dangermousie: (Fruits Basket: Haru by meganbmoore)
Excerpt from a comment to Ms. Ripley on viki:

plus lee da he is to old for park yoochun...can't the director used another main girl instead of her.....cause i'm starting to not like the drama....beside lee da he keeps on getting rape, like seriously she wants to be touched so much!!!

Nice to know if someone is getting raped and/or molested, it's because they must want it so much! What the fucking fuck!

Oh, and Lee Da Hae is older than Park Yoochun by all of two years! The hideous old hag!!!

Sometimes I want to shake fangirls until their teeth rattle.

Nice to see the woman-hating doesn't change across fandoms.
dangermousie: (Fruits Basket: Haru by meganbmoore)
Excerpt from a comment to Ms. Ripley on viki:

plus lee da he is to old for park yoochun...can't the director used another main girl instead of her.....cause i'm starting to not like the drama....beside lee da he keeps on getting rape, like seriously she wants to be touched so much!!!

Nice to know if someone is getting raped and/or molested, it's because they must want it so much! What the fucking fuck!

Oh, and Lee Da Hae is older than Park Yoochun by all of two years! The hideous old hag!!!

Sometimes I want to shake fangirls until their teeth rattle.

Nice to see the woman-hating doesn't change across fandoms.
dangermousie: (Fruits Basket: Haru by meganbmoore)
Excerpt from a comment to Ms. Ripley on viki:

plus lee da he is to old for park yoochun...can't the director used another main girl instead of her.....cause i'm starting to not like the drama....beside lee da he keeps on getting rape, like seriously she wants to be touched so much!!!

Nice to know if someone is getting raped and/or molested, it's because they must want it so much! What the fucking fuck!

Oh, and Lee Da Hae is older than Park Yoochun by all of two years! The hideous old hag!!!

Sometimes I want to shake fangirls until their teeth rattle.

Nice to see the woman-hating doesn't change across fandoms.
dangermousie: (Default)
Good God!

There is an article on Jezebel purporting to debate whether abortions should be legal after fetal viability date (i.e. is it OK to abort where, if there was a birth, the resulting baby would be able to live, either by himself or with help of machines).

WHAT THE HELL?!?!

While I have complicated feelings on abortion, I do believe that some abortions should be legal - if you know the fetus is non-viable, for example, it seems insane to force a woman to go through full gestation and birth only to deliver a corpse or someone who'd survive for 15 minutes outside the womb. I think those should be OK at any time. I think abortions for pregnancies which are result of rape or incest, or pose a severe health risk to the mother, are also OK. And, unlike pro-lifers, I don't happen to believe life begins at conception, so much as I find them personally morally repugnant absent criteria above, I believe first-trimester abortions should be legal across the board.

BUT. You know what all of the above have in common? NONE OF THEM ARE PERFORMED WHEN THE FETUS IS VIABLE OUTSIDE THE WOMB! Either the fetus in question is inviable period (due to severe defects) or they are performed before the fetus is viable.

If you perform an abortion on a viable-outside-the-womb fetus, you know what that is? That's right, murder. Now, sometimes murder is excusable (in the aforementioned 'you can only save the mother or the child, pick' scenario), but that is not what Jezebel is talking about. The article was arguing 'shouldn't women have choice all the way? Shouldn't they have more time to decide? Why do they have to carry it for an additional month when they want it out now etc etc." BARF. When a fetus is independently viable, it's a person and you don't get to kill a person merely because it's convenient. I am a libertarian, I am all for personal freedoms, but only when they don't impinge on freedoms of others, in this case the freaking live infant. Once that fetus becomes a person, it has rights, a right of not being murdered being one of them. I mean, I like to sleep in every morning but that doesn't mean I can go off and strangle my infant because I have to get up at 7am every day due to her and this is inconvenient! I can't throw her under a bus because taking care of a child is stressful and I hate it (for the record, I don't but this is a hypothetical) or it may cost me a career opportunity or lower my standard of living. You can't just get rid of a person to better yourself.

Seriously, Jezebel. WTF.
dangermousie: (Default)
Good God!

There is an article on Jezebel purporting to debate whether abortions should be legal after fetal viability date (i.e. is it OK to abort where, if there was a birth, the resulting baby would be able to live, either by himself or with help of machines).

WHAT THE HELL?!?!

While I have complicated feelings on abortion, I do believe that some abortions should be legal - if you know the fetus is non-viable, for example, it seems insane to force a woman to go through full gestation and birth only to deliver a corpse or someone who'd survive for 15 minutes outside the womb. I think those should be OK at any time. I think abortions for pregnancies which are result of rape or incest, or pose a severe health risk to the mother, are also OK. And, unlike pro-lifers, I don't happen to believe life begins at conception, so much as I find them personally morally repugnant absent criteria above, I believe first-trimester abortions should be legal across the board.

