Aliya, the daughter of a terrorism financier, develops feelings for Cruise. Cruise is an agent who pretends to be a friend. However, the person who is only supposed to reciprocate the other person’s feelings ends up giving their own heart as well.
The mission of Cruise is to become friendly with Aliya and approach her father. As the two become closer, the operation proceeds smoothly, but the person Aliya trusts and what Cruise must do grow farther apart. I sensed a different kind of tension in their emotional interactions, one distinct from the sound of gunfire.
Here, love not only hinders the mission but also allows the agent to get close to the target. Even when genuine feelings develop, the deception does not stop. My question extends beyond whether the agent returns alive. What responsibility does the country bear that ordered the agent to exploit that trust?
I believe that while “Lioness: Special Operations Team” effectively portrays the cruelty of a nation that uses love as a weapon, the drama overly focuses on the responsibility by attributing it to the personal traumas of the agents.
Becoming friends is an attack
The love between Cruise and Aliya is not a breather inserted into a spy thriller. I believe this relationship is what makes the operation itself cruel.
Typically, an infiltrator must alleviate the suspicion of the target. This is true for cruises as well, but here, the moment suspicion disappears, the problem becomes even greater. The more Aliya trusts Cruise, the more she opens the way for him to approach her family.
The process of Aliya opening her heart to a friend is the same as the operations team getting closer to the target. On one side, a relationship begins, and on the other, the mission progresses. They are experiencing completely different outcomes from the same encounter.
The friendship that the operational team desires comes with work that only the friend does not know about.
This imbalance is significant. Aliya believes she is choosing who to be with, but she is not receiving the necessary information to make that choice. The relationship is based on a lie, starting from the reason the other person is with her.
It is not as if cruise only displays false emotions throughout. As feelings develop for Aliya, he finds himself unable to separate his mission from his love. Even genuinely caring for someone cannot erase the deception he has already begun.
I felt the power of this situation here. If Cruise’s love is fake, it can be explained as a relationship fabricated for the sake of the mission. However, because it is real, the pain of continuously exploiting the trust of someone you cherish is even more agonizing.
It is difficult to definitively say that all the kindness Cruise shows Aliya is a lie. However, the fact that her kindness is helpful to the operation remains unchanged. Just because someone’s feelings are genuine does not mean that their actions will necessarily be honest.
The state exploits this very vulnerability. The sense of relief and intimacy that Aliya feels is directed towards Cruise personally, but the benefit accrues to the operational team. Only those who believe they have gained a friend are unaware that this transaction is taking place.
Therefore, the conversation between the two individuals is not merely about matters outside of the mission. It is a process of deciding what to believe and whom to let into one’s life. Even without drawing a weapon, actions are being taken that put the other person’s life at risk.
The premise that being a female agent makes this approach possible also takes on a sharper edge here. This is because the state does not stop at recognizing women’s abilities; it also puts intimate relationships to use. If so, even after the feelings become genuine, can this mission still be called a success?
The more successful a mission is, the more a person breaks down
I consider the choice that separates the results of an operation from an individual’s happiness to be the greatest achievement of this drama. Performing one’s duty well does not necessarily lead to a good outcome for the character Cruise.
Cruise is a person who escaped a life of abuse and found his place in the military. For him, the military is not just an organization that gives orders, but a place that saved him. Refusing a mission is also a betrayal of the place that accepted him.
That Cruise loves Aliya. If he follows orders, she must betray someone she cares about. If he follows his feelings, he will clash with the organization he has believed in. No matter which choice he makes, she cannot protect something precious.
Therefore, I do not agree with the criticism that the spy drama comes to a halt because the romance goes on too long. In this drama, emotional conversations are the time in which the cost of the operation mounts. The more Aliya reveals her true feelings to Cruise, the more cruel it becomes to follow orders.
Simply stating that the approach was successful does not convey the extent of its brutality. For the operation team, it was an opportunity to get closer to the target, but for Aliya, it was an event where she found someone to entrust her feelings to. If the conversations between the two people were removed, the mission might be completed faster, but something valuable would be lost.
Aliya’s situation is also important. She is a daughter of a wealthy family, but she is unable to freely decide on her own marriage. The fact that she has a lot of money does not guarantee her the right to choose whom she loves and with whom she wants to live.
It is all the more important to open one’s heart to Cruise. It is about liking someone with one’s own feelings, not as a father’s daughter or someone’s marriage partner. The plan utilizes even the feelings that Aliya has so painstakingly offered.
If you have used a friend’s trust in your work, then you should first receive thanks from the company.
However, in this type of mission, the ability to gain trust is directly linked to operational effectiveness. I like that this point makes me uncomfortable. It is because it creates a duality of feelings: support for capable agents and, at the same time, a degree of suspicion about the work they are doing.
