and all of that mysogynistic crap they made up and pretend it was part of all Korean History, when it wasn't and was a very late import (and Yes, import--did not come directly from Korea herself). (Say ask them to drink when they don't want to as shown in Beauty Inside, more directly in Something in the Rain etc--I'm referencing the media because I read the articles citing it does happen, but the articles are dry so it's easier to point to media examples. Academia is too dry to cite on a fan forum.) Personally, Goldkiwasae probably is railing against the workplace being structured as it is. BTW, I'm not particularly strongly shipping Joon Ho, but I am analyzing character, looking at what elements were pulled from the Korean and worldwide canon, and trying to wrestle with how Koreans see their current feminism and where they are trying to go within this particular story. I don't ship characters really as an author. That's not my job, so much... my job is mostly to emotionally manipulate the readers/viewers so they understand and accept my argument that the story must be this way and there is no escaping it while being totally emotionally sucked in and invested. I'm guessing like most writers, Im Seo Ra has the same goal. Unfortunately, this is also culturally based as well... so how people read story will change on context of where they are. But overall, I tend to approach stories a lot more coldly than most audiences do--I switch hats also between Korean and other readings from other cultures. I catch every single last detail I can to see where the author is going. I make games of guessing the writer based on previous works too. (I crush on writer's abilities, and actors abilities trying to borrow those techniques for story writing... over what they look like and totally separate those things. The advantage of being gray-a is separating those things is totally easy for me. <3). And for me, from the whole Kishotenketsu standpoint, with the arc of feminism of your life partner should have a life outside of you because it's not a PIE of missing pieces of better halves, it's not OWNERSHIP (Both of which came from patriarchy of Victorian ideas of Medieval Europe, even if totally false), it's about finding personal balance, and you are not a rehab hospital, Kang Joon Ho is the better choice. Roo Da has more emotional attachment--she's fine with his childishness. He's not annoyed her for most of her work life. I don't need reform, or character conflict evolution arc and argue narrative structure. For me, as I head hop the character's PoV's and try to construct them (which as I noted is short on Baek Jin Sang which I personally hate as a writer given the amount of screentime he has...) Roo-Da just off and on screen has had more time with Joon Ho. (more off screen, since I think every single date isn't in there--there were quite a few cheats inserted along the way--they needed to emphasize the time loop over the development of the relationship with 20 episodes they might have gotten all of the things they missed to flesh those things out more cohesively). My differences as a writer v. viewer probably played a lot much more strongly on Introverted Boss where I took the writer's PoV and saw why the watchers couldn't connect properly to the first few episodes well... but total aside. But yeah, I'm also fine with them not ending up together and no ultimate kiss. The romance really isn't a key part of Roo-Da's character arc so it doesn't matter. (Either from a realization or conflict-driven PoV). The romance really isn't the main thrust of this story... it's a sub plot at most which plays separate in some ways from the main plot of reform a crappy company. (A plotline that popular in Japan).

