I guess that depends on what you don't like about him in the first two episodes?
He thinks highly of himself and his skills which makes him come off as whiny, with a bad attitude, and unable to do his job well unless he thinks it will move him towards a promotion/make him look good.
Does the ML improve as a character in Episodes 3 and 4 (aka does he get more likeable)?
I'm not asking if he's hot/sexy or any of that as I'm seeing plenty of comments regarding that department, 😅 but not much about his character arc so far.
After reading the comments, I'm worried this is getting considerably more soapy than I guess I was anticipating.
The spoiler tag is for things that have not yet aired.
But how do you determine how long (as far as time passing) until it's no longer a spoiler? Two hours after it airs, a whole day, a week? It's so subjective. I think it should generally be for plot twists and big events in the story any time they are talked about. It's not like everyone watching dramas can watch each episode immediately after they air. Only people with no life can do that. 😅
Using yhis logic, only people watching dramas as they drop can watch dramas spoiler-free? I think that's kind of awful--some people want to get a sense for what the drama's like without having key plot points spoiled week or months or years after it's aired when they stumble on a new show to watch. They can't watch spoiler free?
I wonder why so many A-list stars are places as 2 ML like this and Kim Bum in Sold Out on You. Love this drama…
I don't get all the fuss about the 2ML here. He's been nothing remarkable for me so far. Maybe people are projecting his roles from other projects onto this one? 🤷♀️ From the first two episodes he barely made an impression on me.
Shin Hae Sun is my fav kdrama actress. Can people tell me is it worth watching? Like how is the chemistry b/w…
For this role she is exuding similar energy to other characters she's played, but I've never seen her play a character in this type of role necessarily (in a business executive position). I think she's doing great, but she's not doing anything groundbreaking or new (but she's doing great and obviously does well in this type of role so I'm really liking her so far).
The main leads have good chemistry in a comedic sort of way, so far. Currently they're at odds at work (at least that's how the ML interprets their interactions currently). The ML is kind of having a hard time, and not at his best. 😅 No romance on the horizon really at the moment, but clearly they're headed in that direction.
The two episodes were light-hearted but clearly, the writer is hinting at the mess that's about to come. To me…
Completely agree with your assessment of the ML. He's relatable, but clearly has some growing to do, and she's giving him opportunities galore 😅 (and I think it's because she sees some potential/good stuff in him).
I'm used to MLs playing roles like hers and it's fun how they're playing with the tropes and having a woman in this "ML-like" role instead. I find it really refreshing because it lands differently when a woman is placed in this context. It highlights the dynamics between everyone in a new way.
In contrast, I also like how they're giving the ML kind of the typical FL role here but incorporating how differently it feels/lands when a man is in this context. Unlike an FL in this role, he clearly thinks certain work is beneath him (I find you won't tend to see a woman portrayed that way because women are used to doing work that's "beneath" men; many societies don't bat an eye at this concept). This emphasis wouldn't come through as much if the ML and FL roles were reversed (i.e. the ML was the executive, and the FL was the assistant manager), because this very likely wouldn't have been her first rodeo with that kind of treatment. 😅
Anyway, I'm basically enjoying the way this is subverting tropes to do some commentary. 😉
Interesting, other than her demoting the ML without explaining why (she clearly has a hidden reason), I thought…
I don't think we can assume yet that the FL actually had an issue with the way the ML handled that stairwell situation. From his perspective she's targeting him by moving him to another team (doing the same job in a different context) because she thought he handled it poorly (again, he's reading into that and assuming she thought he was a player), but we don't actually know if she actually is targeting him or if that is how she saw the situation at all. She could have moved him for other reasons not yet disclosed. She totally has the ability to get him exposed for what he did (if she thought it was a problem), yet she didn't expose him.
At what point to you think she bullies the ML (or other employees)?
I saw it (not as suggestive) but as her keeping him from talking further because wasn't that right after he crossed the line and started getting way too personal to be professional also (due to being drunk)? It's maybe not an ideal response from her, but I wouldn't describe it as bullying.
If the scenario was reversed it would potentially be more suggestive because of what putting something in a woman's mouth more visually mimics (which doesn't have the same equivalent when you switch the genders in this scenario).