BUT. You know what all of the above have in common? NONE OF THEM ARE PERFORMED WHEN THE FETUS IS VIABLE OUTSIDE THE WOMB! Either the fetus in question is inviable period (due to severe defects) or they are performed before the fetus is viable.

If you perform an abortion on a viable-outside-the-womb fetus, you know what that is? That's right, murder. Now, sometimes murder is excusable (in the aforementioned 'you can only save the mother or the child, pick' scenario), but that is not what Jezebel is talking about. The article was arguing 'shouldn't women have choice all the way? Shouldn't they have more time to decide? Why do they have to carry it for an additional month when they want it out now etc etc." BARF. When a fetus is independently viable, it's a person and you don't get to kill a person merely because it's convenient. I am a libertarian, I am all for personal freedoms, but only when they don't impinge on freedoms of others, in this case the freaking live infant. Once that fetus becomes a person, it has rights, a right of not being murdered being one of them. I mean, I like to sleep in every morning but that doesn't mean I can go off and strangle my infant because I have to get up at 7am every day due to her and this is inconvenient! I can't throw her under a bus because taking care of a child is stressful and I hate it (for the record, I don't but this is a hypothetical) or it may cost me a career opportunity or lower my standard of living. You can't just get rid of a person to better yourself.

Seriously, Jezebel. WTF.
dangermousie: (Default)
Good God!

There is an article on Jezebel purporting to debate whether abortions should be legal after fetal viability date (i.e. is it OK to abort where, if there was a birth, the resulting baby would be able to live, either by himself or with help of machines).

WHAT THE HELL?!?!

While I have complicated feelings on abortion, I do believe that some abortions should be legal - if you know the fetus is non-viable, for example, it seems insane to force a woman to go through full gestation and birth only to deliver a corpse or someone who'd survive for 15 minutes outside the womb. I think those should be OK at any time. I think abortions for pregnancies which are result of rape or incest, or pose a severe health risk to the mother, are also OK. And, unlike pro-lifers, I don't happen to believe life begins at conception, so much as I find them personally morally repugnant absent criteria above, I believe first-trimester abortions should be legal across the board.

BUT. You know what all of the above have in common? NONE OF THEM ARE PERFORMED WHEN THE FETUS IS VIABLE OUTSIDE THE WOMB! Either the fetus in question is inviable period (due to severe defects) or they are performed before the fetus is viable.

If you perform an abortion on a viable-outside-the-womb fetus, you know what that is? That's right, murder. Now, sometimes murder is excusable (in the aforementioned 'you can only save the mother or the child, pick' scenario), but that is not what Jezebel is talking about. The article was arguing 'shouldn't women have choice all the way? Shouldn't they have more time to decide? Why do they have to carry it for an additional month when they want it out now etc etc." BARF. When a fetus is independently viable, it's a person and you don't get to kill a person merely because it's convenient. I am a libertarian, I am all for personal freedoms, but only when they don't impinge on freedoms of others, in this case the freaking live infant. Once that fetus becomes a person, it has rights, a right of not being murdered being one of them. I mean, I like to sleep in every morning but that doesn't mean I can go off and strangle my infant because I have to get up at 7am every day due to her and this is inconvenient! I can't throw her under a bus because taking care of a child is stressful and I hate it (for the record, I don't but this is a hypothetical) or it may cost me a career opportunity or lower my standard of living. You can't just get rid of a person to better yourself.

Seriously, Jezebel. WTF.
dangermousie: (Default)
I don't follow American entertainment very closely (after all, I already obsess over Korean one and books and I do need to sleep and play with Baby Mousie sometimes) but I was vaguely aware of Angelina Jolie making her directorial debut in a movie which was a love story set during the civil war in former Yugoslavia. "Hmmmm,can be interesting" thought I but that was the extent of it.

Until today, when I learned that "[h]er directorial debut deals with a Bosnian Muslim woman falling for a Serbian soldier who rapes her during the Bosnian war."

I repeat: Her directorial debut deals with a Bosnian Muslim woman falling for a Serbian soldier who rapes her during the Bosnian war.

EXCUSE ME????

THE FUCK???????

Just to make it clear, this isn't supposed to be some hard-hitting look at damages of war. No, this has been escribed as a sweeping star-crossed love story.

Can I barf in the corner now?

Is she going to do a follow-up about a Jewish woman and a SS officer who kills her family but then they fall for each other? Or how about a romantic comedy about a Tutsi widow having to move in with a Hutu militia member who torched her place and killed her neighbors and then they bond?

WHAT THE HELL IS WRONG WITH HER, SERIOUSLY.

I like messed-up love stories, but there is messed-up and there is really sick and disgusting and "how could you even think about this?".

