"HAVE YOU NO BRAIN CELLS?" "IT SAYS MELON" If youāre going to insult someoneās intelligence, at least make sure your grammar and spelling doesnāt prove the opposite.
You know similar shows about falling in the script, show FL having a tragic ending that is done by the ML. Maybe…
No cold ML in this travel script shows is a common thing. you can find it in the rec or just a search of these kind of shows you'll see it's a common thing. On the other hand cold ML are common in c dramas but they're not really cold, they show it as a cover, if not that they suddenly become good with no sense and respect over the personality of the character. And they really never use and discard the FL.
I didn't know any of the actors and I'd watched maybe five period idol dramas when I started this, also I don't…
You know similar shows about falling in the script, show FL having a tragic ending that is done by the ML. Maybe that was true about some older probably non idol chinese drama shows but now it's really incorrect. Cold MLs are not really cold, bad, ruthless as it's shown in the default script. By the way do you have good knowledge of music? If I ask about the name of some of them can you tell me? Maybe not this show, though? It's already good to know the instruments used in it too.
That's totally alright. The problem is Liu Yu Ning not you. He's always the same. I have watched 5 of his dramas,…
From the first moment, I talked about rangeāand I meant range in acting. You, however, thought I meant range in roles, and you kept insisting on that point. Later, when you noticed that LYN has played some modern dramas, you suddenly shifted your wording: āWhere did I call it ārangeā?ā āSo his ārangeā is costume-drama soldier.ā āI never claimed LYN had great range.ā āIn contemporary roles ā¦ his range is greater than my experience.ā āAt least you got it straight that you are the one going on about ārange.āā
All of these show that you were the one treating ārangeā as ārange in roles,ā and you even accused me of inventing my own definition. You got the meaning now and started attacking me, Do you even get what I mean or is it intentional? I never argued with you over who's making it about range, idiot. While ārange in rolesā is only one aspect of range in acting. From the start I wasnāt the one putting words in your mouth (this is another distorted jab for personal attacking)āI was trying to make it clear that I wasnāt talking about ārange in roles.āItās frustrating, because a simple search would have clarified it. Well first you don't even mention his words and now this changing what he said. Let me bring proof:
Maybe those critiques can be found if you wash away the lens "he does get a lot of hate for no reason". I never made claims about LYNās real-life personality. You brought that up first with: āYou only have to see how goofy he is in real life.āI simply asked a question about it. Donāt attach two unrelated points as one argument.
I see no reason to keep explaining myself about his improvement over the years or to see how acting is measured. It's clear either you struggle with tone and text or just playing a fool.
I already explained the so called personal attacks you accuse me of. They are NOT personal attacks, so I'm not the one who started in first. It's not a "IN KIND" reply from your part where you used these three terms as playing victim while you clearly made it all about mocking me.
"Personal insults and throwing up straw man arguments", "about my standards, which you know nothing of", " What is a personal attack is insulting MY standards", "so try to keep it on topic instead of relying on personal attacks", "LOL! Darling..."Ł "you don't know anything about me, so try to keep it on topic instead of relying on personal attacks",, "you really have no grounds to comment, except as an outsider", "aren't the sole arbiter of quality", "you volunteered to make it so", "Please move on to whatever high altitude drama that meets your criteria", ""why subject yourself, and us, to your disdain".
The clear intent behind them is crystal clear. If you don't call the last two making it about me, what are they?
That's totally alright. The problem is Liu Yu Ning not you. He's always the same. I have watched 5 of his dramas,…
This is pathetic."They all have poor scripts, acting is almost on the same level due to poor character development". I left a comma which means PAUSE and due is a clear continuation. while you said ""ALL Chinese ... poor scripts" and acting"", "ALL these dramas have poor scripts and acting", who's putting words in one's mouth? "How's YOUR eyesight and memory doing?". You even mock me.
