Reviews

The Heart remembers

The title of the movie (Even If This Love Disappears from the World Tonight) was intriguing enough for me to pick it randomly without knowing anything about the plot. The story has an unusual premise, but the execution is somewhat clumsy and the progression very simple. The pacing felt a bit off; the big moments didn’t happen naturally but were either forced or occurred off-screen. I also didn’t like the childish acting, which might be funny to a younger audience, but to me it felt unrealistic.

Nevertheless, I enjoyed the movie for its main story, its message, and the emotions it evokes. As stated in the synopsis, this is truly a pure and touching love story that seems impossible yet still becomes real. I really appreciate Korean cinema for giving us clean and simple romances that inspire rather than provoke.

The movie teaches us that memories might fade, but they are not lost. Everything we experience stays somewhere deep inside the heart. It may appear hidden, but it is still there. That is a theological truth: even the things we have forgotten or lost remain for all eternity. Nothing good disappears in vain.

My compliments also go to the production team, who made an effort to ensure every scene looks beautiful. So despite having some issues with the story’s progression, I am thankful to have been blessed with this warm and noble love story.

Read More

I am so confused

If you like JoongDunk pairing...then watch something else :)

I was excited about this series as I really like JoongDunk ship but not gonna lie, at the end, I was very confused. I am not expecting a highly complex story telling, but please at least make it make sense a little bit.

To be more specific, we have a murder of a university student, and automatically her 7 friends become suspects for her murder. One of the suspects is Jay whose older brother, Jade, is a police captain and he is involved in this murder case. Except from Jade, we also have Kamin, who is the inspector for this case and highly believe in justice. When these two meet for the first time, there is a sparkle and Jade is constantly flirting with Kamin, but the latter is a serious person, he can't do that.

However, from the first episodes, somehow, Jade persuades Kamin to move to his house. WHAT? You literally just met dude and you are coworkers, why in the world would you propose that? On top of this proposal, Kamin accepts moving in and staying in a house with Jade and Jay. WHAT?? You literally just met, please be aware of your surroundings! Apparently you are a law graduate and an inspector of the fucking police, have you not heard of STRANGE DANGER BEFORE KAMIN?

But to be honest, the most frustrating thing about this series, was how quickly the mood change. For example, we begin with the first murder, and then each suspect receives a "Truth or Dare" cards in which they have to select what to do in order not to be killed (please keep in mind that these 8 people were supposed to be friends. 2 SUSPECTS DIE AND THE REST OF THEM CONTINUE GOING AT THE UNIVERSITY! WHAT??? But in the between of the murders and university scenes, we have to see how the Captain and the Inspector flirt each other. Jade my dude, is younger brother is a suspect for a murder and he is waiting for his turn to receive the "Truth or Dare" card, and you have the luxury to go for shopping with Inspector? WHAT?

I might be too strict and mad with this series, but as a total I don't really think that it is a good series. If you want to watch JoongDunk, watch something else. Dare you to Death is an irrelevant show, which if they skipped the murderous stuff, would possible be worth it.

Last but not least, is it just me or Sing, the actor who portrays Dr. Ruth, looks like Ryota from Generation Exile Tribe? No?

Anyway... bye

Read More

Big fan of LYKN and this series in specific !!

Never realised I didn't write a review on this series. I rewatched ThamePo like 3 times now and I've been a big fan of LYKN for quite some time. I rarely rate a series this high for everything. Overal a 10 and the music, acting/cast, music and story rank super high for me. The only smalll thing I dislike are parts in the plot. (I'm used to call them by their irl names or stage names so sorry if I accidentally use their real/stage names in this review)

Let's start from the beginning. Po being rejected for a job because his reasoning is weak and personally I just don't get this scene even after watching this 3 times. Po seems way to open about his personal life, but this also shows later on in the series how he changed the part of him opening up to much.

Over to one of my favourite parts: THE GRAPHIC DESIGN. I'm in love with Po's graphic design and LYKN's posters and photoshoots in general (apart from this series). I know Est didn't make it himself but I'm just obsessed with GMMTHEEV's designs. Looks soooo good.