But maybe I am just being a curmudgeon. Who doesn't adore love blossoming between a genocidal rapist and his victim? Awwwwwwww.
dangermousie: (Default)
I don't follow American entertainment very closely (after all, I already obsess over Korean one and books and I do need to sleep and play with Baby Mousie sometimes) but I was vaguely aware of Angelina Jolie making her directorial debut in a movie which was a love story set during the civil war in former Yugoslavia. "Hmmmm,can be interesting" thought I but that was the extent of it.

Until today, when I learned that "[h]er directorial debut deals with a Bosnian Muslim woman falling for a Serbian soldier who rapes her during the Bosnian war."

I repeat: Her directorial debut deals with a Bosnian Muslim woman falling for a Serbian soldier who rapes her during the Bosnian war.

EXCUSE ME????

THE FUCK???????

Just to make it clear, this isn't supposed to be some hard-hitting look at damages of war. No, this has been escribed as a sweeping star-crossed love story.

Can I barf in the corner now?

Is she going to do a follow-up about a Jewish woman and a SS officer who kills her family but then they fall for each other? Or how about a romantic comedy about a Tutsi widow having to move in with a Hutu militia member who torched her place and killed her neighbors and then they bond?

WHAT THE HELL IS WRONG WITH HER, SERIOUSLY.

I like messed-up love stories, but there is messed-up and there is really sick and disgusting and "how could you even think about this?".

But maybe I am just being a curmudgeon. Who doesn't adore love blossoming between a genocidal rapist and his victim? Awwwwwwww.
dangermousie: (Default)
I don't follow American entertainment very closely (after all, I already obsess over Korean one and books and I do need to sleep and play with Baby Mousie sometimes) but I was vaguely aware of Angelina Jolie making her directorial debut in a movie which was a love story set during the civil war in former Yugoslavia. "Hmmmm,can be interesting" thought I but that was the extent of it.

Until today, when I learned that "[h]er directorial debut deals with a Bosnian Muslim woman falling for a Serbian soldier who rapes her during the Bosnian war."

I repeat: Her directorial debut deals with a Bosnian Muslim woman falling for a Serbian soldier who rapes her during the Bosnian war.

EXCUSE ME????

THE FUCK???????

Just to make it clear, this isn't supposed to be some hard-hitting look at damages of war. No, this has been escribed as a sweeping star-crossed love story.

Can I barf in the corner now?

Is she going to do a follow-up about a Jewish woman and a SS officer who kills her family but then they fall for each other? Or how about a romantic comedy about a Tutsi widow having to move in with a Hutu militia member who torched her place and killed her neighbors and then they bond?

WHAT THE HELL IS WRONG WITH HER, SERIOUSLY.

I like messed-up love stories, but there is messed-up and there is really sick and disgusting and "how could you even think about this?".

But maybe I am just being a curmudgeon. Who doesn't adore love blossoming between a genocidal rapist and his victim? Awwwwwwww.
dangermousie: (Pick the Stars: facepalm by meganbmoore)
Ah, and now I remember why I gave up on romance novels - blistering hero hate!

I got lulled into security by reading four romances in a row where the heroes were likeable, treating heroine and others around them with respect, and not in need of reform.

But that's all right.

Things are back to normal with Gaelen Foley's Lord of Fire. What an apt name for the novel because that is precisely what I want to do to the hero - stick him into the fire and have some barbeque while he roasts.

OK, let's get down to this hypothetical. You are a young woman and this is your experience with a guy - you first see him presiding over a disgusting dusgusting orgy during which he drags you off against your will (and you fully believes for raping), sticks a pistol between your eyes, and feels you up everywhere against your will. Even when he finds out you are actually the sister-in-law of his mistress, come to fetch her to her sick child, and have never done anything improper or sexual in your life, he still offers you some sex.

Next morning, he tells you that only one of the two, you or your sister-in-law, can go to the sick kid, because he knows you treasure the child and wants to use your weakness for the kid to get you in his clutches.

OK, in this hypothetical, if you are in any way sane, are you going to (a) assume this is a horrible monster who deserves to be castrated and soon the hero of the piece will appear to help you heat the knives or (b) decide that all of this is OK because he's hot and angsty.

If you picked (a), congrats, you are a normal human being. If you picked (b), my condolences, you are Galen Foley.

I am supposed to believe the heroine feels physically drawn to him after that? In what Universe, unless she is a closet BDSM afficionado with a rape fetish?

How on earth the author expects me to root for them as a couple is beyond me. As it is, there is some evil French spy who supposedly wants to off our "hero" and I keep hoping he will succeed. I mean, when "hero" was relieving his hideous torture at French dude's hands, my reaction was not "poor woobie" but a "serves you right, you bastard!" and a fierce desire that the French Dude do it again.