Douban is not some audience review site, it's known for being critical, so I'm not assuming. In other words it's not my OPINION in your language. Which I don't think you'll get. I also didn't claim Douban is an audience review site. which is another words is my mouth. You'd see their critiques if you have an account and I suppose you do since you know everything about they say about this drama and him. Audience review sites are like MDL, WETV and IQIYI rating numbers.
This is playing ignorant, you clearly get what I mean. Storytelling is the tool of the supposed theme. World building is not only what you say. It's clear the drama has a main plot line, which requires narrative framing and thus what I brought. And I didn't argue about those themes I'm talking about flaws of this drama. But it's clear you showed there is some storytelling here. It's not a documentary so among it's meta commentary it needs to have a substance. What a writer writes in a drama or movie is not Nature's law. It is not religious order that can't be defied. we can criticize and show it's flaws. This way of justification of ridiculous. Your avoiding what said and twisting my words to your benefit.
"I recognized there were clever jokes about A Journey to Love." Oh Did you then why when I asked, you said: " I don't think it has anything to do with A Journey to Love, but I could be wrong. And then changed to "There's lots of references from A Journey to Love..". to prove you knew about it? You don't have to use these dirty tricks to avoid admitting loss. By this action you've shown what kind of person you are. You'd change everything to prove your right. This is very much projection and exclusionary authority here. You clearly need the satisfactory of emotional displacement
That's totally alright. The problem is Liu Yu Ning not you. He's always the same. I have watched 5 of his dramas,…
Iām talking about his range in acting, not his range of roles (š¤¦just Google it ā what a distorted riposte). His portrayal of princes/generals should be far more different than just changes in dialogue and visuals. Itās about his ability to show layered emotions, to speak through his posture, inner world, and improvisations. Until now, it has been recycled expressions, the same flat voice, and surfaceālevel delivery.
Iām sure others can see your double standards. Accusing me of dishonesty or badāfaith debating, and questioning my sincerity or intelligence, is ironic. I merely said, āsays more about your standards than his acting.ā This isnāt inherently pejorative ā itās an observation. Framing it as a personal attack misrepresents what I actually said. Donāt play the victim here. ā...even you can play...ā is a rhetorical dig aimed at the simplicity of a role archetype, not a personal attack. I called you obsessed because 11 days had already passed ā the conversation was stale unless you were oddly motivated to revive it either purely out of fan loyalty or out of a habit of arguing.
āThis is even more nonsenseā? I said he said it himself (want the link?)ā apparently, you know it better than he does. Similar mentions to mine have definitely sparked criticism in China and better than mine ( you canāt call it all hatred). Just because you know Chinese and haven't heard them doesn't make them discreditable. Youāre not the representative of domestic audiences of this drama. Itās difficult to play LS because he wears a mask ā an actor needs to convey emotion through tone changes, body language, and sometimes just a gaze. That doesnāt justify his weak portrayal; it highlights it. Some roles might be close to an actor's personally, but thatās not true for the majority of roles an actor plays. LYN is a singer and entrepreneur first. Over time, he has learned how to entertain crowds in his own style. You canāt possibly know his true personal life to compare it with his onāscreen performance.
Heās clearly shown improvement over the years ā as his fans call out ā but thatās not in question; the quantity is. Imagine being in this industry for almost ten years and still staying the same. What a shame! He definitely improves like other people. Heās been the male lead in several S/S+ dramas. To rise, he needs to prove himself promising enough to secure those roles. The role of his popularity is undeniable here way more than his acting proof (it's not groundbreaking in anyway), if that's the only side of the story. Now that's not as under the microscope when heās in a supporting role, as being the male lead, heās the spotlight of the show ā the one with the most screen time. Since everything is considered my opinion, for the definition of āactingā and how acting is measured and criticized, you can watch ę¼åčÆ·å°±ä½ ē¬¬äøå£.