The first time watching this I kinda thought of Baifern as a Sasaeng but getting further into this series I realised she isn't really a Sasaeng and she really did want the best for Po. I'm also ALWAYS happy to see Sammy play in series, her role is always nice and she just lightens up the mood.

The whole plot feels really unrealistic to me but that's quite normal when watching bl's, otherwise it'll be to regular to my opinion. The reason for their disbandment never really made sense to me and I feel like it was only mentioned twice(?). Po's patience is amazing I would get sooo annoyed with Thame tbh...

The side couple ahahahaha, I love them sooo much.

One of my favourite genre's of bl is soft love and I just love their relationship development although I rlly hated Jun at some point for hiding my boys back from liking each other.

Read More

Quirky, Fluffy, and Fu With Some Missed Potential

After the first five episodes, the show was pretty enjoyable, and it stayed fairly engaging up to episode 13. There are definitely some standout scenes, but there are also moments that feel a bit ridiculous. The heart-ache concept is unusual but adds a lot of fun to the story. The way the characters cooperate is refreshing and keeps the show lively.

At first, I was more invested in the second couple than the first, but once the father’s storyline resolved, my interest dipped. Speaking of the father, this drama features one of the most understanding fathers, and he became a really nice character to have in the second half. It felt like the sister lost her empathy after the divorce and was forcing her decision regarding the first couple. In the last half of the series, the third couple helped save the show for me without them, I might have dropped it entirely.

The drama features three couples with interesting dynamics, but unfortunately, none of them are fully developed. For instance, the first couple’s relationship doesn’t really evolve before or after their official pairing. The past-life storyline felt uneven and choppy, leaving some parts, like the dreams and the heartache element, without proper closure.

The final episode introduces an unnecessary amnesia trope, and I didn’t feel much chemistry between the leads. The sister and her partner were only watchable because of his acting; she mostly had a poker face throughout. Interestingly, the tension between the maid and the male lead’s friend was more compelling.

I started watching because I love Ouyang Nana from Snowfall, and the unique quirk of this drama—where the male lead’s heart actually aches whenever the female lead cries definitely caught my interest. Overall, it’s a cute, fluffy drama that’s decent and entertaining. The ending felt a bit rushed, but I’m happy all the side couples got their happily-ever-afters.

The mystery element was engaging, with high stakes for the female lead, though sometimes it felt too easy for the leads to solve problems. It would have been more exciting to see them struggle or fail more realistically. Instead, it often felt like they just hit a small obstacle rather than a real wall, only to overcome it easily in the next episode.

Overall, it’s a fun watch, especially if you enjoy light romance with quirky twists, though it has its fair share of flaws in pacing and character development.

Read More

The puzzles fit perfectly!

Lee Eunmi achieved what many Korean crime drama writers couldn't. She created a story that makes sense, even if you can find out who's the killer. If only the last scene wouldn't be there.

This drama has everything a properly made crime drama needs. Great writing, actors, director, visuals with small details that entertain and keep the viewers in their seat. This isn't just a story about another random serial killer. Even though they don't tell us the motive until the end, if you look closely you can find small details and hints. My first guess about the killer was correct the minute the character appeared, and if you watch the first episode after the finale again, you’re going to appreciate the writing and the acting even more. The small details in their acting, the way they reacted to each other were there and these types of things makes this drama much better than most crime stories.

There are some problems of course, because Yun Ina, our main character, is the only suspect of the murder of her uncle. It’s understandable, because she's the only person who was there, yet the police can't do anything about it for 10 years. Why? We'll find out the reason later, and it makes sense. Ina is now working for the police as a profiler, but the other main character, Kim Han Saem still thinks she’s the killer, that’s why he’s not the most popular detective at the police station. After a decade the killer is back, and Ina is one of the main reasons for that, but it’s not the usual cliche I was expecting. When we found out why, it shocked me. Not because it was surprising, but because it was that meaningful. I don’t think I’ve ever seen a serial killer who stopped and then came back for a reason like this, and I’ve watched a lot of crime shows and movies. At first my biggest issue with the 10 year time jump was I didn't understand how the writer would explain the reason behind this, and usually this is where most people fail to deliver.