One cannot dismiss Aliyah’s belief simply because she supports Cruise. One must not erase the life that Cruise gained in the military, even if one desires Aliya’s happiness. The drama makes us understand both characters, and then shows how one person’s duty threatens the other person’s happiness.
This conflict is more painful than any description of a cruel state order. Therefore, do the actors manage to convince the audience, with their faces and bodies, of the person caught between the order and their feelings?
Actors save the remaining person after the command is given
The actors better portray the pressure that remains even after the agent completes the mission, rather than simply showcasing the agent’s competence. If you don’t want to know the ending beforehand, you can skip the scene at the end where they return home.
Dave Annable plays Neil, who is the husband of Jo, the operations chief. His sense of stability, as he embraces Jo, comes from not demanding explanations from her. Annable, by physically accepting her embrace, creates a space where Jo no longer needs to endure.
Neil was not one of the people who carried out the orders on the ground. However, the emotions left behind by those orders are shared within the home. Because Annable calmly accepts this moment, the burden that the family carries becomes even more significant.
Jo Saldana plays the character of Jo, a CIA official who sends female agents to the families of targets. While Jo commands and operates in the field, she relies on her husband at home. Saldana demonstrates that even a commander has a limit to the pressure she can handle.
As I watched Jo lean against her husband, I felt even more suffocated than before. I couldn’t accept the scene as if everything was alright now that she was home. The first thing that came to mind was that someone who had been in control was now surrendering their body to another.
This performance is good because it doesn’t portray Jo as someone who lacks resolve. Whether Jo is giving orders in the field or relaxing at home, she is the same person. The performance highlights the fact that having the ability to do something and having the ability to endure that task are not necessarily the same.
In the role of Cruise, Raysla de Oliveira embodies the duality of a soldier: aggression and vulnerability in the face of love. Even in conversations where she grows closer to Aliya, she does not completely let her guard down. The desire to connect clashes with the mission she must keep hidden.
Thanks to that, Cruise’s anxiety does not stop at merely an expression of fear that he will be found out. One can sense his predicament: he wants to get closer, but the closer he gets, the more deeply he must deceive the other person. I believe this anxiety keeps the conversation between the two framed as part of the operation.
Stephanie Noer, who plays the role of Aliya, does not hide her desire to be loved. When Aliya confides her feelings to Cruise, I am no longer able to see Aliya only as the target’s daughter.
Thanks to these actors, the consequences of the order do not end with abstract words. However, can we say that the state is responsible simply because the agents portrayed the suffering well?
Not everything can be explained by calling it military promotional material
I disagree with the assessment that this drama is simply military propaganda. However, I will not praise it for adequately criticizing the state, solely based on the premise that an agent is suffering.
Following the preceding section, this section discusses the outcome of the final stage. While it does not detail the specific execution process, if you do not want to know the results, you can skip this section.
The operation achieves its objective of eliminating the target. However, the love between Cruise and Aliya is destroyed along with this success. For the two of them, completing the mission is not a cause for celebration.
I highly appreciate this choice. When an agent returns alive and the mission is completed, the audience naturally feels relieved. However, the drama leaves Cruise’s loss, preventing that feeling of relief.
Therefore, to simply dismiss this work as mere propaganda for showcasing capable soldiers is to miss a crucial point. The work does not claim that the ability to execute orders flawlessly leads to happiness. Instead, it portrays a situation where that very ability leads to harming a loved one.
The problem lies in what comes next. It is clear that Cruise feels guilt, and that Jo needs comfort. However, the question of what responsibility the organization that caused this suffering should bear has not been addressed for long enough.
The cruise ship must bear the consequences of its actions. Jo returns home and relies on her husband. While the order came from the state, the suffering that follows falls upon individuals and families.
If the follow-up handling of state duties is entrusted to one’s spouse, it cannot be resolved simply through family allowances.
It is not to say that Neil’s embrace was wrong. Jo needed that comfort, and the scene was undoubtedly painful. However, having a good spouse cannot absolve the responsibility for a bad order.
Having feelings of sympathy for an agent and questioning the nation that exploited that agent are two different things. The former involves sharing in the agent’s pain. The latter involves demanding accountability from those who decided that the agent’s face could be used for operations.
This drama does the former much better. However, while I am convinced by the characters’ suffering, I find the depiction of the pursuit of the nation to be lacking.
When compared to other works that depict what a nation expects from women and what it offers in return, this deficiency becomes even more apparent.
Putting women at the forefront does not mean putting responsibility at the forefront as well.
Placing women at the center of the operation was a good choice. However, it is regrettable that the focus remained on the individuals who were harmed, rather than on the nation that exploited them.
The documentary “Lioness” (2008) is a work that examines this difference. It deals with female soldiers who took part in actual combat yet found it difficult to receive institutional recognition. It is not the source material for the drama, but rather a work to view alongside it, posing the same question.
