honestly, i’m blown away at how on point that drunk!yuuri plot twist was… usually when shows try to throw that curve (eg. gossip girl or pretty little liars) it throws everything off the curve and usually doesn’t make sense and leaves for so many plotholes that will never be explained. and u can tell that the writers just put that in last minute without thinking of the story in general
yet for yuri on ice, you can tell that this plot twist–ie. the fact that viktor did know yuuri and possibly fell in love with him way earlier than anyone expected–was planned from the beginning. because everything in the previous 9 episodes can now be seen in a new light. not only that, it makes sense too. the fact that you can watch the show in two different perspectives (that is, the perspective w/o having watched episode 10 and also the one w/ the ep 10 knowledge) and have both still make sense w/o any plot holes and stuff is so impressive!!
it rly shows that the writers really crafted this story rly well, and kudos to them. idk if i can recall any other show that pulled the “plot twist that changes perspective” so well
it’s also a fantastic in the business perspective because it gives people incentive to go back and rewatch all the episodes in crunchyroll, giving more support to the creators so thats rly awesome too~~~~
I understand there’s a current recrudescence of the question as to whether Jamie’s sexual encounter with Geneva Dunsany was rape.
No, it wasn’t.
There are two parts to this question, and I’ll answer them both, but separately.
Part I: Reality
1. The situation is laid out pretty clearly: Geneva wants Jamie to have sex with her because she’s about to be married (very much against her will) to a man old enough to be her grandfather, and the only thing she can control is who she gives her maidenhead to. She’s spoiled, impulsive and doesn’t care about anyone but herself, so makes up her mind to deprive her elderly husband of the virgin he thinks he’s getting.
2. Jamie is a prisoner on parole, employed as a groom on her father’s estate. She’s sexually attracted to him, and has been flirting blatantly with him for some time—all of which he ignores. He’s the best prospect she has for what she has in mind—and she doesn’t like being flouted–so she orders him to come to her room and deflower her.
3. Naturally enough, he’s having none of this and turns her down flat. (Note that point, please…)
4. She responds by producing a letter that she’s intercepted, sent to Jamie by his sister, which not only pinpoints his family and Lallybroch, but contains enough information to get Jamie’s entire family arrested—and quite possibly hanged _en masse_–for treason, should the wrong people see it. Which, Geneva tells him, they _will_, if he doesn’t show up in her room at night, ready to do what she requires.
5. Sick with terror for his family—and helpless; he can’t strangle the girl, and even if he took the letter from her by force, she could (and would) tell the authorities everything in it. Given their relative social positions, she’d be believed, and Jamie and his family would be toast.
6. He goes to her room, and does what she wants.
OK. Now, personally, I have trouble seeing how anyone looks at that situation and emerges with the notion that it’s _Jamie_ who’s committing rape. By the mores of the early 21st century (more about that in Part II), plainly Geneva is a sexual predator, and Jamie is the one who very clearly says “No.” (“No means no,” right? Right? More about that in a moment…)
Geneva is blackmailing an innocent person, and a man who is a captive, without power or resources, coercing him into committing a serious crime (fornication with an unmarried young woman being technically a crime, even if consensual) as well as an immoral act—as well as something he patently, clearly, totally doesn’t want to do and has so stated in the baldest of terms.
It’s obvious that it’s Geneva who’s committing rape, not Jamie. Q.E.D.
So, why do a number of people think he is? See Part II.