There’s one thing I have to highlight, because the way the story of the killer ended was special. It had a massive impact on me emotionally. That last scene with them was something I don’t think I will ever forget. It was top-tier writing and acting!!!

As for the side characters, there are a lot of them, but I don’t think I can mention anyone who was poorly written. We could argue that some of them should get a proper closer, but overall I can’t complain about anything.

I also loved the dynamic between Kim Dami and Son Sukku. There was some slight romantic tension maybe, but if you want more, you’re going to be disappointed. There isn’t any romance. What’s there is a lot of funny bickering, and eventually mutual respect, plus quality detective work. Now, that is something I was missing from a lot of crime dramas. Usually the police work is done poorly, but not here.

Some might think Dami’s character Ina is a bit childish and cold, because she barely shows emotions, and at the police station she’s a bit over the top. I think that’s just a mask, because when she’s alone she’s a completely different person. If you watched “The Mentalist” TV Show, she is kind of similar to Patrick Jane, because she’s not only great at reading people, but also can hide her true persona. Not to mention her real plan.She’s a headstrong woman, and that’s why she can be a bit annoying at times for some.


So, let’s talk about the negatives.

There isn’t much, I can only name small things, and that one last scene at the very end. I don’t think this show needed an open ending, because people might think we can get a season 2, but that’s unnecessary. Before this last scene I was about to give this show a 10/10, but after thinking about the small little annoyances and this scene, I had to change my mind.

Without any spoilers, I can say one more thing. If you love the crime genre, you have to watch this, because it’s worth it. Eleven hours was the perfect length to properly finish a story like this.

Read More

Head for the hills…

This is my first time watching a show with Keen and Sea as leads. I have seen Surf and Java in different dramas. Surf in I saw you in my dream and Java as Thup in boss and a babe. For all the actors I really enjoying seeing them on screen JJ being my favourite as he brought that slap stick comedy with him but his character got real when needed.

That said this drama was a poor rip off of I saw you in my dream. I didn’t find it boring but it was not engaging. The storytelling felt choppy most of time. There is a lot that they could have done with this but they chose this lacklustre direction.

Let me start with the positives:
The actors are easy on the eyes, this makes it easier to watch and the acting is good as in they did what they were directed to do.
Ngevatives:
The music was forgettable, I actually cannot remember a single song. Moving on to the story- what was it?
Neighbour enemies turned lovers? (Cue bad buddy) J starts seeing future versions of him and Jinn and suddenly he catches feelings? Then the unexplained nose bleeds all the time… I spent more time at the hospital with this couple than anywhere else.
Their kisses don't feel natural to say that it’s their what 3rd series together?

Jinn’s daddy issues justified-Dad and mum’s lack of communication unjustified resolution too simplistic Jerome is not the magic pill to Jinn’s family issues.

I am still figuring out what happened- because the ending was very questionable it left me with a lot of questions. So the visions came about because they both wished at some point and bla bla bla. Is Jinn still going to die from some unknown sickness? I don't know because the director never bothered to use the 12 episodes to tell us the story. The characters all felt very 2D.

The second couple, Van and Farm were mildly more interesting. This is the opposites attract trope, Van was an ass and Farm had no business dating him. I understand Van's emotional distance due to unresolved grief but he was a total dick to his friend. And then he suddenly wanted Farm back? I was glad Farm took a stand for himself but it only took the fear of few mosquito bites to forgive Van.

The supernatural element was good to begin with however it was not utilised well for the story and becomes more of a prop for the show. This wa very much a rip off I saw you in my dream but I felt Deehup did a better job that GMmtv with this production. Highlight of the show for me was JJ- Lone Ranger.

would I rewatch- No. Too many plot holes, poor and simplistic ending that left lots of questions, the resolved arcs were luckluster and key explanations were never given. This i think is a directing issues. Siwaj is often hit and his with his shows.