Personal attacking is when you belittle, mock, dismiss, mischaracterize, and question someoneās credibility instead of addressing their points; imply they are selfāimportant or ignorant ā just like youāve been doing now, just like what you have done.
That's totally alright. The problem is Liu Yu Ning not you. He's always the same. I have watched 5 of his dramas,…
Oh, did I? First, you started making it about yourself, and now about me. I talked about LYNās acting and this drama. Discussing my viewing habits is an evasive maneuver to avoid whatās really being discussed. Iām going to bring up your āpersonal attacksā ā the very ones you accuse me of.
Your tone here is dismissive and twisted, aimed at belittling me. What I brought up were common critiques surrounding idol dramas. Itās not just my OPINION. I didnāt say āpoor acting.ā Are you going to change whatās right in front of your eyes too? Labeling what I said about idol dramas as absolutes, or calling them ānot criticism,ā doesnāt weaken the points they partly make about industry issues ā which is what the drama points out too, even if the term is exaggerated. The numbers here are symbolic. On what grounds do you deny it? I didnāt bring statistics to prove it, neither you did to deny it, it's just your drivel.
Audience review sites donāt consider anything critical; theyāre filled with fans who post favorable reviews. They are not valid sources for discussion, and we canāt call every critic a hater or anti.
Selective framing. As far as Iāve seen, most dramas try to convey a message (though some are only speculated by fans). This drama also hints at a few things, but the storytelling is a different topic. Itās about the foundation of the script and the worldābuilding. The meta commentary, cultural and insider nuance are only a part of the colors and designs. Pretending not to get what I mean is "intentional".
Underdeveloped sideācharacter arcs, unreasonable sudden shifts in characters (CGH, the emperor, NR, even the FL, and the cold NH only to burst out later when needed), the overāidealized story of NH, uneven pacing, simplified villain motivations and palace intrigue, favoritism in character intelligence (notably CGH and CL), noticeable loss of humor, plot holes, unused character potential (especially The Nightwalkers, SH, CGH as SML, LS) ā these are not āoutsiderā or āoddā views.
These are flaws every critical rating platform like Douban can point out. Maleācentric narratives, illogical romance, industry casting realities, SML syndrome, the artifice of fixed narrative roles, and predictable tropes, etc., are things that can be understood after a fair share of watching ā or simply by being told directly.
You donāt know anything about the clever jokes the drama played with the controversies around A Journey to Love. So stop acting like youāre the one with exclusionary authority and knowledge here. Itās just bloated, condescending gatekeeping meant to disqualify my words instead of addressing them.
Well simply say I left a link at the first of the batch of photos. I didn't say you own them, made them, or created them. I just wanted to know where did you get it that's all.
No studio videos? I think I saw one in tiktok clearly just bits of a larger thing. By the way are they released in actor's personal weibo account? Every actor does that in a drama?
https://mydramalist.com/photos/ABq76L_3
https://mydramalist.com/photos/81oq6K_3
What's the difference the director talks about?
https://mydramalist.com/photos/ABq76L_3
https://mydramalist.com/photos/81oq6K_3
What's the difference the director talks about?
If youāre going to insult someoneās intelligence, at least make sure your grammar and spelling doesnāt prove the opposite.
You, however, thought I meant range in roles, and you kept insisting on that point. Later, when you noticed that LYN has played some modern dramas, you suddenly shifted your wording:
āWhere did I call it ārangeā?ā
āSo his ārangeā is costume-drama soldier.ā
āI never claimed LYN had great range.ā
āIn contemporary roles ā¦ his range is greater than my experience.ā
āAt least you got it straight that you are the one going on about ārange.āā
All of these show that you were the one treating ārangeā as ārange in roles,ā and you even accused me of inventing my own definition. You got the meaning now and started attacking me, Do you even get what I mean or is it intentional? I never argued with you over who's making it about range, idiot.
