or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Culture › Entertainment and Culture › Girls
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Girls - Page 2

post #16 of 59
To be honest, this show is pretty mediocre in the most boring way. Branding it as a "smart comedy" is a bit of an unintentionally pejorative way of saying that it's content to take on poignant themes without feeling obligated to do it compellingly. Knowing it exists is really enough to get the point across.
post #17 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by StephenHero View Post

To be honest, this show is pretty mediocre in the most boring way. Branding it as a "smart comedy" is a bit of an unintentionally pejorative way of saying that it's content to take on poignant themes without feeling obligated to do it compellingly. Knowing it exists is really enough to get the point across.

Best way I've ever seen this put.
post #18 of 59
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by StephenHero View Post

To be honest, this show is pretty mediocre in the most boring way. Branding it as a "smart comedy" is a bit of an unintentionally pejorative way of saying that it's content to take on poignant themes without feeling obligated to do it compellingly. Knowing it exists is really enough to get the point across.

Yep, right on the money. But I will keep watching it. shog[1].gif
post #19 of 59
Kareem Abdoul Jabbar does not approve of your UES lifestyle:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/kareem-abduljabbar/girls-review_b_2593756.html
Quote:
Clearly on an emotional high from her Golden Globe wins, Lena Dunham, Creator/Writer/Director/Star of the HBO series Girls, recently gave an interview in which she dismissed criticism of her show as coming mostly from 58-year-old men who didn't understand -- and I'm paraphrasing and reading between the lines -- the show's new-generation originality and youthful exuberance.

That's odd considering that Vulture reported that the show's single largest audience, 22 percent, is "white dudes over 50." In fact, 56 percent of the show's audience is male. Some say it's because of the frequent nudity and graphic sex. That doesn't hurt. But the main reason to watch Girls is because the show obviously is struggling to be a voice of its generation, just as The Catcher in the Rye, Go Tell It on the Mountain, The Naked and the Dead, On the Road, Beloved, Generation X, The Joy Luck Club, Slaves of New York, Less Than Zero, and Bright Lights, Big City were voices of their generations.

Girls wants to tell us something important about twentysomething females of the 21st Century. And, as the elders of our society, we should always be listening to those new voices crying out.

But what are they telling us?

1. Their world is mostly white.

Last season the show was criticized for being too white. Watching a full season could leave a viewer snow blind. This season that white ghetto was breached by a black character who is introduced as some jungle fever lover, with just enough screen time to have sex and mutter a couple of lines about wanting more of a relationship. A black dildo would have sufficed and cost less.

I don't believe that people of color, sexual preference, or gender need to be shaken indiscriminately into every series like some sort of exotic seasoning. If the story calls for a black character, great. A story about a black neighborhood doesn't necessarily need white characters just to balance the racial profile. But this really seemed like an effort was made to add some color -- and it came across as forced.

2. They like to talk about (and sometimes engage in) sex.

It's like a checklist of being naughty: masturbation (check), sex during period (check), oral sex (check), anal sex (check), virginity (check), etc. The show is actually at its most engaging during these awkward, fumbling, and mostly embarrassing (for the characters) scenes. The characters talk boldly about sex, but their actions are often shy and unsatisfying. The contrast of the generation that's been taught that pretty much anything goes sexually trying to act cool while struggling with their vulnerabilities is generally fresh and original and insightful about this generation.

3. They're too self-conscious, too cutesy, and not that funny.

We're supposed to find these girls somehow charming because of their flawed characters. Their intense self-involvement is meant to be cute and it can be... at times. But not enough to overcome our impatience with their inability to have any personal insight. They're all educated but fatally ignorant.

This isn't all Girls fault. It's unfair to put so much of a burden on what is basically a standard sitcom. Some of the fault lies with the audience's desperation for a generational voice that they turn to a sitcom to express it rather than great literature. Filmmaker and short story writer (and Dunham fan) Miranda July is more accurately a voice of a generation adrift in the rough waters of Great Expectations and a Great Recession.

When it takes itself seriously is when it stumbles. I just wish it would express its seriousness by being funnier. Seinfeld made it a point to ridicule the characters' shallowness and self-involvement, raising it to a level of social commentary. And it was funny. Two other girl-centric shows that reached these same heights to be voices of a generation were My So-Called Life and Wonderfalls. Both funny, yet also insightful and original. Perhaps that's why they both only lasted one season before becoming cult hits. Girls, a safer more mousy voice, has already been renewed for a third season.