This is all the more disappointing because the reason I got this sick-making book was because I finished Foley's The Duke and really enjoyed it - the hero *gasp* had morals, was in no need of reform, and actually listened when heroine told him "no".

Now excuse me, I need to go barf.
dangermousie: (Pick the Stars: facepalm by meganbmoore)
Ah, and now I remember why I gave up on romance novels - blistering hero hate!

I got lulled into security by reading four romances in a row where the heroes were likeable, treating heroine and others around them with respect, and not in need of reform.

But that's all right.

Things are back to normal with Gaelen Foley's Lord of Fire. What an apt name for the novel because that is precisely what I want to do to the hero - stick him into the fire and have some barbeque while he roasts.

OK, let's get down to this hypothetical. You are a young woman and this is your experience with a guy - you first see him presiding over a disgusting dusgusting orgy during which he drags you off against your will (and you fully believes for raping), sticks a pistol between your eyes, and feels you up everywhere against your will. Even when he finds out you are actually the sister-in-law of his mistress, come to fetch her to her sick child, and have never done anything improper or sexual in your life, he still offers you some sex.

Next morning, he tells you that only one of the two, you or your sister-in-law, can go to the sick kid, because he knows you treasure the child and wants to use your weakness for the kid to get you in his clutches.

OK, in this hypothetical, if you are in any way sane, are you going to (a) assume this is a horrible monster who deserves to be castrated and soon the hero of the piece will appear to help you heat the knives or (b) decide that all of this is OK because he's hot and angsty.

If you picked (a), congrats, you are a normal human being. If you picked (b), my condolences, you are Galen Foley.

I am supposed to believe the heroine feels physically drawn to him after that? In what Universe, unless she is a closet BDSM afficionado with a rape fetish?

How on earth the author expects me to root for them as a couple is beyond me. As it is, there is some evil French spy who supposedly wants to off our "hero" and I keep hoping he will succeed. I mean, when "hero" was relieving his hideous torture at French dude's hands, my reaction was not "poor woobie" but a "serves you right, you bastard!" and a fierce desire that the French Dude do it again.

This is all the more disappointing because the reason I got this sick-making book was because I finished Foley's The Duke and really enjoyed it - the hero *gasp* had morals, was in no need of reform, and actually listened when heroine told him "no".

Now excuse me, I need to go barf.
dangermousie: (Pick the Stars: facepalm by meganbmoore)
Ah, and now I remember why I gave up on romance novels - blistering hero hate!

I got lulled into security by reading four romances in a row where the heroes were likeable, treating heroine and others around them with respect, and not in need of reform.

But that's all right.

Things are back to normal with Gaelen Foley's Lord of Fire. What an apt name for the novel because that is precisely what I want to do to the hero - stick him into the fire and have some barbeque while he roasts.

OK, let's get down to this hypothetical. You are a young woman and this is your experience with a guy - you first see him presiding over a disgusting dusgusting orgy during which he drags you off against your will (and you fully believes for raping), sticks a pistol between your eyes, and feels you up everywhere against your will. Even when he finds out you are actually the sister-in-law of his mistress, come to fetch her to her sick child, and have never done anything improper or sexual in your life, he still offers you some sex.

Next morning, he tells you that only one of the two, you or your sister-in-law, can go to the sick kid, because he knows you treasure the child and wants to use your weakness for the kid to get you in his clutches.

OK, in this hypothetical, if you are in any way sane, are you going to (a) assume this is a horrible monster who deserves to be castrated and soon the hero of the piece will appear to help you heat the knives or (b) decide that all of this is OK because he's hot and angsty.

If you picked (a), congrats, you are a normal human being. If you picked (b), my condolences, you are Galen Foley.

I am supposed to believe the heroine feels physically drawn to him after that? In what Universe, unless she is a closet BDSM afficionado with a rape fetish?

How on earth the author expects me to root for them as a couple is beyond me. As it is, there is some evil French spy who supposedly wants to off our "hero" and I keep hoping he will succeed. I mean, when "hero" was relieving his hideous torture at French dude's hands, my reaction was not "poor woobie" but a "serves you right, you bastard!" and a fierce desire that the French Dude do it again.

This is all the more disappointing because the reason I got this sick-making book was because I finished Foley's The Duke and really enjoyed it - the hero *gasp* had morals, was in no need of reform, and actually listened when heroine told him "no".

Now excuse me, I need to go barf.
dangermousie: (B&W Chen Lin by scanky_chops)


Unlike with most dramas I check out (where I decide to watch them based on my love for cast or production team, or alternatively interest in the story or excitement from previews), my motivation for checking out Baker King Kim Tak Gu was fairly peculiar - I wanted to see what on earth was in Baker in order to make a drama about the less-than-fascinating topic of baking rivalry and starring no-names, a crazy ratings hit (latest eps brought in close to 40%). Aside from [livejournal.com profile] alexandral, nobody I know was watching it which added to the mystique.