I will give the cast another chance in other projects.

Read More

A Fun and Charming Rom-Com Elevated by Its Cast

What's Wrong with Secretary Kim is a lighthearted and entertaining romantic comedy that delivers exactly what it promises. While it may not reinvent the genre, it succeeds in being a thoroughly enjoyable watch thanks to its charismatic leads and well-executed comedic timing.

Story (7/10): The premise of a narcissistic vice chairman trying to keep his capable secretary from quitting is a classic setup. The story follows familiar rom-com beats with the rich-male-lead-falls-for-ordinary-girl trope, and the childhood connection subplot feels somewhat forced. However, the pacing keeps things moving briskly, and the comedy elements land consistently well. The drama knows what it is and leans into its strengths rather than trying to be something overly profound.

Acting/Cast (9/10): This is where the drama truly shines. Park Seo Joon is perfectly cast as the hilariously self-absorbed Lee Young Joon, bringing both comedic flair and genuine warmth to the role. Park Min Young matches him scene for scene as the composed and capable Kim Mi So. Their chemistry is electric and carries the show even through its weaker plot points. The supporting cast, including the office colleagues and the rival brother subplot, adds additional layers of humor and heart.

Music (8/10): The soundtrack complements the mood of the drama nicely. While there is no single standout track that becomes iconic, the OST does a solid job of enhancing romantic moments and comedic scenes alike. The music selections feel appropriate and well-timed throughout the series.

Rewatch Value (7/10): Secretary Kim is the kind of drama you reach for when you want something comfortable and feel-good. The comedy holds up on repeat viewings, though knowing all the plot twists diminishes some of the excitement. It works well as a background comfort watch.

Overall (8/10): A well-crafted rom-com that excels through its cast performances and comedic writing. Recommended for anyone looking for a lighthearted, fun drama that will keep you smiling throughout its 16 episodes.

Read More

I must say, it feels like a character change compared to their usual roles. Normally, Earth Pirapat plays the more mature and responsible character, while Mix Sahaphap plays the softer one. That is the dynamic we usually see in their dramas. However, in this drama, Earth’s character is the messy one, which is different from his usual mature roles. However, Earth portrayed both types of characters very well, and he showed his acting ability clearly. But i perfer matuerd earth more..

As for drama i started watching this drama mainly because of this couple , since I really like their previous works. They did their best in their roles, and their acting was still good. However, I feel very disappointed with the storyline of this drama.

One of the biggest problems is the comedy. The jokes feel very lame and forced. Instead of being funny and natural, they feel awkward and sometimes even uncomfortable to watch. Because of this, I could not enjoy the drama as a comedy, and I rarely felt like laughing.

The storyline is also weak and confusing. The romantic development between the characters does not feel clear or meaningful. It is difficult to understand who likes whom and why their feelings change. The character development is poor, and there are no strong or memorable personalities. This makes it hard for the audience to connect emotionally with the couple.

In addition, the story feels messy and lacks proper direction. The romance and comedy do not blend well together, and it feels like the plot is missing important depth and structure. Compared to other dramas starring Earth and Mix, which have strong stories and emotional impact, this one feels like their weakest project.

Overall, although Earth and Mix performed well and did their best, the weak storyline, lame comedy, and poor character development made this drama disappointing. It had potential, but the execution was not strong enough to make it enjoyable.

Read More

GMMTV really said “we’re not making trash shows anymore”!

Firstly, I loved it from start to finish. It never really lagged for me and it kept my interest every episode. Gah Pond must’ve been a suffering saint in his past life to look THAT GOOD! The story was sooo engaging (the only piece I felt was missing was the villain being more prominent and more at odds with the Lee family). That would’ve added a bit more spice, but they even rounded that off pretty well. Of course Phuwin and Pond acted their butts off! Finally, usually I’m not a big fan of making dramatic themes into a comedy because 9.9/10 it ends up being too cheesy and saccharine, but they balanced out the comedy and the drama so well. And then, the gaffe during the epilogue of having Thee purchase GMMTV and interact with all of his (Pond’s) real-life coworkers was comedy GOLD! Whomever came up with that needs a raise IMMEDIATELY! This had to be one of my favorite shows from GMMTV that they’ve ever done! So sad it’s over. 😩