What extent does the state utilize the capabilities of women, and what responsibility does it bear for the consequences? The documentary raises the question of whether the women who took part in combat are recognized for it. There is a difference between assigning a task and treating the person who performs that task with respect.
The 2023 drama goes further by entrusting women with important missions. Even a character’s ability to connect with someone is being used in operations. What a nation gains is not only the combat capabilities of its soldiers, but also the feelings of a single individual.
The difference between the two works is clear here. The documentary asks whether the system properly accepts the women who fought. The drama shows what a woman who has sacrificed even love for her mission endures.
I support the drama’s choice to raise this question. It goes beyond simply proving that women can fight like men. However, if the premise is that someone’s feelings are used in an operation, then the process of winning that person’s heart should have been portrayed more seriously.
The process by which Cruise initially approached Aliya was too simple. Despite being the family of a dangerous target, the interaction began with them simply standing nearby. Because the time available to assess who could be trusted was short, the effort required to gain trust was reduced.
I do not intend to criticize this as an inconsistent plot. In my opinion, it is a choice that reduces the steps involved and focuses time on deepening the relationship. The problem is that this compression alleviates some of the impact of the subsequent betrayal.
The more difficult it is to earn someone’s faith, the more cruel the decision becomes to use that faith in an operation. The problem arises because Aliya opens her heart too easily. The moment Cruise betrays that faith is more significant than the process the state ordered her to undertake to gain that trust. The pain of Cruise betraying that trust outweighs the responsibility for ordering them to earn that trust.
While it can be recommended as a spy thriller where relationships crumble, the praise that it is a work that holds the state accountable to the very end should be retracted.
People’s suffering is examined to the end, while the state’s responsibility is questioned less.
My rating is 3.5 out of 5 stars. While the questions about the nation may be lacking, it is worth devoting eight episodes to. This is because the premise, that gaining love inevitably leads to fostering betrayal, is maintained until the very end. As Cruise and Aliya become closer, the audience finds it increasingly difficult to easily support the success of the plan.
Points are awarded for the choices that intertwine love and duty, and for the actors who embody the resulting pressure. However, it is not rated higher due to the overly simplistic initial approach and the perspective that reduces the nation’s responsibility to individual suffering.
What I find regrettable is not that the characters do not suffer enough. They already suffer sufficiently. I should have spent longer asking who was responsible for the orders that caused their suffering.
If you’re more interested in how the mission changes the relationships than in who wins the shootout, I recommend it. Conversely, if you’re looking for a stealth drama that meticulously builds up its approach, you’d be better off avoiding it. Even if you expect nonstop action, the emotional conversations in the latter half may feel drawn out.
When watching, it is helpful to follow what Aliyah comes to believe as the two people grow closer. It is important to consider not only the information that Cruise obtains, but also the feelings of the person who provided that information. Jo’s home life is not a separate story, but rather a place where the pressure of work spills over.
The next work to be reviewed is the documentary “Lioness” (2008). While not the original source material for the drama, it provides a good comparison of what a nation gives back to women in exchange for their abilities. It allows for a more precise articulation of the frustrations felt while watching the drama.
“Lioness” is honest in its depiction of how using love as a weapon can hurt people. I think I should have kept even the nation that wielded that weapon in view for longer.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)
Is “Lioness: Special Operations Team” based on a true story?
This is a fictional story inspired by the U.S. military program for deploying female soldiers. It is important to distinguish between the actual program and the CIA assassination operations depicted in the drama. It is better to focus on the plot element of using the intimacy of women in the operation, rather than simply recreating a true story.
How many episodes are in season 1, and is it easy to understand for first-time viewers?
The first season of 2023 consists of eight episodes. It is more important to follow Cruise’s mission and Aliya’s faith than to focus on military knowledge. Understanding why the process of the two characters growing closer is dangerous makes it easy to follow the central story.
Is it okay to watch this if you are expecting action?
While it features espionage and military action, it is not a drama with constant gunfire. The latter half of the series focuses heavily on the emotional interactions between Cruise and Aliya. It is more suitable for viewers who prefer stories that emphasize the tension of relationships breaking down, rather than meticulous approach procedures.
What are the strengths of Saldana’s acting?
I like the contrast between the decisiveness of giving orders in the field and the way the body lets go of pressure at home. It shows that even someone who commands capably has limits to how much of that work they can endure. If we look at Jo’s work and home together rather than separating them, the power of this performance comes through more clearly.
Is the documentary “Lioness” (2008) the original work?
This work is not presented as the original source material for a drama. The documentary focuses on female soldiers who participated in actual combat but faced difficulties in receiving official recognition for their service. It is a good example for examining the issue of what responsibility a nation bears when it assigns tasks to women.