I have just finished the first 3 eps and I can see why it's popular - it's a crazy family saga which is very very easy to watch - I had no problem watching the first three eps (with judicious fast-forwarding) in one sitting. There is no spectacular acting, writing, direction, or cinematography - it is all very unspectacular, but it's not in any way intrusive - it's a very solid kind of mediocrity. A sort of "turn off your brain for a couple of hours a week" type of drama with some addictive elements mixed in.

If it reminds me of any drama it's East of Eden - only replace gangsters and revolutionaries with bakers and patissiers. Don't get me wrong - East of Eden, while flawed, was vastly superior to Baker - for one it had ambitions, for another the story was a lot more interesting, and there was some spectacular acting (Lee Mi Sook alone was a total powerhouse). More importantly, the stakes were greater (what's the worst that can happen in Baker? Someone gets food poisoning from underdone bread?) and I cared for characters - I want a drama to evoke a strong emotional response in me which Baker does not at all.

But the biggest problem for me is not any of that but a certain difference of perception between me and the drama - the one deal-breaker for me is when a drama wants me to view characters one way but I can only view them another (great example is Boys Over Flowers which demanded I see Jun Pyo as a worthy woobie and I only saw him as a selfish coward). And the problem is that the drama has certain premises I cannot accept - such as that the father is OK for sleeping with the maid (when his wife is in the hospital recovering from childbirth, no less) because that gives him a son he wants but the wife is an evil soulless bitch when she sleeps with another man to get a son (only after the husband does btw). Just as we are supposed to view the maid as saintly and wonderful but I can only look at her in disgust - she was fully into sleeping with a married man (there is no hint of him coercing her or anything). We are supposed to think Grandma is a great person, strict but just, even though she is completely heartless to her daughter-in-law because she produces only daughters (this obsession with male heirs makes me sick to start with, especially since the women themselves reinforce the fixation on the male heirs. SICK. Plus, hello, it's a male who brings the y chromosome to the baby, not the wife). After all, Grandma muses that servant would have made a great d-i-l because she has a great soul (read "made a boy"). Yeah right, old biddy! I don't care what kind of soul the wife had to start with, living with someone like you and her husband (who doesn't even bother showing up to see how his daughter is like) would turn anyone into a harpy. I mean, how dare she not be happy the living proof of husband's adultery and rival heir is moving in! How dare her kids not love the newcomer with all their might? And, of course, of course, the servant's son is a sweet saintly genius while the wife's son is an evil monster. Yeah, right. One of the things I loved about EoE is that it went against the whole 'blood will out' or 'blood is most important' belief in so many ways - the son of saintly union leader was brought up by a psycho and became a psycho himself (until his late-in-the-game redemption which still pisses me off). The son of the psycho was brought up by union family and became a revolutionary/helper/etc and, aside from his temporary trip to the dark side, ended the story as a good person. And it was clear in EoE that the protagonist, while he came to love his late-discovered blood brother, would always view the switched brother as the 'real' one and love him the most of his family (enough to die for him, in fact).

Baker, OTOH, has no desire to play with established (and patriarchal) notions - it reinforces them, in fact. (I won't even get into the fact that EoE had some amazing amazing female characters but Baker seems to split theirs into evil monsters and saints).

Basically, entertaining but not special. And not really my bag but I'll watch a few eps more to make sure. I can see why it's a hit though - it's pretty addictive for some reason.
dangermousie: (B&W Chen Lin by scanky_chops)


Unlike with most dramas I check out (where I decide to watch them based on my love for cast or production team, or alternatively interest in the story or excitement from previews), my motivation for checking out Baker King Kim Tak Gu was fairly peculiar - I wanted to see what on earth was in Baker in order to make a drama about the less-than-fascinating topic of baking rivalry and starring no-names, a crazy ratings hit (latest eps brought in close to 40%). Aside from [livejournal.com profile] alexandral, nobody I know was watching it which added to the mystique.

I have just finished the first 3 eps and I can see why it's popular - it's a crazy family saga which is very very easy to watch - I had no problem watching the first three eps (with judicious fast-forwarding) in one sitting. There is no spectacular acting, writing, direction, or cinematography - it is all very unspectacular, but it's not in any way intrusive - it's a very solid kind of mediocrity. A sort of "turn off your brain for a couple of hours a week" type of drama with some addictive elements mixed in.

If it reminds me of any drama it's East of Eden - only replace gangsters and revolutionaries with bakers and patissiers. Don't get me wrong - East of Eden, while flawed, was vastly superior to Baker - for one it had ambitions, for another the story was a lot more interesting, and there was some spectacular acting (Lee Mi Sook alone was a total powerhouse). More importantly, the stakes were greater (what's the worst that can happen in Baker? Someone gets food poisoning from underdone bread?) and I cared for characters - I want a drama to evoke a strong emotional response in me which Baker does not at all.