Read More

ONE OF MY ALL TIME FAVORITES

This drama hands down is one of the best Chinese dramas I have ever watched. From the beginning to the end it was good. I wish we had more at the end about when they went back to the future, but even still it was a very goo drama. The ML's never had any misunderstanding from the beginning to the end, which is super rare. I loved the chemistry of the main leads. I love that they had incorporated all the characters and making us feel them. I love the actors as well, they did a phenomenal job in acting. This was such a fun watch. It had love, hate, fun, and everything a happy drama should have. And we ALL LOVE A HAPPY ENDING!

Read More

Cute enough...

If you want an easy to watch, low angst romcom, you might enjoy this. You can turn off your brain and just watch for entertainment's sake. The entire cast was good. The main couple was very cute to watch, and we got to see the progression of the relationship, as opposed to quickly moving from I hate you to I love you. I also liked the growth of the relationships between the leads and the staff of the school. It shows that people can quickly believe something based on how someone looks, but by taking the time to get to know them, the come to like the person inside, just not how they perceived them.

The teenage couple was cute enough, but honestly, I have no idea why he liked her, she was just not a nice person. However, they ultimately kind of grew on me.

I wouldn't say the main couple had amazing chemistry, but there were some good kisses.

This is a show that can definitely be called a romcom and it sticks with the genre. May be too simplistic for some, but I enjoyed it for what it was.

Read More

Cute, but not funny

I love the main couple, specially MeiMei she is adorable, the thing is they always pick the worst stories.

I've watched 3 of their dramas together and in all 3 the story was bad, however, the chemistry was great.

Here is not exception, I didn't find anything funny about it, the side story about the brother was boring and the FL despite being cute as always, I didn't find her funny here, also I didn't like the ML here, I don't know if it was the character or what exactly but I just didn't like him.

So if you like the two leads only and want to see them together in anything, just give it a go, but don't expect too much ~

Read More

The Real Villain of Honour Isn’t Violence. It’s Cheating.

Welcome to MDL comment section where infidelity outranks abuse in the hierarchy of outrage. Where people are united to criticise hypocrisy of women in this drama while silently accepting the existence and actions of pedoflies. I am not here to discuss whether cheating and sexual violence belong in the same moral category. I’m pointing out the public reaction to them. It is telling that the priority of some people lie in the judgment of a "messy" cheating woman over the systemic reality of assault. Honour drama matters because it refuses to give us "perfect" victims and some people seem more disturbed by that imperfection than by the violence itself.

—-
SELECTIVE MORAL OUTRAGE VS. STRUCTURAL VIOLENCE.
My question is does a character’s moral failure invalidate a story’s thematic argument?
Reducing a drama about trauma, coercion, sexual violence against women and minors, pedophilia, and female solidarity to “she cheated, therefore the show is trash” is intellectually lazy and critically shallow. Cheating is being treated as the central moral failure of the drama and SA is being sidelined in discussion. Honour isn’t a tale about infidelity, it’s a story about how past abuse shapes lives, how women navigate power and vulnerability, and how solidarity and resilience become survival tools.

To focus solely on Hyeonjin’s affair is to ignore the narrative’s core. The hypocrisy is the point. These women are legal warriors for justice who are simultaneously messy, dishonest, and compromised. This isn’t a narrative flaw… it’s realism. Trauma doesn’t produce moral saints, it produces survivors navigating shame and survival. That does not diminish the responsibility for their actions. The cheating storyline is ethically messy. Hyeonjin is not written as triumphant or empowered in her betrayal, she is destabilised. The encounter itself is narratively uncomfortable: she says no, attempts to leave, and is kissed again before ultimately giving in. That sequence introduces ambiguity around agency, coercion, emotional vulnerability, and unresolved attachment.

