You can look at Google Trends. The hype is already wearing off. It always does.

The lead actors will get lots of opportunities - will take a bit to see if they can translate their skills to other projects and to A list fame and fortune. I think Connor Storrie can. His acting was phenomenal.

Both actors played roles very different from their natural personalities so that might help them not get type cast as much. They did an excellent job in the show.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am just chuckling at all the Vanilla crowd saying it's just smut. Um, maybe tune out from Bridgerton. Or are we only offended when the leads are gay?

FWIW, I think this and Bridgerton are exactly the same - a smutty romance targeted at a largely female audience with no deep meaning behind it despite trying to throw in a little for respectability (racial stuff for Bridgerton, homophobia issues for HR.)

Neither is much my thing but there is nothing wrong with them. But all the “it is so deep it might as well be the second coming of Shakespeare!” posts here and elsewhere crack me up. It’s not. You don’t need to justify with how intellectual and meaningful and this and that it is to allow yourself to enjoy it. It’s OK to like a trashy, romancy bit of fun and admit this is what that is.

To me, the books read like that, but not the show. It feels deeper and makes audiences emotionally invested because of the incredible acting and all the little details that were changed and added in the TV adaptation.

One of the characters struggles with a language barrier and the other is on the spectrum, so verbal communication is not their forte, but the viewer is able to discern their feelings of love, longing, worry, frustration, hope, hurt etc. because of how well the actors portray them with their micro expressions, body language, and choice of specific words and inflection in he dialogue. I forget that I am watching TV; it feels like I am intruding on someone’s private relationship.

Add to that the really hot sex scenes and fresh beautiful faces (and bodies, lol), and you get a global streaming phenomenon.

It's not a global streaming phenomenon because it's deep or particularly high quality. It's a show with good acting (not great dialogue for most of it) that was well done and deserves some praise. It's not more than that. To compare it to an earlier comment, it's not The Wire. It's not making it on any top 10 lists other than popularity right now until the next big thing comes along.

Episode 5 is ranked the 13th best TV episode of all time on IMDB (and that episode has zero smut). Competing with giants like GOT, The Wire, Breaking Bad, The Sopranos, Six Feet Under, Stranger Things. Impressive for a low-budget production.

The show as a whole has a 97% critics’ rating on Rotten Tomatoes, and in the 90s from viewers too.

So yes, it is objectively a very good show.

Do you also use Niche for your school ratings?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am just chuckling at all the Vanilla crowd saying it's just smut. Um, maybe tune out from Bridgerton. Or are we only offended when the leads are gay?

FWIW, I think this and Bridgerton are exactly the same - a smutty romance targeted at a largely female audience with no deep meaning behind it despite trying to throw in a little for respectability (racial stuff for Bridgerton, homophobia issues for HR.)

Neither is much my thing but there is nothing wrong with them. But all the “it is so deep it might as well be the second coming of Shakespeare!” posts here and elsewhere crack me up. It’s not. You don’t need to justify with how intellectual and meaningful and this and that it is to allow yourself to enjoy it. It’s OK to like a trashy, romancy bit of fun and admit this is what that is.

To me, the books read like that, but not the show. It feels deeper and makes audiences emotionally invested because of the incredible acting and all the little details that were changed and added in the TV adaptation.

One of the characters struggles with a language barrier and the other is on the spectrum, so verbal communication is not their forte, but the viewer is able to discern their feelings of love, longing, worry, frustration, hope, hurt etc. because of how well the actors portray them with their micro expressions, body language, and choice of specific words and inflection in he dialogue. I forget that I am watching TV; it feels like I am intruding on someone’s private relationship.

Add to that the really hot sex scenes and fresh beautiful faces (and bodies, lol), and you get a global streaming phenomenon.

It's not a global streaming phenomenon because it's deep or particularly high quality. It's a show with good acting (not great dialogue for most of it) that was well done and deserves some praise. It's not more than that. To compare it to an earlier comment, it's not The Wire. It's not making it on any top 10 lists other than popularity right now until the next big thing comes along.

I don’t get the need to say it’s not the Wire? So it’s not the best show tv has ever produced? So what?

Because that's literally what people are saying? Someone commented on the rating on RT (earlier, not the current rating) as if that was proof that this was the most perfect TV to ever exist.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is something wrong with all these middle aged women hanging over fences, needing to be pushed back by security while screaming the actors names, crying etc.