While ārange in rolesā is only one aspect of range in acting. From the start I wasnāt the one putting words in your mouth (this is another distorted jab for personal attacking)āI was trying to make it clear that I wasnāt talking about ārange in roles.āItās frustrating, because a simple search would have clarified it.
Well first you don't even mention his words and now this changing what he said. Let me bring proof:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lm8Hx1oJ1Tg
ā at 44:18 he says:
āęå°±å°čÆ å ¶å®å»ēØäø¤ē§é³č²å»ä½ē°äø¤äøŖ äø¤äøŖäŗŗē© ē»ęå¢åē°äŗ²ęäøŗčŖå·±ęå¼äŗ ę²”ä»ä¹åŗå«,āSo even with your favorite actor, you change what he says. Why wouldnāt you do the same with someone else?
This is exactly what straw-man arguing looks likeāthe very thing you accuse me of: āthrowing up straw-man arguments and playing ignorant.ā
Twice now youāve claimed that. How many time even I said 'you' compared to you? Who's making it about whom?
Maybe those critiques can be found if you wash away the lens "he does get a lot of hate for no reason". I never made claims about LYNās real-life personality. You brought that up first with: āYou only have to see how goofy he is in real life.āI simply asked a question about it. Donāt attach two unrelated points as one argument.
I see no reason to keep explaining myself about his improvement over the years or to see how acting is measured. It's clear either you struggle with tone and text or just playing a fool.
I already explained the so called personal attacks you accuse me of. They are NOT personal attacks, so I'm not the one who started in first. It's not a "IN KIND" reply from your part where you used these three terms as playing victim while you clearly made it all about mocking me.
"Personal insults and throwing up straw man arguments", "about my standards, which you know nothing of", " What is a personal attack is insulting MY standards", "so try to keep it on topic instead of relying on personal attacks", "LOL! Darling..."Ł "you don't know anything about me, so try to keep it on topic instead of relying on personal attacks",, "you really have no grounds to comment, except as an outsider", "aren't the sole arbiter of quality", "you volunteered to make it so", "Please move on to whatever high altitude drama that meets your criteria", ""why subject yourself, and us, to your disdain".
The clear intent behind them is crystal clear. If you don't call the last two making it about me, what are they?
Douban is not some audience review site, it's known for being critical, so I'm not assuming. In other words it's not my OPINION in your language. Which I don't think you'll get. I also didn't claim Douban is an audience review site. which is another words is my mouth. You'd see their critiques if you have an account and I suppose you do since you know everything about they say about this drama and him. Audience review sites are like MDL, WETV and IQIYI rating numbers.
This is playing ignorant, you clearly get what I mean. Storytelling is the tool of the supposed theme. World building is not only what you say. It's clear the drama has a main plot line, which requires narrative framing and thus what I brought. And I didn't argue about those themes I'm talking about flaws of this drama. But it's clear you showed there is some storytelling here. It's not a documentary so among it's meta commentary it needs to have a substance.
What a writer writes in a drama or movie is not Nature's law. It is not religious order that can't be defied. we can criticize and show it's flaws. This way of justification of ridiculous. Your avoiding what said and twisting my words to your benefit.
"I recognized there were clever jokes about A Journey to Love." Oh Did you then why when I asked, you said: " I don't think it has anything to do with A Journey to Love, but I could be wrong. And then changed to "There's lots of references from A Journey to Love..". to prove you knew about it? You don't have to use these dirty tricks to avoid admitting loss. By this action you've shown what kind of person you are. You'd change everything to prove your right. This is very much projection and exclusionary authority here. You clearly need the satisfactory of emotional displacement
Iām sure others can see your double standards. Accusing me of dishonesty or badāfaith debating, and questioning my sincerity or intelligence, is ironic. I merely said, āsays more about your standards than his acting.ā This isnāt inherently pejorative ā itās an observation. Framing it as a personal attack misrepresents what I actually said. Donāt play the victim here. ā...even you can play...ā is a rhetorical dig aimed at the simplicity of a role archetype, not a personal attack. I called you obsessed because 11 days had already passed ā the conversation was stale unless you were oddly motivated to revive it either purely out of fan loyalty or out of a habit of arguing.
