Only the first 8 episodes were worth watching.. Overall, lots of wasted potential.

(This review has lots of rants and is full of spoilers. So don't read this if you insist on watching and don't wanna be spoiled.)

Why you should watch this drama:
- Good OST, cast, cinematography.
- To some extent, it challenged gender stereotypes (Gun-woo as a manly LGBT character, the nurse being male, the CEO of a media company being a woman, Do-hee not being afraid to speak her mind)

Why you shouldn't watch this drama:
- Poor portrayal of psychotherapies and people with mental illnesses. I didn't like that this drama demonised Jae-hyuk and made him out to be such a despicable person. Even at the end, I couldn't really sympathise with him. It's almost as though the drama is trying to say that he deserves to be hated because of his mental illness. Furthermore, some things that Hae-kyung says as a psychiatrist are unethical and/or unrealistic (though I understand it is supposed to make the drama funny). As a psychology major, such poor representations are huge red flags for me. They just show that the writer didn't do her research properly. Many scenes in the show reflect a lack of sensitivity with regards to mental issues. Psychiatrists don't just say "You must have ____ disorder" without doing a thorough assessment, and eating disorders don't magically disappear after having a delicious meal. So disappointing as this was supposed to be a show about food, with one of the main characters being a psychiatrist. Many times I find myself wondering if the writer had some prejudice against people with mental illnesses.

- Poor/inconsistent characterization. I was excited to see so many quirky characters but most of them just end up being plot devices. Byung-jin (the nurse) was there to bring Hae-kyung home, Ah-yeong (the CEO unnie) was there to get Do-hee to come to the office or force her to go home, Gun-woo (the gay stylist) was there to bring Jae-hyuk home. Lol. They had so much potential for character development. Literally every main character and important side character had something that could've been developed in a wholesome manner. So it's a huge pity that all of them just ended up being such flat characters. Also, Jae-hyuk's BPD is being unrealistically portrayed here. It's just impossible for Do-hee to not know about his disorder during the times they were dating. At the very least, Do-hee should've been very emotionally affected while dating him, but her flashbacks suggested that she was happy and blissful. It's just... unrealistic. It's not possible to hide your BPD since it is part of your personality.

- Plot holes. I'm looking at you, homeless guy Keanu. It wasn't explained where/how he got his new clothes and had a chance to shave or shower before appearing at Hae-kyung's clinic to warn him about Jae-hyuk. LOL I guess that's a minor thing but yeah it really bugged me. And it wasn't explained how he was allowed to start practising as a psychiatrist again. (Like, what in the world.) I'd assumed that his license got revoked after Jae-hyuk reported about him committing medical malpractice - which became plothole number 2. Shouldn't there have been some form of official investigation? And with a proper investigation done, the hospital and/or the public would have realised that Jae-hyuk was lying in his articles about Keanu's medical malpractice. Plus the ending where he became travel buddies with Jae Hyuk is just meh. In real life psychiatrists/psychologists/therapists are supposed to establish clear boundaries with their clients/patients.

- Many things that the characters do and say just don't make sense to me. Some examples that come to mind:
(1) Do-hee telling Hae-kyung to go away when Jae-hyuk broke into her house. Someone trespassed into your home because of his mental illness and you're telling your psychiatrist boyfriend, who's probably experienced in dealing with such situations, to go home?
(2) Ah-yeong trying to set Do-hee and Jae-hyuk up in the beginning even though she is her best friend/unnie and knew about how Do-hee got dumped? Who does that!?
(3) Ah-yeong and homeless Keanu falling in love was funny but again, unrealistic. I can understand why Keanu would fall for her but not the other way round.
(4) When No-eul revealed on-air that Hae-kyung was her ex-boyfriend, Hae-kyung didn't even get mad. He and Do-hee didn't even talk about what happened. If I were him, I would be mad at not just No-eul, but at Do-hee for allowing this to happen on her show. I thought he had pride? After all, he did try to track down Do-hee to give her a piece of his mind when she insulted him at the start. (Again, inconsistent characterisation).

