Board Thread:General Discussion/@comment-1255374-20160227225840/@comment-995426-20160412130557

Mona Lisa is one of those things that brings out the worst in fandoms. People seem to either love her for shallow reasons, or they hate her because she appeals to shallow interests at the expense of any real depth or chemistry. Yoshimickster is right&mdash;it might have ultimately been better had Ramona's relationship disintegrated rapidly (or maybe proven problematic for personality differences, or maybe simply didn't turn into some big romance thing), because, when it comes down to it, they rushed into a relationship as complete strangers. I mean, I've been in love numerous times, including as a teenager, and it's mentally insulting when a fictional romance either doesn't have any real depth, or if a romance rushed into doesn't have any real consequences. Something as serious as an epic romance should have depth and chemistry, or it will feel like nails on a blackboard to fair portions of the audience, just like Fox and Krystal, and like Bella and Edward, and like Anakin and Padmé, and also, ironically, like Kevin Costner and Whitney Houston's photogenic-but-chemistry-devoid characters in The Bodyguard where the song "I Will Always Love You" came from. And as long as a fandom fully understands this and keeps it in mind, maybe they can come to better understand just why it polarizes audiences the way it does. Does that make sense?

Also, I tried to keep my comment shorter and more to the point than usual. How did I do?