I can't imagine the public backlash if middle aged men were out in public, screaming, crying, and reaching and trying to grab at some 20 something year old women.

I think it is embarrassing for women of any age (beyond adolescence) but for middle aged women - get it together.

Sucks to be on the other side of a double standard, isn't it? Women have been dealing with that since the beginning of time so suck it up, buttercup.

Just shows that men and women are all the same. People talk as though women are somehow more evolved but then they act like this and you realize, they are the same as the lecherous men grabbing at young women's bodies. Don't think it is a good look on anyone.

Where do you see men engaging in this behavior in current times? I can't imagine that happening now a days without a lot of backlash. Hopefully soon that backlash will extend to women as well.

Anonymous wrote:Almost all acclaimed shows I've watched in recent years contain scenes or entire plots of women getting harassed and abused by mediocre men: cheating or emotionally distant boyfriends and husbands, pushy bosses, domestic abusers, rape, murder. I am sick of it! Then comes a show where two very attractive and equally successful athletes fall for each other and have a secret, steamy relationship. It's the kind of masculinity women can actually enjoy. The female characters in the show are sensitive and cool too. The entire premise is refreshing, hence the popularity.

This is the reason. Seriously. These two points. I looooove the tenderness and longing and sensitivity, combined with masculinity, of the characters. And the girl BFFs are what all women should be.

Anonymous wrote:There is something wrong with all these middle aged women hanging over fences, needing to be pushed back by security while screaming the actors names, crying etc.

I can't imagine the public backlash if middle aged men were out in public, screaming, crying, and reaching and trying to grab at some 20 something year old women.

I think it is embarrassing for women of any age (beyond adolescence) but for middle aged women - get it together.

Sucks to be on the other side of a double standard, isn't it? Women have been dealing with that since the beginning of time so suck it up, buttercup.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Almost all acclaimed shows I've watched in recent years contain scenes or entire plots of women getting harassed and abused by mediocre men: cheating or emotionally distant boyfriends and husbands, pushy bosses, domestic abusers, rape, murder. I am sick of it! Then comes a show where two very attractive and equally successful athletes fall for each other and have a secret, steamy relationship. It's the kind of masculinity women can actually enjoy. The female characters in the show are sensitive and cool too. The entire premise is refreshing, hence the popularity.

+1. Men in a position of power opting to be tender, attentive and asking for consent is a nice change.

Yep, and also men in real life don’t seem interested in healing, often inflicting their trauma onto others. Ilya and Shane working through their baggage and emotions is enjoyable to watch because it is rarely seen in reality.

Anonymous wrote:Almost all acclaimed shows I've watched in recent years contain scenes or entire plots of women getting harassed and abused by mediocre men: cheating or emotionally distant boyfriends and husbands, pushy bosses, domestic abusers, rape, murder. I am sick of it! Then comes a show where two very attractive and equally successful athletes fall for each other and have a secret, steamy relationship. It's the kind of masculinity women can actually enjoy. The female characters in the show are sensitive and cool too. The entire premise is refreshing, hence the popularity.

+1. Men in a position of power opting to be tender, attentive and asking for consent is a nice change.

Almost all acclaimed shows I've watched in recent years contain scenes or entire plots of women getting harassed and abused by mediocre men: cheating or emotionally distant boyfriends and husbands, pushy bosses, domestic abusers, rape, murder. I am sick of it! Then comes a show where two very attractive and equally successful athletes fall for each other and have a secret, steamy relationship. It's the kind of masculinity women can actually enjoy. The female characters in the show are sensitive and cool too. The entire premise is refreshing, hence the popularity.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I appreciate that it is a very low budget show, but the creators clearly put a lot of effort into doing a good job. It’s also great that they gave opportunities to lesser known actors. The actor that plays the Russian is fantastic. He isn’t even Russian he is from Texas.

Yes, all of this. The acting is quite good, especially the actor who plays Ilya. I was very surprised that he isn't Russian or Russian speaking. A lot of the show is also beautifully shot and has really good music. I was not expecting to like it so much.

+1. Connor Storrie's acting is incredible, he carries that show. I was shocked to find out that he is from Texas. His Russian is excellent (my mother is Russian, and I am fluent).
He is so hot too.

