We have a lot of information about Sharla. We know her love of Kpop. It's easy to know her tastes. With him, we have almost nothing. I'd have to know more about him than he's willing to share publicly to see why. Attraction is a complicated thing.
For all we know, he was moved by her love of cats and Pokemon.
Attraction will always make someone look better than they might to others.
I had friends who dated people who didn't look attractive at all to me, but they thought they had a Brad Pitt or a Beyonce at their side and you couldn't tell them otherwise. Just the magical vision of attraction. I guess he looks like a Kpop idol in Sharla's eyes. We can't see it, but that seems to be how he looks to Sharla. I think that's kind of sweet in a way.
Promoting PULL users to contact family members of snowflakes is against PULL rules:
Everything is fair game, aside from addresses, phone numbers, and personal information of uninvolved parties, such as family and friends. Many have quoted your comment that includes the personal accounts of her family members. They'll need to delete that part.
Remove all of what I quoted here. This part violates PULL rules.
I heard a charge that her family's personal information was posted on this thread. I can't seem to find it though in the comments. If this is true and a users knows which comment please report it and I'll review it and decide whether it violates our guidelines.
It is against PULL rules to post personal information like addresses, private phone numbers, and personal information of family members (such as their numbers, email, workplaces ect.).
Do not promote contacting and harassing the snowflake on PULL forums. You are free to give your opinions about the snowflake and their content. Not say, "let's spam their account and get them fired".
Do not contact and harass the snowflake and the users. This violates PULL rules. You can discuss them, even share your private interactions, but encouraging and promoting harassing them is against our guidelines.
Putting aside everything else since we may never know the circumstances off-camera, the reaction was supposed to be the climax of the video.
He sincerely wanted to make her happy, but he also wanted to make the viewers happy.
The more I think about it, the more I think Jun was the one who made the mistake. He overestimated what his wife's reaction would be. He must've expected her to get really happy like how she did in his White Day Surprise video, but got a muted one. Her gushy reaction in the White Day Surprise video is sweet and endearing. You can tell she's moved. That one had build up. He has a dinner prepared and it's around White Day. He gives her a ring. Great build up.
He said it was her birthday present and to show appreciation to her and the viewers. This is a bit confusing. He should've just settled on "it's for your birthday". The White Day video had build up from the cake to the ring. I think that's why her reaction is so natural and moving.
We had great build-up as viewers, but Rachel had none. She was shuffled in and shown vials with flowers.
He should have just settled on "Happy Birthday" as the reason and decorated the table for her birthday, fixed a cake, and while she's eating given the gift. She needed build up like what she had the in the White Day video to get the gushy romantic feels.
I was surprised as well. I wouldn't think much of it (some people react in a very muted way), but she's made such big responses to stuff in other videos and collaborations. Rachel reacted big to her cat's surprises or when they unboxed stuff people sent them.
I think the gift was too unexpected for her and she didn't know what to think.
The video is great. Unfortunately, from a viewer's standpoint, her low-key reaction is a bit of a letdown. I know Sharla's "Sooo goood" is too much at times, but no reaction is worse. You wait for that moment, on the edge of your seat, thinking, "This'll be good. She's gonna flip out with joy. Jun's did such a sweet thing. What woman won't melt?" I waited for that gushy heart-warming moment that makes me squee and instead got a stiff, "What is it?"
That's it? That's the reaction?
It kills the ending of an otherwise wonderful video. Even a Sharla "Sooo goood!" would have worked better.
It's Japan. You'd think she'd be used to make some big "Thank you" reaction to gifts.
I'm torn. Would a fake reaction have been better than the stiff reaction we got? It would have at least been better for the video's ending.