But the biggest problem for me is not any of that but a certain difference of perception between me and the drama - the one deal-breaker for me is when a drama wants me to view characters one way but I can only view them another (great example is Boys Over Flowers which demanded I see Jun Pyo as a worthy woobie and I only saw him as a selfish coward). And the problem is that the drama has certain premises I cannot accept - such as that the father is OK for sleeping with the maid (when his wife is in the hospital recovering from childbirth, no less) because that gives him a son he wants but the wife is an evil soulless bitch when she sleeps with another man to get a son (only after the husband does btw). Just as we are supposed to view the maid as saintly and wonderful but I can only look at her in disgust - she was fully into sleeping with a married man (there is no hint of him coercing her or anything). We are supposed to think Grandma is a great person, strict but just, even though she is completely heartless to her daughter-in-law because she produces only daughters (this obsession with male heirs makes me sick to start with, especially since the women themselves reinforce the fixation on the male heirs. SICK. Plus, hello, it's a male who brings the y chromosome to the baby, not the wife). After all, Grandma muses that servant would have made a great d-i-l because she has a great soul (read "made a boy"). Yeah right, old biddy! I don't care what kind of soul the wife had to start with, living with someone like you and her husband (who doesn't even bother showing up to see how his daughter is like) would turn anyone into a harpy. I mean, how dare she not be happy the living proof of husband's adultery and rival heir is moving in! How dare her kids not love the newcomer with all their might? And, of course, of course, the servant's son is a sweet saintly genius while the wife's son is an evil monster. Yeah, right. One of the things I loved about EoE is that it went against the whole 'blood will out' or 'blood is most important' belief in so many ways - the son of saintly union leader was brought up by a psycho and became a psycho himself (until his late-in-the-game redemption which still pisses me off). The son of the psycho was brought up by union family and became a revolutionary/helper/etc and, aside from his temporary trip to the dark side, ended the story as a good person. And it was clear in EoE that the protagonist, while he came to love his late-discovered blood brother, would always view the switched brother as the 'real' one and love him the most of his family (enough to die for him, in fact).

Baker, OTOH, has no desire to play with established (and patriarchal) notions - it reinforces them, in fact. (I won't even get into the fact that EoE had some amazing amazing female characters but Baker seems to split theirs into evil monsters and saints).

Basically, entertaining but not special. And not really my bag but I'll watch a few eps more to make sure. I can see why it's a hit though - it's pretty addictive for some reason.
dangermousie: (B&W Chen Lin by scanky_chops)


Unlike with most dramas I check out (where I decide to watch them based on my love for cast or production team, or alternatively interest in the story or excitement from previews), my motivation for checking out Baker King Kim Tak Gu was fairly peculiar - I wanted to see what on earth was in Baker in order to make a drama about the less-than-fascinating topic of baking rivalry and starring no-names, a crazy ratings hit (latest eps brought in close to 40%). Aside from [livejournal.com profile] alexandral, nobody I know was watching it which added to the mystique.

I have just finished the first 3 eps and I can see why it's popular - it's a crazy family saga which is very very easy to watch - I had no problem watching the first three eps (with judicious fast-forwarding) in one sitting. There is no spectacular acting, writing, direction, or cinematography - it is all very unspectacular, but it's not in any way intrusive - it's a very solid kind of mediocrity. A sort of "turn off your brain for a couple of hours a week" type of drama with some addictive elements mixed in.

If it reminds me of any drama it's East of Eden - only replace gangsters and revolutionaries with bakers and patissiers. Don't get me wrong - East of Eden, while flawed, was vastly superior to Baker - for one it had ambitions, for another the story was a lot more interesting, and there was some spectacular acting (Lee Mi Sook alone was a total powerhouse). More importantly, the stakes were greater (what's the worst that can happen in Baker? Someone gets food poisoning from underdone bread?) and I cared for characters - I want a drama to evoke a strong emotional response in me which Baker does not at all.

