mkfusenation
Portugal // BL Dramaland
Why can't people seem to appreciate flawed characters?
This review won't be a review per say but moreso another perspective of the show when compared to the majority of the negative reviews on this site. I feel the need to do this especially because a handful of these reviews almost made me decide not to watch this show. I won't go into a lot of details regarding the storyline since so many reviews have already done so. However, I'd like to leave my two cents here because most of the reviews shown here are negative and most of them are based on two things - Joe's naivety and Ming's toxicity.
One thing about this series is that it depcts toxic relationships with very flawed characters. It's been advertised since the beginning, it's based in an infamously toxic chinese novel (by an author who's well known for her toxic main leads), there's sinopsis, tags, trailer, etc. And yet people still seem to be hiper fixated in complaining about it, as if it hasn't been advertised at all.
Don't like these themes? Don't watch.
This is the same issue with Kinnporsche (which has two directors in common). So many people review bombing with negative ratings regarding the toxic storyline. There was even a review that complained so much and at the end considered this one of the best series of this year - giving this a 6. At least be coherent with your words and your scoring.
I understand the issue people have with Ming, he's an obvious red flag who is toxic from the beginning, a very flawed character who is depicted since the beginning as such. Flawed characters have existed in stories, series and movies for a long time and oftentimes they give way to intrigue storylines and help capture the viewers attention to try to understand how this person behaves the way they do. Flawed characters are real and human and I don't understand how so many people fail to appreciate that this type of representation is needed in art too. Yes, Ming is a huge asshole and a toxic narcissist. That makes him an even more compelling main character.
As for Joe, he's an absolute cinammon roll. He's someone who falls in love with someone he shouldn't. I see so many people stating how he's naive for liking Ming and that it's not realistic. Excuse me? How many people end up in toxic relationships despite the clear signs? How many people fail to see the red flags because of the rose-colored glasses? It's as realistic as it can get. Fortunately, My Stand-in still manages not to be as toxic as some relationships in real life get - and not as toxic as the original novel, thankfully. I feel like this show actually managed to tell the story really well, they allowed for Ming's character to grow and for Joe to realize that no matter how much he tried, he couldn't escape his feelings for Ming.
Sure, y'all can say Joe's dumb - he is. But it feels weird to reduce his feelings and struggles to just that - naivety and stupidity. Joe and Ming are such complex characters and to reduce this complexity to just being dumb or toxic is like missing the whole point of the show. The story isn't told just by dialogue or just by nc scenes. There's so many small details the directors focused on to conect the storyline. The actors were amazing too, the change in Up's eyes depending on Ming's emotional stability in different parts of the show was mesmerizing to watch - he's such a great actor. Poom was also absolutely amazing as Joe, reflecting his emotional maturity before and after his death.
Flawed and difficult characters are extremely complex. They're harder to understand, harder to act and harder to love. It's a challenge for the actors involved in these storylines and it's a challenge for the whole team. Yet, they're the most intriguing, the ones that make our brains work to understand, to fill in the blanks. There's a reason why we love villains. It's the same train of thought. Flawed characters are relatable, even if only a tiny little bit. Sure, in Ming's case, I really hope he's not as relatable to everyone out there, but there's realism to his character, like it or not.
This is why I don't understand the hate. I understand the constructive criticism and I have my own too, but to review bomb a show like this based on something it has advertised since the beginning? I don't get it.
One thing about this series is that it depcts toxic relationships with very flawed characters. It's been advertised since the beginning, it's based in an infamously toxic chinese novel (by an author who's well known for her toxic main leads), there's sinopsis, tags, trailer, etc. And yet people still seem to be hiper fixated in complaining about it, as if it hasn't been advertised at all.
Don't like these themes? Don't watch.
This is the same issue with Kinnporsche (which has two directors in common). So many people review bombing with negative ratings regarding the toxic storyline. There was even a review that complained so much and at the end considered this one of the best series of this year - giving this a 6. At least be coherent with your words and your scoring.
I understand the issue people have with Ming, he's an obvious red flag who is toxic from the beginning, a very flawed character who is depicted since the beginning as such. Flawed characters have existed in stories, series and movies for a long time and oftentimes they give way to intrigue storylines and help capture the viewers attention to try to understand how this person behaves the way they do. Flawed characters are real and human and I don't understand how so many people fail to appreciate that this type of representation is needed in art too. Yes, Ming is a huge asshole and a toxic narcissist. That makes him an even more compelling main character.
As for Joe, he's an absolute cinammon roll. He's someone who falls in love with someone he shouldn't. I see so many people stating how he's naive for liking Ming and that it's not realistic. Excuse me? How many people end up in toxic relationships despite the clear signs? How many people fail to see the red flags because of the rose-colored glasses? It's as realistic as it can get. Fortunately, My Stand-in still manages not to be as toxic as some relationships in real life get - and not as toxic as the original novel, thankfully. I feel like this show actually managed to tell the story really well, they allowed for Ming's character to grow and for Joe to realize that no matter how much he tried, he couldn't escape his feelings for Ming.
Sure, y'all can say Joe's dumb - he is. But it feels weird to reduce his feelings and struggles to just that - naivety and stupidity. Joe and Ming are such complex characters and to reduce this complexity to just being dumb or toxic is like missing the whole point of the show. The story isn't told just by dialogue or just by nc scenes. There's so many small details the directors focused on to conect the storyline. The actors were amazing too, the change in Up's eyes depending on Ming's emotional stability in different parts of the show was mesmerizing to watch - he's such a great actor. Poom was also absolutely amazing as Joe, reflecting his emotional maturity before and after his death.
Flawed and difficult characters are extremely complex. They're harder to understand, harder to act and harder to love. It's a challenge for the actors involved in these storylines and it's a challenge for the whole team. Yet, they're the most intriguing, the ones that make our brains work to understand, to fill in the blanks. There's a reason why we love villains. It's the same train of thought. Flawed characters are relatable, even if only a tiny little bit. Sure, in Ming's case, I really hope he's not as relatable to everyone out there, but there's realism to his character, like it or not.
This is why I don't understand the hate. I understand the constructive criticism and I have my own too, but to review bomb a show like this based on something it has advertised since the beginning? I don't get it.
Was this review helpful to you?
