One Day on Netflix… bingeworthy

[Anonymous]

I loved it and found it believable. Maybe not the first episode, but definitely the later ones. Their bond was built over a long period of time, it wasnt a "sparks fly" it was a slow burn. She's really funny and quippy and normal compared to some of his life.

I hated the ending. But I'm really bad with that sort of thing. Very dehydrated now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I loved it and found it believable. Maybe not the first episode, but definitely the later ones. Their bond was built over a long period of time, it wasnt a "sparks fly" it was a slow burn. She's really funny and quippy and normal compared to some of his life.

I hated the ending. But I'm really bad with that sort of thing. Very dehydrated now.

I thought the ending was sweet. It flashed forward a bit and provided closure while also tying back to memories.

The ending in the movie wasn’t nearly as good.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I loved it and found it believable. Maybe not the first episode, but definitely the later ones. Their bond was built over a long period of time, it wasnt a "sparks fly" it was a slow burn. She's really funny and quippy and normal compared to some of his life.

I hated the ending. But I'm really bad with that sort of thing. Very dehydrated now.

I thought the ending was sweet. It flashed forward a bit and provided closure while also tying back to memories.

The ending in the movie wasn’t nearly as good.

I binged the series last week, and rewatched the movie last night and wow the bike scene in the movie is much more graphic. I feel like the story worked much better as a tv show (and as a book), the development and ups and downs of their relationship was much richer in the longer format.

[Anonymous]

The acting is so good. Leo Woodall deserves an Emmy for this performance. So many gut-wrenching scenes and he nails them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There are mismatched couples by looks yes. But there something: money, charm, selflessness. Emma is a humorless pain. I can see him with Tilly before Emma

This. Emma in the series didn't show anything that would make his attraction to her make sense. She was unattractive, whiny, humorless, and aimless. Anne Hathaway did a much better job in this role. I will say that the series did get better after the first couple episodes. The actor who played Dex knocked it out of the park.

The actress who played Tilly did a great job. She was bubbly, fun, sensual. It was easy to see how a guy could be really attracted to Tilly. Looks don't have to be even, but generally there's something else like personality, money, accomplishments, responsibility, or *something* that makes the hot, wealthy person fall for the much less attractive one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are mismatched couples by looks yes. But there something: money, charm, selflessness. Emma is a humorless pain. I can see him with Tilly before Emma

This. Emma in the series didn't show anything that would make his attraction to her make sense. She was unattractive, whiny, humorless, and aimless. Anne Hathaway did a much better job in this role. I will say that the series did get better after the first couple episodes. The actor who played Dex knocked it out of the park.

The actress who played Tilly did a great job. She was bubbly, fun, sensual. It was easy to see how a guy could be really attracted to Tilly. Looks don't have to be even, but generally there's something else like personality, money, accomplishments, responsibility, or *something* that makes the hot, wealthy person fall for the much less attractive one.

It makes me think of Never Have I Ever, where the traditionally hot guy falls for the girl (it’s only a coincidence that both women are Indian, it’s just what I’ve watched recently in this area). In that, it’s totally believable that Paxton would fall for Devi. They have great chemistry that makes him look beyond his usual circle. I didn’t buy it here, and agree with the PP who said that it was more believable for him to fall for Tilly.

(And I say traditionally hot, but I find all the women here attractive as well, just not what someone like Dex would go for without more chemistry.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are mismatched couples by looks yes. But there something: money, charm, selflessness. Emma is a humorless pain. I can see him with Tilly before Emma

This. Emma in the series didn't show anything that would make his attraction to her make sense. She was unattractive, whiny, humorless, and aimless. Anne Hathaway did a much better job in this role. I will say that the series did get better after the first couple episodes. The actor who played Dex knocked it out of the park.

The actress who played Tilly did a great job. She was bubbly, fun, sensual. It was easy to see how a guy could be really attracted to Tilly. Looks don't have to be even, but generally there's something else like personality, money, accomplishments, responsibility, or *something* that makes the hot, wealthy person fall for the much less attractive one.

I think some of this may be a British vs. an American sensibility. Emma is sharp and witty, and that seems to count for more in British circles than American circles. She's not conventionally attractive, but she's not ugly, either, and an attraction to someone who's not conventionally attractive is what makes Dex more interesting as well. If he's just falling for a beauty, he seems more vapid (and he first hooks up with Sylvie, who is quite gorgeous, when he's still clubbing and living a posher, more debauched, life).