- Felt like the writer just had CLOY fever, as evident in all the CLOY references and the whole Jeju-island arc/meeting-you-was-destiny theme at the start. Honestly, now that I've watched all the episodes, the first 8 episodes before the exes appeared were totally irrelevant to the main storyline. Ironically though, they were the episodes I enjoyed the most. It seemed to me that the writer could not decide how to develop this drama and added the front part and all the CLOY references for the likes. Even Do-hee reminded me of Yoon Seri lol.

- A lot of parts in the drama felt very anti-climactic.
(1) The part in which Hae-kyung's mom died, I could not decide whether I was supposed to feel sad for him...
(2) The car accident was very wtf for me?
(3) The scene in which Do-hee broke down in front of the police station with Jae-hyuk behind her. I think I was supposed to feel sad but I couldn't sympathise with her at all because she made so many weird decisions that normal people in distress won't make.
(4) Jin No-eul's storyline. She cried, she lost, she gave up. Why include her in the story when she's not even important lol.
[Sorry I can go on and on but I will stop here.]

Final comments:
The drama tricked me into thinking that Do-hee and Hae-kyung were the main characters but the real main character is Jae-hyuk. Every major event in this drama revolved around him. Yes he is annoying, but he is also the person who grew the most. Furthermore, the actor who portrayed him really shined in this drama. I was very very impressed by how he portrayed Jae-hyuk's mental breakdowns. So that's a plus point. Other than that, this is a very disappointing and cringey drama. You won't learn anything new about life/ food/ psychotherapy. Instead, you may gain more negative stereotypes of mental illnesses and false impressions of how therapy is carried out. So I won't recommend it unless there are actors in the cast that you're a huge fan of and want to support no matter what.

Citeste mai mult

A Creative Exploration on the Death Penalty (Ending Explained)

(This review contains MAJOR SPOILERS. I advise you to read this only after watching this movie because I want to share my interpretation of the ending.)

After watching Crash Landing On You, I've become a huge fan of Son Ye Jin. So now I'm trying to watch as many of her works as possible. And each time I am not disappointed: when she is onscreen, she becomes that character and no one else. If that is not great acting, I don't know what is.

Anyway, like almost everyone else in the comments section here and elsewhere, I was a little confused by the ending. But upon greater reflection, I realised that it is a great ending. It's being left semi-open on purpose for us to reflect. Here's why.

In the beginning, we see Da-eun in a cafe with her boyfriend and friend, trying to practice for her upcoming job interview for a journalist position. One of the questions asked by Da-eun's friend was about the expiring statute of limitations for Han Chae-min's kidnapping case. To which Da-eun replies that the statute of limitations should be abolished so that the criminals can receive the maximum penalty. Her friend then probes, "Does that mean they deserve the death penalty?" Da-eun pauses in hesitation. Her friend then says that the death penalty could be an outdated practice since Korea hasn't used it since 1997, plus many other countries have since abolished it. Da-eun replies that she thinks that these criminals should still get the death penalty. Note that this is an important foreshadowing for what is going to happen for the rest of the movie.

Throughout the movie, we see Da-eun trying to find out who is the real kidnapper and killer of Han Chae-min, the young boy who died years ago. While she's watching the movie based on the Han Chae-min case with her friends, she hears the real audio footage of the kidnapper and thinks that it could be her own dad, Jung Soo-man. With this suspicion in mind, she follows him and observes his everyday life. What we garner as the audience is that Soo-man is a hard worker and a very gentle and responsible father. Despite him repeatedly denying that he killed the child, we see Da-eun experiencing a lot of internal turmoil when more concrete evidence appears which suggests that her dad Soo-man is, in fact, responsible for kidnapping Chae-min. When the police approach Da-eun, she is forced to pick a side. The problem is, which side? Should she be on the side of truth, which is what she, as a journalist-to-be, embodies? Or should she pick the side of her dad because of her duty as a daughter? After all, it's easy to say that you want justice for the victims and penalty for the criminals when these criminals are people you don't know and don't care about.