I have no idea who came up with the idea of work dinners (they were clearly not people thinking about the good of their employees) where everyone drinks a ton and has the potential to get drunk. It's a recipe for disaster and should not be a thing. 😅 Let the poor overworked people get home to their families and let them have some free time and escape from their intense work environment instead of prolonging it in really unhealthy ways! 🤦♀️
Well, Did it ? as a Tried and dropped at one episode guy, I am curious !!!
We are about halfway; it took me a little while to warm up to it and some of the characters, but I am liking it more and more. The ML's dynamic with his teenage parents is absolutely adorable, and I think it's really fun to see a child learning how to have compassion on and empathy with his parents and their own young person struggles; he has a unique perspective into what shaped them into what they become as adults, and the way he pulls for them and roots for them and fights for them kind of adorably reverses their roles in the past (he plays the role of the parent neither of them had).
I love the deaf component as well as they've been addressing issues of human dignity surrounding it throughout the story, too. Enjoying it now, for sure!
Interesting take. I would have loved to engage you in responding to my query below, but I can also respond here,…
I really like the app, too. It's way more convenient and I'm not on my laptop enough to use the browser much (and I hate the ads on the site when I use a browser 😅).
The rating system on MDL is just for fun, and shouldn't be taken too seriously.The MDL rating system is such that…
Interesting take. I would have loved to engage you in responding to my query below, but I can also respond here, too. 😉
Also, based on this logic I wonder why MDL offers an app version of the site, then? 🤔 I see almost no ads on it at all, and that's why I moved to it. Do you think most MDL users use laptops/computers to access this site on a browser?
Also, I was thinking as viewers that rating thoughtfully is an extension of appreciation for what the creators have done, and helps other viewers have a more accurate experience when curating their choices. It's possible to have fun AND be thoughtful, don't you think?
I think the reason people get frustrated with very exaggerated ratings (low or high) is because it's kind of similar to grading, say, an essay.
If a student writes a complete essay with all the required criteria and has some good features (they have some quotes they cite, they have the required number of paragraphs/words/pages required and have a reference list and some evidence included), but the essay is poorly written and poorly argued, they shouldn't get graded with a super low score because they met a certain threshold that means they should be rewarded for a certain level of effort (a student like that would never get below a 50% or 60% because that would be completely denying all these features that were required to make it into an essay at all--if you were that student, you would want to be rewarded for doing that work, yes?). They'll probably get a D or low C, and that's deserved because Bs are reserved for students who did a decent job, and As are for students who exceeded expectations.
I think dramas with good components (funny moments, good cinematography, decent acting for some or many of the actors, a complete script and a few funny or sweet moments and a fairly coherent story with major flaws or plot holes or frustrating bits, etc. should get at least a 6 (similar to the essay).
There's too much that went into it to deserve a 1 or 2, and I think almost nothing in the drama world deserves a score like 1 or 2. In my mind, a 6 is very bad, just like an essay that's 60% is bad (and technically a failing grade), but anything less than that would be ignoring all the creativity and work that went into the other parts that met a certain threshold of criteria for a drama to exist at all.
If we apply this analogy to the other extreme, if you give every essay an A, even though some are much worse than others, that is frustrating, too. That denies all the aspects of excellence that some essays (aka dramas) have that others don't and is unfairly rewarding poor work with a score they didn't truly deserve.
The big difference between essays and dramas is that many people work on dramas. So many work like dogs to create a good product (even if it ends up being awful) and to rate anything that low just completely dismisses all of that work and effort (imo).
Obviously some think of a rating as a scale of enjoyment (and this is another way a drama differs from an essay--one is specifically meant to entertain!), so people just rate based on: did I like it? Was it meh? Did I hate it?
I think this a super important factor as well, of course, but I think for a score to be thoughtful and also helpful as an indicator of quality and enjoyment, some balance needs to be struck between these elements (quality and enjoyment), and because so much work goes into the quality AND the enjoyment of a drama, some credit needs to be given for reaching a threshold of quality, even if we found it super unenjoyable.
I'm not asking if he's hot/sexy or any of that as I'm seeing plenty of comments regarding that department, 😅 but not much about his character arc so far.
After reading the comments, I'm worried this is getting considerably more soapy than I guess I was anticipating.
Using yhis logic, only people watching dramas as they drop can watch dramas spoiler-free? I think that's kind of awful--some people want to get a sense for what the drama's like without having key plot points spoiled week or months or years after it's aired when they stumble on a new show to watch. They can't watch spoiler free?