[Anonymous]

Hillarious! The FT agreed with me that this match would NEVER happen (I’m the upstream jock).

The Financial Times, everybody:

I hate to be the one to disappoint, especially in Valentine’s week and in the fugue of romance that tends to befall us at the time of year. But we must disabuse ourselves of the cultural preoccupation that hot, dumb posh boys with crowds of buddies fall for smart, caustic, socially awkward girls.

The latest manifestation of this pervasive brain/brawn romantic fiction, One Day, started streaming on Netflix last weekend. A 14-part adaptation of David Nicholls’ rabid bestseller, first published in 2009, it follows a will-they-won’t-they-ever-get-their-rocks-off friendship over decades via an annual check-in — the perfect episodic structure for a TV adaptation in this binge-drama age.

Most critics have adored the show’s slow-burning romantic arc: boy with zero plans or ambitions has one-night encounter with star academic on their last day at Edinburgh university; boy stumbles through life buffered by his good looks and private wealth, while girl stumbles through bad relationships and career disappointment buffered by the idealistic notion that she will one day do the world some good. Boy hits rock bottom. Girl starts to achieve goals. Boy is saved by girl who has forever cherished a largely unrequited, almost creepy, crush.

One Day is all part of the much fancied cultural weakness for the notion that true love must follow a painful path. Lysander first spat out the argument in A Midsummer Night’s Dream — largely to justify his decision to ditch his current girlfriend and go chase someone else instead. It’s become a collective passion that true love can cut through class, attitude and looks. Everyone, from Jane Austen to Sally Rooney, has made a fortune on the premise that, if you are pure and patient, you will transcend socio-economic barriers (and physical disadvantage) and your prince will come to you.

Spoiler alert. Even when these people find love, fate tends to dash it on the head. As Love Story taught us, the outcome of these mawkish romantic dramas tends to be a denouement in which one of the couple must be martyred so that the other can appreciate the ecstasy of how it was to feel the “perfect love”. Invariably this must be the woman, because she is, after all, the more fragile sex. The hot boy is left to struggle forward, lonely, sad and irresistible with his still floppy hair and sparkly eyes.

And people love a posh boy, especially this year. It’s an odd kink that in this moment of social awareness, the super-wealthy are being so deified on screen. One Day’s Dexter hails from the bucolia of a handsome manor in the shires, but he’s not as wealthy as his first wife, who seems to live on an estate inhabited by the extras of Saltburn.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are mismatched couples by looks yes. But there something: money, charm, selflessness. Emma is a humorless pain. I can see him with Tilly before Emma

This. Emma in the series didn't show anything that would make his attraction to her make sense. She was unattractive, whiny, humorless, and aimless. Anne Hathaway did a much better job in this role. I will say that the series did get better after the first couple episodes. The actor who played Dex knocked it out of the park.

The actress who played Tilly did a great job. She was bubbly, fun, sensual. It was easy to see how a guy could be really attracted to Tilly. Looks don't have to be even, but generally there's something else like personality, money, accomplishments, responsibility, or *something* that makes the hot, wealthy person fall for the much less attractive one.

I think some of this may be a British vs. an American sensibility. Emma is sharp and witty, and that seems to count for more in British circles than American circles. She's not conventionally attractive, but she's not ugly, either, and an attraction to someone who's not conventionally attractive is what makes Dex more interesting as well. If he's just falling for a beauty, he seems more vapid (and he first hooks up with Sylvie, who is quite gorgeous, when he's still clubbing and living a posher, more debauched, life).

But that’s it; Emma is sharp and dour, she’s not witty at all. Sylvie is witty, Emma’s observations are the language’s equivalent of clubbing baby seals. She’s insufferable and not good looking. You really have to be good looking to be this painful

[Anonymous]

Emma is not considered witty in British circles.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Rom-Com lol

gross. not reading further. how old are all of you?

[Anonymous]

FT is right, caustic. Emma is caustic

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I loved it and found it believable. Maybe not the first episode, but definitely the later ones. Their bond was built over a long period of time, it wasnt a "sparks fly" it was a slow burn. She's really funny and quippy and normal compared to some of his life.

I hated the ending. But I'm really bad with that sort of thing. Very dehydrated now.

I thought the ending was sweet. It flashed forward a bit and provided closure while also tying back to memories.

The ending in the movie wasn’t nearly as good.

I dont disagree, I just hate death and cried my face off

[Anonymous]

I was a bit relieved tbh. She was sooooo boring and made Leo a dull boy

[Anonymous]

Hilarious! 🤣