[SPOILER ALERT].
In the end, the statute of limitation expires without the kidnapper being caught. However, believing that Soo-man is the killer, Chae-min's father drives a car and purposely crashes into the truck that Soo-man is in, causing both himself and Soo-man to die, and leaving Da-eun seriously injured and potentially crippled for life. In the hospital where Da-eun is recovering, we see the police talking about how she deserves it because she tried to protect Soo-man, who is the kidnapper. But in the ending scene, the audience is told through Da-eun's mom's dying words that Soo-man has committed a crime, which is that Da-eun is not their biological daughter and was in fact kidnapped as a newborn by Soo-man to be raised as their own daughter. Through more flashbacks, we find that Da-eun's uncle, Shim, had known about this and kept evidence of this (Da-eun's hospital ID wristband which says her real name). Furthermore, he has been using this to blackmail Soo-man into giving him money. On one occasion, Shim tells Soo-man that he needs $100k, and suggests for Soo-man to kidnap a child for money since he has already kidnapped a child once. It is implied that Soo-man eventually agreed out of fear that Shim would reveal his secret and cause him to lose Da-eun. After Da-eun's mom dies of an illness, Shim calls the police through a payphone and reports that Da-eun is actually the missing baby Mi-sun from years ago. Maybe he's doing this out of a guilty conscience (which is ironic since he guilt trips Soo-man for money.) Anyway, he has no reason not to. With the death of Da-eun's parents, he no longer has anyone to extort money from. So, Shim is the biggest winner here.

What does this twist mean? From my perspective, it means that the real killer is Shim, and that Soo-man is merely an accomplice who helped to kidnap Chae-min in order to extort money from Chae-min's parents. And after receiving the money, Shim killed Chae-min because he's useless to him now. Because the case has been so highly publicised, with Soo-man being reported in the media as the prime suspect, Soo-man who eventually dies in the car accident will forever be remembered as the killer of Chae-min. So yes, Soo-man kidnapped the child, but he was also telling the truth when he said that he did not do it (kill the child).

Why do I not think that Soo-man is the killer? Judging from how Soo-man is a parent himself who so desperately wanted a child, I don't think he would bear to kill Chae-min, a little boy of Da-eun's age. Furthermore, his acts of parental love for Da-eun, plus the scene in which he tried to prevent a group of young women from drink driving, suggest to me that he understands perfectly how parents feel and is just not the kind who would harm children.

So what is the significance of this ending? To me, it is a critique of the death penalty. Through the car accident which kills Soo-man, the movie has attempted to address the implications of the death penalty in a very creative manner. In other words, the car accident in the movie is a metaphor for the death penalty. By killing the criminal Soo-man, justice seems to be served for the victims and their family, aka Chae-min's dad. However, Chae-min's dad ends up dying in the car crash too. To me, this symbolises how the death penalty, while seemingly serving justice, merely destroys everyone in the end, including the victims and their families.

As for the question about whether the statute of limitations should be abolished, which Da-eun's friends asked at the beginning when they were in the cafe? Even though it has been brought up many times in this movie, whether it should be abolished or not is not the debate here. Clearly, the writer/director has shown us that it should be abolished, because after the statute expires, the criminal walks free. In this case, Shim, which I believe is the real killer, walks free. Even if more evidence miraculously appears that point to Shim being the real killer, he cannot be arrested. On the other hand, for criminals sentenced to the death penalty, their deaths cannot be reversed even if they were later proven innocent. And so this is also the reason why the ending seems to be an open one. It is to show the audience that "it's not over til it's over". But how do we really know when it's over? Who will be the one that says that it's over? God knows. And because there is always a margin for error, perhaps it is better to prevent innocent people from dying, even if it's just one or two of them, than to seek justice for victims by sentencing criminals to death.

What about the reason for abolishing the statute of limitation? My interpretation is that the reason shouldn't be for making criminals serve the maximum penalty (or death penalty), like what Da-eun suggested in the beginning. Instead, it should be abolished to allow law enforcement officers to continue working on old cases so that they can still arrest criminals and get them to pay for their crimes, however late it may be.

Citeste mai mult