The main leads have good chemistry in a comedic sort of way, so far. Currently they're at odds at work (at least that's how the ML interprets their interactions currently). The ML is kind of having a hard time, and not at his best. 😅 No romance on the horizon really at the moment, but clearly they're headed in that direction.
I'm used to MLs playing roles like hers and it's fun how they're playing with the tropes and having a woman in this "ML-like" role instead. I find it really refreshing because it lands differently when a woman is placed in this context. It highlights the dynamics between everyone in a new way.
In contrast, I also like how they're giving the ML kind of the typical FL role here but incorporating how differently it feels/lands when a man is in this context. Unlike an FL in this role, he clearly thinks certain work is beneath him (I find you won't tend to see a woman portrayed that way because women are used to doing work that's "beneath" men; many societies don't bat an eye at this concept). This emphasis wouldn't come through as much if the ML and FL roles were reversed (i.e. the ML was the executive, and the FL was the assistant manager), because this very likely wouldn't have been her first rodeo with that kind of treatment. 😅
Anyway, I'm basically enjoying the way this is subverting tropes to do some commentary. 😉
If the scenario was reversed it would potentially be more suggestive because of what putting something in a woman's mouth more visually mimics (which doesn't have the same equivalent when you switch the genders in this scenario).
I have no idea who came up with the idea of work dinners (they were clearly not people thinking about the good of their employees) where everyone drinks a ton and has the potential to get drunk. It's a recipe for disaster and should not be a thing. 😅 Let the poor overworked people get home to their families and let them have some free time and escape from their intense work environment instead of prolonging it in really unhealthy ways! 🤦♀️
I love the deaf component as well as they've been addressing issues of human dignity surrounding it throughout the story, too. Enjoying it now, for sure!
Also, based on this logic I wonder why MDL offers an app version of the site, then? 🤔 I see almost no ads on it at all, and that's why I moved to it. Do you think most MDL users use laptops/computers to access this site on a browser?
Also, I was thinking as viewers that rating thoughtfully is an extension of appreciation for what the creators have done, and helps other viewers have a more accurate experience when curating their choices. It's possible to have fun AND be thoughtful, don't you think?
If a student writes a complete essay with all the required criteria and has some good features (they have some quotes they cite, they have the required number of paragraphs/words/pages required and have a reference list and some evidence included), but the essay is poorly written and poorly argued, they shouldn't get graded with a super low score because they met a certain threshold that means they should be rewarded for a certain level of effort (a student like that would never get below a 50% or 60% because that would be completely denying all these features that were required to make it into an essay at all--if you were that student, you would want to be rewarded for doing that work, yes?). They'll probably get a D or low C, and that's deserved because Bs are reserved for students who did a decent job, and As are for students who exceeded expectations.
I think dramas with good components (funny moments, good cinematography, decent acting for some or many of the actors, a complete script and a few funny or sweet moments and a fairly coherent story with major flaws or plot holes or frustrating bits, etc. should get at least a 6 (similar to the essay).
There's too much that went into it to deserve a 1 or 2, and I think almost nothing in the drama world deserves a score like 1 or 2. In my mind, a 6 is very bad, just like an essay that's 60% is bad (and technically a failing grade), but anything less than that would be ignoring all the creativity and work that went into the other parts that met a certain threshold of criteria for a drama to exist at all.
If we apply this analogy to the other extreme, if you give every essay an A, even though some are much worse than others, that is frustrating, too. That denies all the aspects of excellence that some essays (aka dramas) have that others don't and is unfairly rewarding poor work with a score they didn't truly deserve.
The big difference between essays and dramas is that many people work on dramas. So many work like dogs to create a good product (even if it ends up being awful) and to rate anything that low just completely dismisses all of that work and effort (imo).
Obviously some think of a rating as a scale of enjoyment (and this is another way a drama differs from an essay--one is specifically meant to entertain!), so people just rate based on: did I like it? Was it meh? Did I hate it?
I think this a super important factor as well, of course, but I think for a score to be thoughtful and also helpful as an indicator of quality and enjoyment, some balance needs to be struck between these elements (quality and enjoyment), and because so much work goes into the quality AND the enjoyment of a drama, some credit needs to be given for reaching a threshold of quality, even if we found it super unenjoyable.
What do you all think?