They are not romanticising cheating. It reads as a moment of weakness entangled with power dynamics and unresolved past trauma. The subsequent lies, the hidden earring, the possibility of pregnancy… these are not celebratory plot devices. They are destabilisers. The drama does not present adultery as liberation. They are not offering her a "get out of jail free" card, she is clearly driving toward a cliff of social and personal consequences. Presence of moral failure among the protagonists complicates the message, it does not ERASE it. The story depicts a survivor who is a brilliant advocate for others but a fragmented, self sabotaging disaster in her private life. To demand she be a "moral saint" to be a worthy protagonist is to demand a fiction that doesn't exist in the real world of trauma. We can hold her accountable for the betrayal of her marriage while simultaneously recognising that her personal failures do not justify or diminish the systemic violence she fights against.

Criticise Hyeonjin. Dislike her. Hold her accountable for the betrayal of her marriage, the narrative certainly does. But to let her infidelity become the only takeaway from a story about the industrial scale violation of women and minors is fundamentally dishonest. In dramas like Penthouse/ Love in the Moonlight/ Shine/ Eve, the infidelity outrage is the point of the exercise. For this drama to be discredited, it would need to trivialise sexual violence, glamorise coercion, or selectively condemn certain moral failures while excusing others without consequence. The cheating arc generates tension, fallout, and instability rather than reward. It complicates the characters’ credibility but does not erase the seriousness of the issues they confront in court.

We should be capable of holding a character’s personal failure in one hand and the world’s systemic cruelty in the other without dropping the latter because the former makes us uncomfortable.

—-
PERFECT VICTIM
Focusing on SA victims in this drama, I want to make one thing clear: abuse is defined by the actions of the abuser, not the personality of the abused. Must a victim be perfect to deserve sympathy? Does a woman’s imperfection erase the harm done to her? If she isn’t universally likable, are her bruises, fear, and trauma any less real?

Societies often measure women against an “perfect victim” standard: she must be passive, gentle, sexually restrained but not prudish, emotional but not hysterical, composed but not cold; she must have no prior mistakes, no anger, no contradictions, no complex history. People subconsciously look for reasons to distance themselves from discomfort by asking, “What did she do?” rather than “What was done to her?” suggesting if the woman harmed is even worthy of belief. Sympathy is granted most easily to those who fit a narrow image of innocence. The myth of the perfect victim allows people to believe that violence only happens to the exceptionally innocent, and therefore can be avoided by behaving correctly.

People find it hard to believe victims because believing them is uncomfortable. It forces people to accept that harm can come from ordinary people and that it could happen to anyone, including themselves. Doubting the victim feels safer and easier, and blaming them gives people a sense of control, as if bad things only happen when someone “does something wrong.” Many also misunderstand how trauma works, mistaking confusion, fear, or emotional reactions for lying /exaggeration /weakness. Public cases involving women such as Tara Reade, Amber Heard, Angelina Jolie, Christine Blasey Ford, Chanel Miller, and Anita Hill reveal how credibility is filtered through race, sexuality, likability, timing, demeanor, and presumed motive. Credibility cannot be based on how likeable someone is. Imperfection becomes evidence, anger becomes instability, sexual history becomes motive, delay becomes fabrication, survival strategies become aggression. The demand for “purity” is less about truth and more about preserving social comfort.

“If the victim is flawed, the world feels orderly. If she is difficult, perhaps he isn’t so bad.”

A woman can be brash, ambitious, selfish, queer, contradictory, difficult and still be abused. Suggesting otherwise shifts responsibility from the abuser to the abused, inflicting a secondary violence by silencing survivors who fear disbelief and internalise blame because they don’t fit the archetype they were taught. A victim deserves sympathy not because she is pure, but because she is human and her flaws, whatever they are, do not retroactively justify someone abusing her.

Showing empathy to victims doesn’t mean ignoring fairness, it means remembering that real people are carrying real trauma. We should be more outraged by acts of violence than by the imperfections of those who survive them. Sexual violence is a choice made by the perpetrator, not a mistake or weakness of the survivor. Instead of questioning what the victim did or didn’t do, we need to ask why someone thought it was okay to violate another person. It’s time to assign the blame where it belongs… on the perpetrators and not the survivors. Holding perpetrators accountable, rather than scrutinising survivors, is how we show true justice and compassion.