That's a very good analysis, but story wise... emotionally, there is far more ground work for Roo-Da to choose Kang Joon Ho. Kang Joon Ho, Roo-Da never actively choose or sought to change, he changed of his own free will, even though this might have been motivated by different factors Roo-Da never tried to change him. Whereas the plot required her to change Baek Jin Sang. This clears Kang Joon Ho of the Rehab problem that is often plagued in these texts--while he is deeply flawed, Roo-Da doesn't tell him to change one bit. He actively asked his grandfather--his grandfather did ask him to change, but he rejected it outright several times throughout the drama. He actively decided of his own agency to also change. People should know that you don't choose romantic partners that are deeply perfect, and he's not. He's childish, yet does a grand character arc, but not at the impetus of someone trying to force that change. That's points up for him. Not a single decision he made was because of Roo-Da solely trying to make him change 100% of Baek Jin Sang's character changes came directly because of Roo-Da trying to force those changes due to the time loop. The drama also downplayed the Deus ex Machina, making him a fairly good candidate. He only swoops in at the 11th hour, but enough ground work was shown in the story to be able to do it on their own by that point. BTW, Anthro and Comp Lit. Anthro with a concentration in systems, (i.e. things like feminism, socio-economic status, etc from a cross cultural perspective. I'm also up on Korean history of feminism, etc.). Also an author, but that's neither here nor there. (Just means how I analyze stories is slightly different from academia). The problem is exactly that... while both male characters did change, it was ultimately 100% Kang Joon Ho's own agency of his own accord to make the changes he did and pick up the responsibility, even if that responsibility ultimately was erased by the time loop, there is still some hope of bringing that agency back in the quick 2 episode finale. Also emotionally for Roo-Da, there is far more ground work as she remembers to want to be with Kang Joon Ho again. The idea that if you help a person change they MUST end up with them is problematic at best. It's like arguing a therapist should end up with their patient, which is a whole 'nother can of worms I hate, but is separate from this. I favor the character and plotline where the male hero ultimately chooses 100% to change himself because of his own agency and the events. Baek Jin Sang misses this. His sole impetus for the most part is Roo-Da beginning to end, which if in reverse, would run into some of the issues of feminism anyway as in the only motivation is the man. In this case, Baek Jin Sang's only motivation is Roo-Da beginning to end, even without her actively trying to change him, which runs into serious issues. (Also makes the longevity of the relationship very problematic). He says a much the last few episodes too... Did she watch me, is she watching me, etc. (In women's version of this in stories I call it Man Sickness--their whole motivation is purely for the romantic lead.). Kang Joon Ho, did strive to change... but the arc was much more subtle throughout. He took responsibility, ever so slowly of his own accord, which makes him a safe alternative. Since there IS a swath of stories lately coming from Korea with a lot of woman rescues man from his own problems, sometimes manic fairied in, (usually he has a mental health problem and then it becomes THE plotline for the entire story... which makes me go all gaggy). It would be nice if Kang Joon Ho recovers his character arc (along with the other characters) and does it of his own agency, and reverses this rather bad trend in Korean dramas. I'm not fond of it. I'm fond of mental health representation, but from an intersectional PoV, it really, really sucks to say that magical private parts can cure any illness--the management of it should come from the character themselves because codependent characters suck. So I'm 100% in favor of a reversal, especially given the emotional ground work from Roo-Da's perspective is there. From Kang Joon Ho she never rehabbed him and his sole motivation isn't purely her either. He said it was also his family, finding out about his father, because that specific event piqued his interest, and so on. He has complex reasoning, which makes him a much more dynamic character in some ways that Baek Jin Sang, so you can't say solely because of Roo-Da he changed. And in terms of feminism, I favor such characters with complex motivations on both male and female ends without the whole I'm gonna change and rescue you. Baek Jin Sang has no introduced family. Doesn't really care about his co-workers and doesn't seem to do things because they interest him, but because they conform to rules. His background was never properly sketched in either to make for deeper motivations beyond Roo-Da. He has no friends, he had one person that pretty much hated him, but those aren't really motivations. They are merely plot decoration to make the plot move forward rather than give him some deeper meaning for himself. Kang Ji Hwan is definitely the better actor (I love watching him--he overacts in this, but he can play more subtle too.), but purely from the writing side, and analysis of the characters, the emotional ground work is better for the Kang-Lee ending from a Roo Da perspective. BTW, there *is* issue within Korean feminism context with older men and younger women, so calling that ageism purely rather than looking at the cultural age structure of Korea and taking into consideration the larger historical context is a bit short of the line. Not saying that ageism isn't a "thing" but that it's a line of inquiry for you if you want to look at it from a intersectional feminism perspective. Age ranking has a large effect on women, sexism and feminism within Korea (it also does in Japan and China too). And we both know that you can't have story without some form of cultural context. So something to think about. (I can give examples, but it would veer off topic).

The director, the writer and the original web comic are all done by females, it looks like. Director is a newbie, too. (relatively speaking). Eun Jin is usually a female name (director) Seo Ra is usually also a female name, with more drama writers likely to be female over male. The comic writer IIRC is likely to be female. @All I'm probably in the minority here, but I still like the Web comic ending from a feminism PoV. I won't spoil what that ending is, but for those that know it my reasoning is this: Women are not rehab hospitals for men. Since the drama has been following fairly closely with the web comic, I'm guessing a Web comic ending. There is better ground work in the drama for the web comic ending, though the acting did change things a bit. But I don't expect less from Kang Ji Hwan whom I've been watching since Hong Gil Dong. Oh and if you do specify the ending of the comic in reply to this, probably wiser to use spoiler tags.

