It's been a while since I've come this way. When I am here, I try to give honest opinions in my reviews and keep them on the subject matter. I always like to read others' reviews so that I may find a kindred spirit or see an opposing viewpoint so that I might become enlightened on a particular part of the movie or show I would not have otherwise taken into consideration. So, imagine my bafflement when I read another review, or more to the point, the "other" review for this show, take umbrage with a few points in my review; that which the other reviewer refers to my input as "the other review." This to avoid bringing names into she/it/theys' pejorative views so as not to infer violation to the site's community guidelines. That being said, let's review the review of a review. >claps & rubs hands<

• About the Child Lock comment : This is why you do not post from emotion. It messes with your ability to comprehend. I said "if you have anyone in the house under 16 years of age..." Thus rendering my detractor's rendition of the streaming service's rating system pointless. Not to mention, how this particular point could be a spoiler is beyond my meager comprehension because it exists outside the actual show. >shrugs<
  
• The country's homosexual population : Thank you for running the numbers. I grossly overstated that aspect, appreciation for the correction. The establishment is already using their status as a means to subvert the nuclear family. And by this very show alone as proof, through a medium most viewed by children. I did not acknowledge the slavery nor the xenophobia *because * the forementioned aspect overshadowed the premise of the series; that and the absolutely dreadful writing. It's hard to invest in a show when you're looking to be entertained, and the show instead is shoving someone's social politics in your face.
  
• Our lesbian "protagonist's" motivations : Oh, where we can rationalize (lie to) ourselves not to be the bad-guy! There is nothing wrong with hating someone who holds you in bondage. There is nothing wrong with wanting to escape said bondage. Buuuuuuuuuuut...hold those accountable who are to be held accountable. "What's that mean?" I hear you, oh-ye-of-soft-feelings, ask bewildered. It means the human boy grew up with them with NO ill-intent toward either the "protagonist" nor her brother. They played together, as children do; free of all the sometimes-biased things we, as adults, hold onto in order to guide the little ones as best we see fit. It was not their human "brother" who was their enemy, as you have seemed to conveniently forgotten. It was the mother. It was the mother who "kept them in their place" as slaves. It was the mother who slated them to be protectors for her son by making them assassins. It was the mother who pushed her reluctant son to summon a demon and do harm to people he considered family. It was the mother who took the spell AND the elf-brother fusing them into a demon. WOW!! Do the truth bombs stop there!?! Naaaw. Let's not forget the human boy went on to become a very powerful magician in his own right AFTER the death of his mother. So, I guess that blows that "(not so good at some magic, maybe?)" snark, right out of the water, huh?
  
• The human "antagonist" motivations : "is shown to be reckless, unwilling to listen to reason and willing to put others at risk as a result of his own hubris, all within the first five minutes of the audience meeting him, and his behavior becomes more abhorrent the more time we spend with him." This is literally the so called "protagonist" in this series for the entire show. She is all of this consistently from the moment they start the heist. Everything I said in the review is accurate. They are thieves. They failed in their crime to steal; miserably performed, since one of them got caught. Why should the owner of the mcguffin, listen to anything thieves have to say? They were committing a crime for money. The human is an accomplished magician and studied the magic needed to bring the antago-- "protagonist's" brother back to the world of the living. There is also no "murder" to be committed by killing the elf-girl's (eghk) girlfriend. They were thieves. They failed. She was caught. Laws of the time gives him the right to execute her. You know what Law is, correct? It's those ideas put into writing agreed upon by an elected group to make decisions on behalf of the people so order may be maintained, and people can live peacefully. They are not subjective to your feelings...? Because your feelings change all the time, and that model is not sustainable to encompass a vast group of people.

Bad writing is bad writing, especially when you shove a niche idea toward the masses, and insists they like it. And diverse characters are never a problem WHEN they are not inappropriately placed (shoehorned) into a storyline. Checkboxes and "quota buzzwords" (whatever that means) are ALWAYS an unwanted anchor to creativity or storytelling.
I am grateful the site allows my "asinine and homophobic" (eyeroll....Oh!! Those buzzwords...!) rant to remain. My review never needed a mask to be anything but what it was, my opinion. I am not trying to convince anyone not to see the show. I gave my opinion of the series and left it to others to make their own conclusions. Try to remember that next time you feel the need to be directly critical of another.