But the biggest problem for me is not any of that but a certain difference of perception between me and the drama - the one deal-breaker for me is when a drama wants me to view characters one way but I can only view them another (great example is Boys Over Flowers which demanded I see Jun Pyo as a worthy woobie and I only saw him as a selfish coward). And the problem is that the drama has certain premises I cannot accept - such as that the father is OK for sleeping with the maid (when his wife is in the hospital recovering from childbirth, no less) because that gives him a son he wants but the wife is an evil soulless bitch when she sleeps with another man to get a son (only after the husband does btw). Just as we are supposed to view the maid as saintly and wonderful but I can only look at her in disgust - she was fully into sleeping with a married man (there is no hint of him coercing her or anything). We are supposed to think Grandma is a great person, strict but just, even though she is completely heartless to her daughter-in-law because she produces only daughters (this obsession with male heirs makes me sick to start with, especially since the women themselves reinforce the fixation on the male heirs. SICK. Plus, hello, it's a male who brings the y chromosome to the baby, not the wife). After all, Grandma muses that servant would have made a great d-i-l because she has a great soul (read "made a boy"). Yeah right, old biddy! I don't care what kind of soul the wife had to start with, living with someone like you and her husband (who doesn't even bother showing up to see how his daughter is like) would turn anyone into a harpy. I mean, how dare she not be happy the living proof of husband's adultery and rival heir is moving in! How dare her kids not love the newcomer with all their might? And, of course, of course, the servant's son is a sweet saintly genius while the wife's son is an evil monster. Yeah, right. One of the things I loved about EoE is that it went against the whole 'blood will out' or 'blood is most important' belief in so many ways - the son of saintly union leader was brought up by a psycho and became a psycho himself (until his late-in-the-game redemption which still pisses me off). The son of the psycho was brought up by union family and became a revolutionary/helper/etc and, aside from his temporary trip to the dark side, ended the story as a good person. And it was clear in EoE that the protagonist, while he came to love his late-discovered blood brother, would always view the switched brother as the 'real' one and love him the most of his family (enough to die for him, in fact).

Baker, OTOH, has no desire to play with established (and patriarchal) notions - it reinforces them, in fact. (I won't even get into the fact that EoE had some amazing amazing female characters but Baker seems to split theirs into evil monsters and saints).

Basically, entertaining but not special. And not really my bag but I'll watch a few eps more to make sure. I can see why it's a hit though - it's pretty addictive for some reason.
dangermousie: (Default)
You have no idea how many posts hating the heroine of Bad Guy I have seen!

OMG, the evil gold-digger, how dare she manipulate Guy A or not jump into Guy B's arms. Blah blah evil horrible abomination. I have noticed this tendency - unless the heroine is an angelic being wholly devoted to the hero, fangirls tear her down like she's been killing babies.

WTF!!!!

One of the two main guys in Bad Guy is ruining the lives of innocent people in order to get revenge. It's OK he is seducing the woman he feels nothing for and actively wrecking her marriage so as to get closer to his goal. It's OK that at the same time he is courting that woman's young sister. It's OK he's tried to drown someone. After all, he's hot.

The other of the two main guys is spoiled, immature, treats the help like lesser beings without even thinking about it, acts out and creates a hell of collateral damage. It's OK one of his tantrums led to his then-girlfriend killing herself. It's OK he ruined a priceless work of art. It's OK he jeopardized the job and caused humiliation of the woman he likes. After all, he's hot.

Seriously, WTF, fandom????

I can't say the heroine is a praiseworthy human being but she is miles better than the two male characters. Yet, of course they are loved woobies because they are sexy guys and she is an evil harpy because she is a woman.

The hell?

I love the two guys to bits but heroine is a saint compared to them.
dangermousie: (Default)
You have no idea how many posts hating the heroine of Bad Guy I have seen!

OMG, the evil gold-digger, how dare she manipulate Guy A or not jump into Guy B's arms. Blah blah evil horrible abomination. I have noticed this tendency - unless the heroine is an angelic being wholly devoted to the hero, fangirls tear her down like she's been killing babies.

WTF!!!!

One of the two main guys in Bad Guy is ruining the lives of innocent people in order to get revenge. It's OK he is seducing the woman he feels nothing for and actively wrecking her marriage so as to get closer to his goal. It's OK that at the same time he is courting that woman's young sister. It's OK he's tried to drown someone. After all, he's hot.

The other of the two main guys is spoiled, immature, treats the help like lesser beings without even thinking about it, acts out and creates a hell of collateral damage. It's OK one of his tantrums led to his then-girlfriend killing herself. It's OK he ruined a priceless work of art. It's OK he jeopardized the job and caused humiliation of the woman he likes. After all, he's hot.

Seriously, WTF, fandom????

I can't say the heroine is a praiseworthy human being but she is miles better than the two male characters. Yet, of course they are loved woobies because they are sexy guys and she is an evil harpy because she is a woman.

The hell?

I love the two guys to bits but heroine is a saint compared to them.
dangermousie: (Default)
You have no idea how many posts hating the heroine of Bad Guy I have seen!

OMG, the evil gold-digger, how dare she manipulate Guy A or not jump into Guy B's arms. Blah blah evil horrible abomination. I have noticed this tendency - unless the heroine is an angelic being wholly devoted to the hero, fangirls tear her down like she's been killing babies.

WTF!!!!