I think with 100D it was more that people didn't like the politics, which is more writing side while he was off being a commoner, which isn't so much on the head of the director, but on the head of the writer. Most people didn't want to hear all the palace stuff and wanted more of him being a commoner. But the cutting itself, as in the transitions used, how the story was cut together was pretty good, technically. Story-wise it could have been shored up on the political side since most of the time the prince was away from that action, meaning you had a split in investment--which is on the writer, not the director. The director chose nice camera angles and scene transitions for the script he was given. Also it improved as the story went along. Some of those long cut scenes in 10-14 were really good, even when the prince said nothing. The cuts showed trust in the actor, especially as he upped his game. (It also ranked third overall in TVN History) Most of my objections to the cuts in this drama are that it breaks up, rather than enhances much of the acting with poor choice of camera angles, and the 3-4 second cuts. It's as if the director is either shooting on a really tight schedule, which shouldn't be the case for episodes 1 and 2, or he doesn't trust the actors, which I don't see evidence for doing to them. I'd like the camera to trust the actors slightly more by resting on them. I know they can act, but the camera doesn't trust them at all to hold a monologue, and chooses to cut as they are saying their lines. And by far, the best part is the acting, so shouldn't the camera reflect that in the work by trusting the actors to remember their lines, instead of panning away from them or cutting away as they are saying their lines? All the actors are much more veteran, so I'd trust them to be able to do their work and hold on them to try to up the emotional stakes, rather than cut away every few seconds. (Tighter schedules call for tighter cuts because you don't know if the actors know their lines yet, so you need to do swifter cuts to minimize NG fails.) There are times I think the camera should HOLD on an actor because they are building dramatic tension and then just when I'm connecting, CUT different angle which doesn't enhance anything... which is harder to connect when they are acting their heart out. *shrugs* Maybe he's trying to make it out with shorter cuts because of the whole suspense storyline, but I think like writers choose shorter or longer sentences to punch up action or description, he should be allowing some places to have longer cuts than others so there is emphasis and difference. But from the resume, he's a younger director, so maybe he hasn't figured exactly when the hold, when to cut, etc. Plus it's not cable, so there is less oversight, as well, from what I understand. (JTBC and TvN do a lot more oversight to make sure their brand is consistent.) So I'm guessing I'm just spoiled.

Is it me or are the cuts and cutting really weird on this drama? The acting is pretty good, and the writing is OK, but the directing is kinda leaving me a bit dizzy in terms of cuts. Both internally, within the scene and also between scenes, it feels a lot choppier than I'd expect. Some of the cuts also don't seem to enhance the story and the order of the cuts is a bit confusing at least first the first two episodes. *shrugs* I know most people don't pay attention to this, but I just got off of watching Beauty Inside and 100 Days My Prince, which both have really, really nice cinematography and nice camera angles and seamless cuts (Also are cable shows). So I might just be a bit spoiled, but this feels a bit choppier than usual.

You don't love your actress that much if you're setting her up to get raped. Sorry. No forgiveness for encouraging and abetting rape. You hate that actress in some shape or form. And sadly, this is true to life--sometimes, especially in the past, though I bet it's still going on, some agencies use their actresses as prostitutes. Watch the movie "Norigae". That's not liking, love, or pure "using" that's a form of disgust and purely seeing someone as less human without rights. It's a form of telling her you have power over her--he was getting frustrated with her unwillingness to swim, etc, so I kinda think he was punishing her for her phobia. This is also kinda why I want our lead Ma Seong to be ten times better and cleaner than CEO Kim. To be considerate of her feelings when CEO Kim wasn't, to listen to her wants and needs and work with her, as clearly, CEO Kim wasn't willing to be, to put consent first because she went through a trauma and he should realize through his own traumas that consent becomes the top of his list. To realize tugging her around, figuratively or literally isn't what she needs. I hope the writer knows this... because Ma Sung shouldn't be a degree better than CEO Kim, he should be the OPPOSITE of CEO Kim in writing terms, not a partial foil, but a complete foil, so when CEO Kim goes down, like we know he will, you feel satisfied, vindicated, rather than going WT-- I don't understand--the male lead is a degree of CEO Kim--why did she fall for him again? Because he's rich and has good looks? I get it, though, the usually the teenage crowd likes forceful, tugging around, wall slams, using money to get people's way (all things that irk people who want a long term relationship rather than one where you break up in a few weeks), etc, but the characters aren't teenagers or early twenties types... so the romance being written doesn't fit the age of the characters either. Fluttery romance works more for the idol type dramas. You can get fluttery, BTW, with consent, but it takes a whole lot more work on the author/writer's part to think how to do it. And for the sake of the actors, in general, I think it would be really cool, if they could show Choi Jin Hyeok's soft and caring side of his acting a tad more, rather than using his money as a plot device--rely on the actor. I know he has the capacity--and good writers try to challenge their actors a bit. Soft, caring, etc, doesn't mean he's not clever, a little naughty, it means he chooses the time and place to show those traits to protect and work alongside his love interest. Writers that don't use actors' full potential makes me dislike the writer unless they are a n00b. I kinda also think Song Ha Yoon's range can be pushed a bit. Hoya, however, is doing pretty well. The writer also seems to enjoy that character a whole bunch more than the others in the cast. I wouldn't mind that type as a male lead, flipping the stereotypes, too.