4. The guys are more interesting than the girls.

Adam, Hannah's (Lena Dunham) abrasive boyfriend, is a wonderful character whose quirkiness never diminished his depth of character. The episode in which he performs in the one-man show is brilliant. Charlie, Marnie's ex-boyfriend, is a complex mix of too stable and too nice. The fact that he's dumped by a girl who is actually more boring and shallow than she claims he is, makes for some excellent social commentary, although that seems like an accidental byproduct. Could it be that Dunham actually is better at writing guy characters than girl characters?

Girls' heart and mind is in the right place. It wants to be more than the sum of its familiar parts. And sometimes it is. Maybe this season its voice will be louder and clearer and have more to say. It's worth listening for.
post #20 of 59
Jesus, who thought it'd be a good idea to have Kareem Abdul-Jabbar (as great a Laker as he was) dabbling in media analysis?

Girls is interesting because it experiments with genre. It takes on the mantle of Sex and the City (explicitly cited in the first episode) in large part by taking up similar stock characters (the writer, the goodie-goodie, the urbane sexpot, the professional) but then does something new with this existing pattern. And part of what's new is that it pushes self-reflexivity pretty far (i.e., the nepotism involved in the actual production of the show is actually reflected in the characters and the plot). It's fine if you deem this new angle worthless and decadent (it probably is). But at least you should understand WTF is going on rather than attributing the self-consciousness to the characters.
post #21 of 59
I can't believe someone greenlit this shit:

http://gawker.com/5980772/lena-dunham-gets-new-show-picked-up-is-slowly-taking-over-hbo
Quote:
Good news for the entirety of the internet, which it turns out is an entity solely supported by people arguing about "Girls": HBO has picked up another show to be helmed by Lena Dunham. It's called "Harlem," and will see Dunham profiling the lives of those in New York City's worst projects in a show that insiders are likening to "The Wire." Just kidding.
Quote:
Lena Dunham, creator/star/executive producer of hot comedy Girls, has teamed with her Girls co-showrunner, executive producer Jenni Konner, for another potential HBO comedy series set in New York. The pay cable network has optioned All Dressed Up And Everywhere To Go, the upcoming memoir by long-time Bergdorf Goodman personal shopper and New York institution Betty Halbreich. Dunham and Konner plan to write together the TV project, which will delve into the life of Halbreich who has spent decades working with the rich and famous.

So, basically "The Devil Wears Prada" on television? Sounds about right. Dunham probably loves that movie, as she should, because it's a great movie. Halbreich has been a personal shopper for various movie stars with no time to shop and New York City socialites with nothing to do but shop (and take cocaine).

There's been no timetable set for Dunham's new vehicle, which will also be executive produced by shadow male Judd Apatow. "Girls" itself has already been renewed for a third season, which means that Dunham will soon rule the world even if no one really watches her show.
post #22 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by erictheobscure View Post

Girls is interesting because it experiments with genre.

Nope. Kareem Abdul Jabbar was off, but you just threw an air ball.
post #23 of 59
You always have such thoroughly reasoned rebuttals.
post #24 of 59
Thread Starter 
What a shitty episode. Predictable, boring drama the entire time.
post #25 of 59

I love this show. I find the characters to be interesting, obnoxious, original, and unintentionally hilarious (the show is self aware though). I've never understood the amount of vitriol aimed its way, even before it aired. For some reason it's one of those shows that people can't seem to say "it's not for me" and leave alone.
 

post #26 of 59
I just love that this show doesn't overly glamorize life in New York. No entry level magazine writers living in a 5000 sq ft loft in SoHo.
post #27 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by aravenel View Post

I just love that this show doesn't overly glamorize life in New York. No entry level magazine writers living in a 5000 sq ft loft in SoHo.

last nights episode was fucking awkward to watch. it turned into sex in the city for a little while.. plus way way too much dunham nudity.

then again I'm happy like shows like this exist... because Louie is taking a year off, and larry david might be coming to an end soon.
post #28 of 59
its amazing how the show gets worse and worse every week
post #29 of 59
I was coming down off a major Sunday bender when it was on and I felt like I was on a never ending horrible acid trip. That shit sucked balls. The wrong girls get naked on that show and Lena Dunham needs to keep her motherfucking clothes on because it's not cute, nor empowering, nor ironic. It's just fucking disgusting.
post #30 of 59


(At least if you thought it was enjoyable to begin with.)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Entertainment and Culture
Styleforum › Forums › Culture › Entertainment and Culture › Girls