Agree. But Hudson Williams was also outstanding, just more subtle. They don’t state it in the show, but in the books, Shane is mildly autistic and Hudson played the character with that in mind. It’s a really strong performance.

Fair point. Both leads are excellent actors.
I haven’t enjoyed an indie show like this in years.

The physical acting in this series is phenomenal. The way Connor can convey so much emotion with just one look. Hudson too. Man..I want the best for these talented young actors.

+1. They fell in love early on, but neither believed the other could possibly feel the same, plus the stigma of being gay in the NHL, so they wouldn’t admit it out loud for almost 10 years. But boy did those longing, love drunk eyes tell the story!

Funny enough, if you Google "love drunk eyes", the image that comes up now next to the definition is of Ilya Rozanov 😍

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's basically gay porn.

Yuck.

It is gay porn in the same way Bridgerton is straight porn. Both are soft core. They imply sex but don't show anything graphic or explicit.

Actual porn typically includes genitals and sex.

These shows include nudity without showing genitals and simulated (pretend) sex that has been choreographed and is being directed - but that doesn't include any actual sex.

If nudity and pretend sex scenes bother you, you will not enjoy it.

Anonymous wrote:It's basically gay porn.

Yuck.

I don't think season 2 will get that much hype. Mostly the book club readers will be into it. Sure there is still a lot of sex / love in it but when that is in a committed relationship, it isn't quite the same as sneaking into hotel rooms.

Hockey culture isn't nearly as toxic as it used to be, especially at the NHL level. It has come a long way from where it was ten years ago when the book was written. The players get a lot of training now and just generally culturally, views are different. Hockey culture changed in Canada and with so many NHL players being Canadian, it has also changed the NHL over time. Still good if this helps it continue to head in the right direction.

I think Connor has the potential to go on to be an A lister / movie star. He is a phenomenal actor. Hudson will be popular for awhile but I don't know if that will carry on as far outside of the show. He did a great job in the series.

In addition to just good casting and other things mentioned here, the show and books also delve into the world of toxic hockey culture, which is huge issue in the sport. We’ll see this play out more in the next 2 seasons. I’m looking forward to it. Glad to see so many in the hockey world embrace the discourse. Not everyone, of course, as seen in this thread. But it’s certainly more than “middle aged women” loving the show.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am just chuckling at all the Vanilla crowd saying it's just smut. Um, maybe tune out from Bridgerton. Or are we only offended when the leads are gay?

FWIW, I think this and Bridgerton are exactly the same - a smutty romance targeted at a largely female audience with no deep meaning behind it despite trying to throw in a little for respectability (racial stuff for Bridgerton, homophobia issues for HR.)

Neither is much my thing but there is nothing wrong with them. But all the “it is so deep it might as well be the second coming of Shakespeare!” posts here and elsewhere crack me up. It’s not. You don’t need to justify with how intellectual and meaningful and this and that it is to allow yourself to enjoy it. It’s OK to like a trashy, romancy bit of fun and admit this is what that is.

To me, the books read like that, but not the show. It feels deeper and makes audiences emotionally invested because of the incredible acting and all the little details that were changed and added in the TV adaptation.

One of the characters struggles with a language barrier and the other is on the spectrum, so verbal communication is not their forte, but the viewer is able to discern their feelings of love, longing, worry, frustration, hope, hurt etc. because of how well the actors portray them with their micro expressions, body language, and choice of specific words and inflection in he dialogue. I forget that I am watching TV; it feels like I am intruding on someone’s private relationship.

Add to that the really hot sex scenes and fresh beautiful faces (and bodies, lol), and you get a global streaming phenomenon.

It's not a global streaming phenomenon because it's deep or particularly high quality. It's a show with good acting (not great dialogue for most of it) that was well done and deserves some praise. It's not more than that. To compare it to an earlier comment, it's not The Wire. It's not making it on any top 10 lists other than popularity right now until the next big thing comes along.

Episode 5 is ranked the 13th best TV episode of all time on IMDB (and that episode has zero smut). Competing with giants like GOT, The Wire, Breaking Bad, The Sopranos, Six Feet Under, Stranger Things. Impressive for a low-budget production.

The show as a whole has a 97% critics’ rating on Rotten Tomatoes, and in the 90s from viewers too.

So yes, it is objectively a very good show.