One of the two main guys in Bad Guy is ruining the lives of innocent people in order to get revenge. It's OK he is seducing the woman he feels nothing for and actively wrecking her marriage so as to get closer to his goal. It's OK that at the same time he is courting that woman's young sister. It's OK he's tried to drown someone. After all, he's hot.

The other of the two main guys is spoiled, immature, treats the help like lesser beings without even thinking about it, acts out and creates a hell of collateral damage. It's OK one of his tantrums led to his then-girlfriend killing herself. It's OK he ruined a priceless work of art. It's OK he jeopardized the job and caused humiliation of the woman he likes. After all, he's hot.

Seriously, WTF, fandom????

I can't say the heroine is a praiseworthy human being but she is miles better than the two male characters. Yet, of course they are loved woobies because they are sexy guys and she is an evil harpy because she is a woman.

The hell?

I love the two guys to bits but heroine is a saint compared to them.
dangermousie: (EoE: YR by meganbmoore)
First off have some pretty which is not to blame for insane fangirls and helps me to calm down.



And another:



1...2...3...RANT

Ahhh, fandom, how I wish I could say you surprised me with your vitriol towards the heroine because she isn't worshipping at the feet of your lust object.

I made the mistake of leaving comments on when watching ep 7 of Summer Desire on viikii. If there are people more idiotic than youtube commenters, I believe I found them.

The amount of sheer rage towards the heroine was...spectacular. Oh, really, fangirls? You think the heroine is a "golddigger bitch?" And you think she should suffer suffer suffer.

Has she killed someone? Cheated on the father of her 10 children who's been earning their keep by backbreaking labor? Abused a cat?

No.

Half-mad with grief due to the deaths of her parents and her brother's critical condition, she dumped her boyfriend and was very brutal about it because she blamed him for her family's accident (perhaps not too rationally but understandably - he set a chain of events in motion that eventually led to the car wreck).

And then, 5+ years later when they meet again, she's commited an even more grievous sin of not wanting to hook up with him again - she has the temerity of being in a dating relationship with someone else.

Oh, the WHORE OF BABYLON!

You know, FRELL that.

You know, fangirls, just because you want to bang the guy like a drum, does not make it a cardinal sin for the heroine to not crawl over broken glass to kneel in front of him.

Also - I fail to see anyone frothing at the mouth at all the questionable things the two male heroes of this do. But, you know, that's different - after all they are hot guys!

UGH UGH UGH UGH UGH.

To make self feel better, have some caps from ep 6 since ep 7 is only out streaming (side note - mmmmmm, Ou Chen's grovelling = so yummy).

I am sorry, but I am Xiamo/Luo Xi shipper for good )

Have a triangle mv for the drama, spoilers only through the first 5 eps.

dangermousie: (EoE: YR by meganbmoore)
First off have some pretty which is not to blame for insane fangirls and helps me to calm down.



And another:



1...2...3...RANT

Ahhh, fandom, how I wish I could say you surprised me with your vitriol towards the heroine because she isn't worshipping at the feet of your lust object.

I made the mistake of leaving comments on when watching ep 7 of Summer Desire on viikii. If there are people more idiotic than youtube commenters, I believe I found them.

The amount of sheer rage towards the heroine was...spectacular. Oh, really, fangirls? You think the heroine is a "golddigger bitch?" And you think she should suffer suffer suffer.

Has she killed someone? Cheated on the father of her 10 children who's been earning their keep by backbreaking labor? Abused a cat?

No.

Half-mad with grief due to the deaths of her parents and her brother's critical condition, she dumped her boyfriend and was very brutal about it because she blamed him for her family's accident (perhaps not too rationally but understandably - he set a chain of events in motion that eventually led to the car wreck).

And then, 5+ years later when they meet again, she's commited an even more grievous sin of not wanting to hook up with him again - she has the temerity of being in a dating relationship with someone else.

Oh, the WHORE OF BABYLON!

You know, FRELL that.

You know, fangirls, just because you want to bang the guy like a drum, does not make it a cardinal sin for the heroine to not crawl over broken glass to kneel in front of him.

Also - I fail to see anyone frothing at the mouth at all the questionable things the two male heroes of this do. But, you know, that's different - after all they are hot guys!

UGH UGH UGH UGH UGH.

To make self feel better, have some caps from ep 6 since ep 7 is only out streaming (side note - mmmmmm, Ou Chen's grovelling = so yummy).

I am sorry, but I am Xiamo/Luo Xi shipper for good )

Have a triangle mv for the drama, spoilers only through the first 5 eps.

Profile

dangermousie: (Default)
dangermousie

November 2012

S M T W T F S
     1 2 3
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
252627282930 

Syndicate

RSS Atom

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Apr. 23rd, 2017 11:40 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios