Gotcha. Fair enough.
Girls - Season 2 - Sundays on HBO
- Thread starter anaron
- Start date
- Status
Gotcha. Fair enough.
Lol what? Everyone on the show found it cringe worthy. Marnie is just so disconnected with herself. I hate Charlie for fucking her and not telling her to fuck right off.
BootlegSnackz
Member
really hope she's not done with Adam. I love Shiri Appleby
fear we will not see her after this episode though.
also: i agree with the Hannah hate. although for me it is because her body is so weird that there are no clothes that will ever look good on her ever. character stuff is a close 2nd though.
fear we will not see her after this episode though.
also: i agree with the Hannah hate. although for me it is because her body is so weird that there are no clothes that will ever look good on her ever. character stuff is a close 2nd though.
everthustodeadbeats
Member
Hours Left
Member
This episode reminded me that my favorite Daft Punk song will always been associated with Kanye West. :/
i_am_ben
running_here_and_there
The entire App company subplot is so atrociously appalling that a girl singing at a party barely registers with me.
What, he just raped someone.
Oh well yeah the app thing came out of nowhere. Another thing I don't like is that it sure doesn't feel like Ray and Charlie are bffs anymore. I guess it's because Charlie appears much less, but still. It's weird.
I thought it was alright. Adam is just straight up creepy at this point. The "Get on all fours", followed by that awful pounding from behind left me cringing. He's just not a sympathetic character at all, and there are moments he seems like a serial killer or some sociopath ready to snap. That aside, the other players storyline's were enjoyable. Oh, and I'd kill to work at Charlie's office. "Are the girls here prostitutes?"
kyoya
Member
In regards to Adam, I kept in mind that he "fell off the wagon"with regards to his alcoholism. Encountering Hannah made him get completely wasted and act insane with the girl he was dating. It'll be interesting to see what happens and if his drinking will become a major issue in upcoming episodes.
Lol at this point? Perhaps you need a refresher on what he and Hannah did in S1. And to be fair, the characters in the show regularly acknowledge that Adam looks insane. Natalia's engaged friend even said so.
Dave Meltzer
Banned
Adam was just drunk and emotional man we've all forced a woman to crawl at some point in our life come on
True. Although, it's not so much the way he looks, but how he acts. I've never really been a fan of him from the start; last night just felt like the tipping point. As in "this dude is wack, keep him away from the kids/anyone I care about". (Though I agree, there have definitely been all sorts of warning signs from the beginning)
Cornballer
Member
No.
Diseased Yak
Gold Member
I know one person with OCD has already commented, but I thought I might, too. I don't have it myself, but I lived with a person for 20+ years that did, and it can come on suddenly under high stress situations. I agree, though, that Hannah's felt tacked into the show as an afterthought, mainly because it's never (that I know of) been mentioned at all, ever, in the show's run up till now, then suddenly there it is.
My ex-wife's OCD centered on mostly mental obsessions (like those mentioned in the Huff Post article you linked) wherein she would fixate on terrible things that she was sure would come true. Most of the time, these didn't lead to compulsions, but when she was really stressed, she would feel the need to check all the door locks, oven knobs, sink faucets, and window locks in the house, by tapping each and every one of them 4 times before she could go to bed at night. Needless to say, this took a while. Through therapy and some meds, she was able to overcome most if not all of this.
Her OCD was only alluded to once, in S1 during the big fight with Marnie. Marnie says something about how Hannah used to masturbate 8 times a night. That was the only previous allusion.
Cornballer
Member
And the context in which it was said hardly alluded to the possibility of OCD.
When I say I'm rolling my eyes at the OCD stuff, it's my reaction to the way in which it is used in this show - it's become like a crutch for this poorly developed character who is earnestly the least interesting part of a show she's supposed to be the center of. What the fuck else is going on with Hannah that is worth having a discussion about? Absolutely nothing.
Man I loved that episode and hated it at the same time. Mostly because of how damn uncomfortable it made me. Especially the sex scene. I didn't think a tv show would ever show something like that but also just how uncomfortable Natalia was. I'm thinking Adam did it just to push her away.
He broke his decade-plus sobriety! I felt terrible for him.
Yep. His apartment wasn't enough. That, or he wanted to see how far he could push, and whether she'd accept it.
brianjones
Member
oh my god marnie
I looked like that wee bay gif watching that
lame that charlie banged her after that
I looked like that wee bay gif watching that
lame that charlie banged her after that
-COOLIO-
The Everyman
No way, hannah is a totally unlikeable, unrelatable character regardless of context or sex.
Exactly. She's like no woman I've met in my real 33 years of living. Though, probably because I'd avoid associating with people like her in general. Perhaps they exist, but yeah, it has nothing to do with her not being some idealized dream girl of television fantasy. Frankly, I don't really *like* anyone on this show. That's okay, I don't need to. Most of them aren't just flawed. They are flawed to the point of being unsalvagable characatures. It's fine -- this is television and I don't expect realism. I just want to be entertained; but the incessant need for critics to remind me that I "just don't like real women" is nauseating.
In the end, Hannah is the most boring of the unlikeable characters, and the one who is the least entertaining to watch. It's made worse by the fact that she has yet to realize she is no longer the star of her own show. It would be better if she'd accept that and rebalance things. It works well as an ensemble, but not as Hannah and sometimes her friends. She can't carry the show and she shouldn't try.
That said, I enjoyed this episode, probably because there was so much focus on the other characters, but I enjoy Hannah much more when she's part of the group rather than the focus of her own side story. And not because I hate "unconventional beauty" or "real women" or whatever cute packaging people want to use. No, in fact, I think I'd be just as disappointed if I had to watch an entire episode of ANY character on this show. When the balance is just right I really like it, but any of them in too large a quantity would probably make me want to turn it off. Hannah is just the only one to get enough screen time alone to get me to that point.
This isn't actually what they're saying. They're saying that people apply a double standard to flawed and unlikeable characters based on their gender. And I think that denying that that is at least somewhat true, even for people who are otherwise quite normal rational people, is to fly right into the face of reality.
Do you like and relate to every single person you know? If you do you're either a saint living among saints or you live in a bubble of familiarity.
It's OK not to like Hannah. Some people we just don't like. That's how life works. Hannah's "unlikeability" is being brought up as an argument against the show, though. And it's a bad argument. Add to that all the "Adam is cool" opinions and I cannot find a single reason for that disparity other than gender.
I think Adam, Ray, and Charlie are also flawed and unlikeable. I just never have to see them being flawed and unlikeable alone, for entire episodes. I couldn't take a show with nothing but Adam's psychotics, Ray's self loathing, or Charlie's whipped doucheness. They are all one-note and only work together.
Hannah gets the ire because she is the only one we get forced alone time with, and she is the vessel for the show runner. So she isn't just the character. She is the creator, writer, actor, and character. Therefor any dislike will pile on. It's fair. If we dislike the others, if they annoy us, the entirety of the blame cannot fall on them.
If you can give an example of a comparable situation where a male created a character for a show, wrote the character, acted the character, and said character was equally flawed and unlikeable please present the example. I can't think of one. Keep in mind that real people are flawed, and striking that balance for television is difficult, but when done right can be quite endearing. People like flawed but redeemable characters. It's relatable.
Again, I don't like any of the characters on this show. At least I can say I would never choose to spend time with them if presented that option in the real world. So, gender isn't at play here. There is just one of them that I see more than the others, and she also happens to be the one in charge of making sure that happens. I consider the criticism fair, and I'd complain about watching a show that focused heavily on any of the other characters, male or female.
Adam isn't cool. He's more entertaining than Hannah (on television -- in reality might be another story) and it was enjoyable watching the interplay when it was him and Hannah together. The overwhelming dysfunction was interesting on camera. But make no mistake, he is quickly proving himself to be a total psychopath.
They both have their moments where their flaws/unlikeableness are fun to watch, but too much of either would get old quickly for me.
...
Nearly every standup-comic-created sitcom in the 90s.
Look, I'm going to be blunt. I'm not going to go pick out a list of asshole male leads who are celebrated and also probably reflections in some way of their creator. I'm not going to do that because no matter what I pick you're going to argue that they aren't as unlikeable as Hannah in some way, or that you can relate to them better in some way.It's a dead end for both of us.
And, believe it or not, it is also not even remotely a counterargument to the issue you're picking on here. No one is saying that you (or anyone) is deliberately going out of their way to hold female leads to a different standard than male. The argument is that societal expectations around their nature are deeply ingrained and often invisible to reflection. Your entire argument rests on an assumption that your subjective viewpoint is somehow objective and free from input from your environment, which is basically impossible.
At its core, the criticism rests on a premise that you do not yourself understand your own reasons for believing something. You can argue with that, if you want. At least then you'll be arguing with something that's not a strawman.
An example? Are we talking about Home Improvement here? If so, I don't think anyone on that show was unlikeable. Flawed, goofy, satire, but not unlikeable. Seinfeld maybe? I'd give you that. It was sort of the point, but the characters were constantly involved with each other. It was carefully orchestrated to avoid giving the audience enough time for one character to become too grating.
Also -- sitcoms. Girls isn't a sitcom by traditional standards. It tries to be a drama. No one raved about Seinfeld for its realistic portrayal of real life women (or men). That kind of praise comes at a price. No one expects as much when the goal of the show is absurd humor, forced hijinks, and intentionally unrealistic portrayals of human interaction.
I could wrong, but I don't think Girls set out to be the next Seinfeld. If it has then I apologize; I've clearly come at it from the wrong angle. In that case its failings are something else entirely.
Never mind. I see. You're too caught up in being "right" in your own mind to give even one simple example. Fair enough, be right. Remember, you brought up the comparison to flawed male leads. I didn't. Once you did, you really do owe it to your argument to provide at least one example. Otherwise, the straw man belongs to you.
For all you know, I'd just say that character was painfully unlikeable. Perhaps I'd even say the show was salvaged from the unlikeable male lead by having an enjoyable supporting cast. Who knows? Until then, please stop making any assumptions about what I "might" say. If you're unwillinging or unable to present an example to your argument, frankly, you have no clue as to my response. Let's not pretend you do, shall we?
Adam has been completely nuts from frame one. His craziness sometimes manifests itself in "charming" ways but he's an absolute nutcase.
Tim the Wiz
Banned
This episode was strong on the awkward, somewhere in the vicinity of industrial strength. I actually had to pause the Marnie scene for a second.
From proximate experience, I have to agree the integration of the OCD does feel contrived, though.
From proximate experience, I have to agree the integration of the OCD does feel contrived, though.
The issue remains that you're still arguing with a strawman. I don't think I'm infallibly right at all, I just want to have an argument that isn't butting subjective appreciation against subjective appreciation.
-COOLIO-
The Everyman
I also don't find her fun or interesting to watch. her annoyance brings down the show. the cool thing about adam is that he started out as a totally unlikeable character and then we saw the endearing parts of his personality. hannah has never been endearing. i feel like she was written to be highly flawed but bubbly so we still root for her, but if so, it's not working at all.
ThisWreckage
Banned
HBO needs better quality control. It really is a pity that something like Luck didn't make it, but this show and Newsroom are still on the air.
BertramCooper
Banned
It was probably one of the better eps of the season, but that's not saying much, considering how dreadful this season has been.
But in true VanDerWerff fashion, a merely decent episode of Girls gets an A++++++.
But in true VanDerWerff fashion, a merely decent episode of Girls gets an A++++++.
Dave Meltzer
Banned
Luck wasn't cancelled because of quality or popularity issues though.
diffusionx
Gold Member
This season has been mixed. I told my fiancee it alternates between horrendous and captivating. Sunday's episode was captivating. The problem is that it has kind of lost its anchoring with the real world (except for Marnie). I know after last year, all the critics were so quick to talk about how this show is so authentic and real and encapsulates life for twentysomethings and it's almost like they wrote this season to get that out of everyone's head.
What were the endearing parts? When he stole the dog? When he was stalking Hannah after she dumped him? After he raped Natalia? The only thing I can think of is when he stood his ground on that stupid play. Other than that, he is a lunatic with severe mental problems - good for TV in a disturbing way, but not the type of guy I would call endearing. Just because he bottled it up for a bit when he met Natalia doesn't mean he is some charmer now.
What were the endearing parts? When he stole the dog? When he was stalking Hannah after she dumped him? After he raped Natalia? The only thing I can think of is when he stood his ground on that stupid play. Other than that, he is a lunatic with severe mental problems - good for TV in a disturbing way, but not the type of guy I would call endearing. Just because he bottled it up for a bit when he met Natalia doesn't mean he is some charmer now.
ThisWreckage
Banned
Right, but Newsroom and Girls remain on the air because HBO wants them to. It's been this way for a while. How to Make it in America and Bored to Death were pretty damn middling shows too.
Unlikable characters are fine. Mad Men is rife with unlikable characters. But Mad Men has great writing. Girls doesn't. That is the difference. Don Draper is a dick, but I still want to see him pull through. The characters in Girls are repulsive human beings and their fate is really irrelevant to me.
Dave Meltzer
Banned
The show is going to stay on the air as long as it's popular enough. HBO isn't some art house which cares more about quality than popularity. Not to mention the general reaction to the show isn't negative, even if you dislike it.
GremlinFool
Member
What a condescending viewpoint. So the only reason one could possibly dislike the show is because of some latent misogyny underpinning their views on humanity? Complete fucking hogwash.
You've been spewing this sort of supercilious nonsense about your own supposed "progressiveness" for enjoying the show and truly "getting it." Enough of this. Constructing a strawman is so much better than you talking down to everyone who has valid reasons for disliking this show.
- Status