āThis is even more nonsenseā? I said he said it himself (want the link?)ā apparently, you know it better than he does. Similar mentions to mine have definitely sparked criticism in China and better than mine ( you canāt call it all hatred). Just because you know Chinese and haven't heard them doesn't make them discreditable. Youāre not the representative of domestic audiences of this drama. Itās difficult to play LS because he wears a mask ā an actor needs to convey emotion through tone changes, body language, and sometimes just a gaze. That doesnāt justify his weak portrayal; it highlights it. Some roles might be close to an actor's personally, but thatās not true for the majority of roles an actor plays. LYN is a singer and entrepreneur first. Over time, he has learned how to entertain crowds in his own style. You canāt possibly know his true personal life to compare it with his onāscreen performance.
Heās clearly shown improvement over the years ā as his fans call out ā but thatās not in question; the quantity is. Imagine being in this industry for almost ten years and still staying the same. What a shame!
He definitely improves like other people.
Heās been the male lead in several S/S+ dramas. To rise, he needs to prove himself promising enough to secure those roles. The role of his popularity is undeniable here way more than his acting proof (it's not groundbreaking in anyway), if that's the only side of the story. Now that's not as under the microscope when heās in a supporting role, as being the male lead, heās the spotlight of the show ā the one with the most screen time.
Since everything is considered my opinion, for the definition of āactingā and how acting is measured and criticized, you can watch ę¼åčÆ·å°±ä½ ē¬¬äøå£.
Personal attacking is when you belittle, mock, dismiss, mischaracterize, and question someoneās credibility instead of addressing their points; imply they are selfāimportant or ignorant ā just like youāve been doing now, just like what you have done.
Your tone here is dismissive and twisted, aimed at belittling me. What I brought up were common critiques surrounding idol dramas. Itās not just my OPINION. I didnāt say āpoor acting.ā Are you going to change whatās right in front of your eyes too? Labeling what I said about idol dramas as absolutes, or calling them ānot criticism,ā doesnāt weaken the points they partly make about industry issues ā which is what the drama points out too, even if the term is exaggerated. The numbers here are symbolic. On what grounds do you deny it? I didnāt bring statistics to prove it, neither you did to deny it, it's just your drivel.
Audience review sites donāt consider anything critical; theyāre filled with fans who post favorable reviews. They are not valid sources for discussion, and we canāt call every critic a hater or anti.
Selective framing. As far as Iāve seen, most dramas try to convey a message (though some are only speculated by fans). This drama also hints at a few things, but the storytelling is a different topic. Itās about the foundation of the script and the worldābuilding. The meta commentary, cultural and insider nuance are only a part of the colors and designs. Pretending not to get what I mean is "intentional".
Underdeveloped sideācharacter arcs, unreasonable sudden shifts in characters (CGH, the emperor, NR, even the FL, and the cold NH only to burst out later when needed), the overāidealized story of NH, uneven pacing, simplified villain motivations and palace intrigue, favoritism in character intelligence (notably CGH and CL), noticeable loss of humor, plot holes, unused character potential (especially The Nightwalkers, SH, CGH as SML, LS) ā these are not āoutsiderā or āoddā views.
These are flaws every critical rating platform like Douban can point out. Maleācentric narratives, illogical romance, industry casting realities, SML syndrome, the artifice of fixed narrative roles, and predictable tropes, etc., are things that can be understood after a fair share of watching ā or simply by being told directly.
You donāt know anything about the clever jokes the drama played with the controversies around A Journey to Love. So stop acting like youāre the one with exclusionary authority and knowledge here. Itās just bloated, condescending gatekeeping meant to disqualify my words instead of addressing them.
Can you share me the source of the photos?