—-
MAGNITUDE OF SA
“He was my friend/ relative/ father/ brother/ colleague.” ONE IN THREE women can say this. Violence at that scale is not an anomaly, not a “few bad men”, not a misfortune. It’s a pattern and patterns are built and tolerated by societies.

While you are reading this, 8 more crimes against women will be recorded in my country. Every 16 minutes, a man in my country makes a decision to violate a woman. 86 new victims every single day. We panic over rare dangers, redesign airports after one incident. If 86 bridges collapsed in one day, we would call it a national emergency. But 86 women being assaulted? It has become a statistic and routine news cycle. Just a number we learn to live with. For every case you hear about, there are many you don’t. Silence is not absence. People think of SA as isolated incidents, but for many women it functions like an atmosphere, shaping daily calculations about what to wear, how to walk, who to call, and when to share their location. It is not just something that happens occasionally; it quietly structures ordinary behavior, from gripping keys between fingers to texting, “I got home.”

—-
MEN’S BRIGHT FUTURE
Are women’s lives and suffering expendable when weighed against a man’s “bright future”?
As someone who listens to true crime all the time, it’s impossible not to notice how often phrases like “boys will be boys”or “but he has a bright future” are used to excuse harm. They frame cruelty as immaturity, entitlement as potential, and accountability as something unfair or excessive. By doing this, people protect the idea of who the man could be rather than what he actually did.

What’s disturbing is that these excuses almost always come at the victim’s expense. No one asks about their bright future, their lost sense of safety, or the life altered by someone else’s actions. Instead, the narrative centers on preserving male promise and comfort. Society is often quicker to mourn a perpetrator’s consequences than to acknowledge a victim’s suffering. Her losses are emotionalised and minimised and his losses are treated as tragic and unjust.
This is because systems of power have been built to protect men’s futures over women’s safety. When accountability is seen as cruelty and harm is seen as collateral damage, it decides whose life is worth defending. Until harm to women is treated as more serious than discomfort to men, the message remains the same: women are expected to pay the price so men can keep theirs intact.

Men especially those with status, authority, talent, or social connections are seen as more valuable to protect than to hold accountable. Admitting harm would mean questioning respected institutions, friendships, families, or one’s own judgment, so people minimise, excuse, or deny the behavior instead. There’s also a long standing culture that normalised male aggression and entitlement while doubting or silencing those who speak up, especially when it would “ruin a good man’s life.”

—-
GLAMORISATION AND DESENSITISATION OF SA IN FILM.
There is long tradition in television where sexual violence appears less as a lived trauma and more as narrative currency. Violation often functions as ignition and what lingers is not the wound, but the spectacle that follows it. When violation repeatedly serves as character development, as motivation, as spectacle, people expect it as part of storytelling grammar. The trope embeds itself quietly, shaping cultural assumptions about whose pain advances the plot and whose pain is secondary to it.

Experimental evidence suggests that repeated exposure to sexually violent films can dull emotional responses, reduce empathy for victims, and lessen the perceived seriousness of abuse. Sexually degrading portrayals may also shape beliefs about sexual assault, reinforce objectification, and foster harmful attitudes toward women. Research indicates that sexually aggressive media can affect not only men’s attitudes but also women’s psychological responses and self perception. Media can distort understandings of consent and responsibility y normalising gender stereotypes, blaming victims, or presenting male aggression without critique.

I also think romanticisation of SA plays a huge role in desensitisation. 365 days, Ffifty shades of grey, GOT, After and many other films aestheticise dominance, persistence, and forced intimacy as proof of desire. Threat becomes foreplay and control becomes charisma. Resistance is framed as tension and coercion as chemistry. Over time, audiences learn to read violation as romance not because the act changes, but because the framing does.

Desensitisation often looks like reduced shock, reduced empathy, treating it as “just another trope”, but reduced outward reaction doesn’t automatically mean reduced empathy. If you respond emotionally to real world harm but not to dramatised scenes, that’s often media habituation, not moral desensitisation.