I'm probably in the minority, here, but I'm not fond of the arm grabbing moment in the last episode... because she's saying "What are you doing?" And so on which sounds like "No, don't do that" to me. Makes me wonder if Metoo is fading in Korea. Also not fond of the buying the table stunt either. Her PoV isn't as well built character-wise like his is and so, when he grabs her and she's all doey-eyed later I don't quite buy it. Plus his total interference with her career, even with that best of intentions can still have a negative impact. There isn't enough built around her to justify some of her actions. She needs to be able to push back. When he was dragging her I was like, "Kick him... tug on him." Granted, she wrote on the table, but it's still squinty-eyed. I think he can SHOW her his heart not by taking her place in a TV program, but by supporting her decisions, her agency, her self control, help her emotionally to get through the rough patches. Not by tugging her around like she's a small dog to command, but trying to figure a way to clean up her reputation TOGETHER WITH her. Put their heads together, talk it through, figure things out there was so much missed opportunity in the last episode of trying to get to her thought processes, and also basic character bonding. Throwing in a rival scene and misunderstanding where you could have built up background doesn't sit well with me. He could have used the TV appearance to talk about Gi Bbeum and vouch for her, for example. Instead, it looks like he did it to boost his popularity... and it has an overall negative effect that her, show, even if she's being badly talked about won't get promoted as much. I would like Korea, my country, to do better and give women agency and maybe be a bit more like the recent drama Familiar Wife? Redefine masculinity a bit. Romantic should be CONSENT, boundaries, and trying to understand each other. He hasn't quite shown the capacity for that. He's shown his wealth and other things, but hasn't sat her down and asked her what exactly happened between them. And this severe lack of communication spells disaster in the long run. I DO love the show in other ways, but it's time to flesh her out beyond the struggling actress that works really hard with a family to support. What's her preferences? When will he listen to her and put effort into doing that rather than just headphones, but listen to her heart and desires? Can he aid her to actually getting there, rather than "helping" which is actually hindering her? She needs emotional support badly, and he's failing to really give that to her. If I was her, even if I learned up front that he'd done all of this chivalrous stuff--I'd still be pissed off. He's telling me, I can't handle myself? He's taking away my chance to prove myself to the world by upping me--not once, but twice--that TV appearance could have helped even if I gained anti-fans--not being talked about is worse than being talked about. I'm going to be ticked off at him, even after the misunderstanding is cleared. Stop interfering and taking away my chance to prove I'm a good person. He's the person that dumped me in the middle of a foreign city, and because he didn't show up, won't explain himself, and I got involved as a murder suspect because of this? Then he just waltzes in and thinks I have no control over what I want--has tugged me around with clothing that was way too heavy when he had a car in the first place? From her PoV, she has every right to be angry at him and demand an explanation. He's not doing her any favors, even if the intentions are good. She needs to push back on him a lot more, even if she's attracted to him, so he actually listens to her--then I can believe a good ending. You want partners, not crushes to argue a good ending.

This is the official network's youtube channel, so should be allowed. It's currently stalled out at episode 7 and and needs subbers. Is there anyone who can help out on this series? I can do some English editing until about the end of September, but it's probably better to find a bilingual editor. (My Mandarin is shaky at best). If someone did give credit, etc we could promote soompi.

Does anyone know if Bao Qing is a male or female name? I'm not as familiar with Chinese names to divine it yet (especially with so many dialects and differences). That's the name of the writer. I find often male writers tend to boil female characters wrongly like this cross culturally. This doesn't mean, though that female writers can't write females well or male writers can't write females well, but the first is more like internalization or extreme introvertedness and the second is usually after lots of hard work overcoming stereotypes, etc. (with the exception of Winnie as a director...) I agree, too, on Nick. I kinda liked the fact he was gay in the original--it gave You Qing and the men more depth and a way to contrast with Ding. It also broke some of the Mary Sue effect as well. Original was written by a female writer who went on to write My Dear Boy which had similar themes. (With Ruby Lin).

If you could I'd appreciate it because I can't see why she keeps rebuffing him. @yitiantulong Agree... That sort of yelling doesn't help anyone. He's absorbing a lot of hurt and anger which doesn't belong to him. It's just abusive rather than helpful. Original had a separation, but not a time skip. She needs a crisis and also a reason for why she's acting like she's acting. The gradual and graceful of the original teased it was coming, but I hope they do something to explain her actions because the original didn't need it, but they certainly do here otherwise I won't quite feel this is a good OTP and more a recipe for an abusive relationship. The playing field needs some leveling.