—
INFIDELITY IN CINEMA.
Imagine looking into the eyes of the person you love, the one you trust without hesitation, the one you depend on, the one you’ve built your life around and not knowing they are choosing again and again, to lie to you. Just to protect the betrayal instead of protecting you. Cheating isn’t just a mistake. It is a form of moral bankruptcy. It shows a complete disregard for the very person you promised to respect and protect. In this drama, what happens cannot simply be dismissed as a “single lapse in judgment.” Even if the physical act happened only once, it did not exist in isolation. There was secrecy, emotional boundary crossing, rationalising the situation, staying despite discomfort, and then continued deception. She lies to her husband even when confronted with evidence. When pregnancy enters the picture, the consequences of those choices become even more devastating. Calling this a momentary mistake is an oversimplification of what cheating really is. It reflects not just one impulsive act, but a series of conscious decisions made when there were multiple chances to stop, to leave, or to tell the truth. It reveals a willingness to betray when the opportunity presented itself. The damage is not measured by how many times it happened. For the person who was betrayed, even once can permanently shatter trust. One breach is enough to change how love feels, how safety feels, and how the entire relationship is understood.

—-
HOW DESENSITISED ARE WE?
Romanticisation frames cheating as emotionally profound, fated, or spiritually meaningful. Glamorisation emphasises aesthetic appeal (luxury/ sensuality/ thrill/ personal liberation). Both reduce moral weight by reframing cheating as self discovery, emotional authenticity or rebellion against restrictive norms. Because viewers are repeatedly exposed to these portrayals, desensitisation occurs where infidelity begins to feel more normal, less shocking, and more understandable. This opens a possibility where repeated narrative framing can reshape moral perception and relationship expectations.

In recent dramas I have watched (Shine and Love in the moonlight) there was intense romanticisation of cheating. Storytelling is designed to make us deeply identify with the central couple framing their relationship as destined, pure, or emotionally unavoidable. When cheating is presented within that emotional framework, people tend to evaluate it through empathy rather than moral principle, seeing it as tragic or justified instead of wrong. Over time, this emotional alignment can make infidelity seem more acceptable within fictional contexts, even if audience might not support it in real life.

—-
MY THOUGHTS ON THIS DRAMA
It is not a bad drama people are claiming it to be in the sense of poor craft. It is purposefully provocative, and people mistake their own moral discomfort for a failure in storytelling. When a show refuses to provide a "perfect" protagonist and instead mirrors the messy, compromised reality of survivors, it stops being a comfortable escape and starts being a mirror that many audiences are unwilling to look into.

This drama is challenging the very hierarchy of outrage that allows real world trauma to be sidelined in favor of "safer" scandals. Low ratings suggest a "moral purity gap" where audiences conflate a character’s personal flaws with the show’s overall quality. While viewers frequently tolerate or even celebrate "anti hero" men, a messy, unfaithful female protagonist often triggers a visceral likability tax, leading audiences to "downvote" the show as a form of moral protest rather than focusing on its technical or thematic core messages. People prefer glamorous escapism over the gruelling confrontation.

We must move beyond "likability" to understand that mirroring a messy reality is not an endorsement of it. Rejecting this entire drama because the victim is flawed only upholds the "perfect victim" myth, suggesting that empathy is reserved for the stainless. Don’t fall into the narrative trap of selective empathy. Husband is undeniably a victim of a devastating personal breach. His suffering also does not negate or compete with the systemic violation of women’s bodily autonomy and these are not mutually exclusive tragedies. When we allow a husband’s heartbreak to become the loudest part of the conversation, we are choosing the "safer" anger of a private scandal over the necessary rage required to confront a culture of sexual violence.

(Explicit terms for sexual violence are omitted to prevent this review from being flagged. It is not a self censorship. I know the legal distinction between general SA and more severe violations (r word). My goal here is to address the collective trauma of survivors. I have documented all statistical references used here so feel free to message me for the source link.)

Read More