Shailene Woodley’s Mary Jane Role Cut From ‘The … 
‘Star Wars’ Cast Breakdown Unveiled 
CAA Signs Florian Henckel Von Donnersmarck, Oscar-Winning … 
UPDATE: Dan Abrams Named New ‘Nightline’ Anchor … 
RATINGS RAT RACE: ‘The Voice’ Finale On Par … 
Joy Bryant Returns To Longtime Agent Steve Alexander At … 
ITV Pays $30M For Controlling Stake In ‘Hatfields … 
Hot Trailer: ‘Anchorman 2′ 
2ND UPDATE: Charlie Sheen Fired Selma Blair From … 
Time Warner Cable Sued For Passing Lakers-Dodgers Costs On … 
Jonah Hill Signs For Management With LBI 
TOLDJA! ‘Dumb And Dumber To’ Proves No-Brainer … 
Salma Hayek’s Animated Passion Project ‘The … 
Relativity Moves Scott Cooper’s ‘Out Of The … 
Hot Trailer: ‘The Lego Movie’ 
Comedy ‘I Didn’t Do It’ Gets Series Order … 
Liv Tyler To Co-Star In Damon Lindelof’s HBO Pilot … 
DreamWorks Animation Launches Effort To Re-Position Itself … 
‘Pacific Rim’ Sequel In Planning Stages, … 
Legendary “Down To Handful” Of Studio Suitors: … 
UPDATE: Dan Harmon Apologizes For Comments Slamming … 
For what it is — a low-key ensemble comedy with no stars in it, HBO’s new comedy Girls did respectable business in its premiere last night. It drew 872,000 viewers, holding onto 79% of its lead-in, the season finale of Eastbound & Down (1.1 million). Girls‘ debut viewership was slightly higher than that of the last HBO comedy to launch in the time slot, the Ricky Gervais starrer Life Is Too Short, which opened with 810,000 in February despite a stronger lead-in, the season opener of Eastbound & Down (1.3 million). Eastbound & Down‘s finale was down from the premiere despite having 10 times larger lead-in, Game Of Thrones (3.8 million) last night vs. Luck (0.4 million) in February. GOT once again held steady in Week 3 for a total of 4.5 million viewers for the night. Eastbound & Down and Girls‘ cumed averages were 1.6 million and 1.1 million, respectively. Girls, along with new comedy Veep starring Julia Louis Dreyfus, which launches next Sunday, are currently available for free on various platforms. Over at Lifetime, new drama The Client List drew 2.9 million total viewers in its second week, up 4% from its premiere, and also gained 8% in adults 18-49 and 28% in women 18-49.
TV Editor Nellie Andreeva - tip her here.
Loading ...
The common criticism I’m hearing that the show has unlikeable characters is pretty shallow. Likeable doesn’t equate to compelling. That said, in spite of their flaws and dispositions, if you stick around you’ll find yourself liking the girls more and more.
Unlikeable doesn’t equate compelling either. And it isn’t shallow to criticize a show for having no likable characters.
My main problem with the pilot is that it’s boring and not funny. A couple lines were mildly amusing; one was funny (casual abortions are always hysterical), but other than that the writing and delivery was weak. There were easy set-ups that any comedy writer worth their salt would’ve hit. Like when Hannah brings in her book for her parents to read – she brings in seven pages. Seven pages isn’t funny. Two pages is funny. Bringing in a few paragraphs to declare your brilliance is absurd and that’s what makes it funny, but to have her bring in a chapter or two – what the hell is that?
Fair enough. The inverse is also true. Unlikeable characters does not automatically equal interesting.
Don Draper is decidedly unlikeable. But he’s not one-dimensional. He’s compelling you want to watch him.
Cersei from Game of Thrones (played by the ridiculously underrated Lena Headey is one of the most unlikeable characters on t.v. But she’s not un-intersting.
Hannah is a self-absorbed, privileged girl with nothing new to say and low self-esteem surrounded by friends who are the same. Oh and all of whom happen to be white. And played ONLY by the daughters of rich and famous people. (Not half of the principal four characters, not 3 out of 4, no ALL of them are the scion of the wealthy and connected.) Even Jezebel, a feminist site which is awesome, is pointing out that these characters are fundamentally uninteresting, boring and almost unwatchable.
I’ll try to stick around. I find this amazing Lena Dunham could accomplish so much by 25. My hat is off to her. Tiny Furniture showed she is immensely talented. We should all be so lucky and have the skill she does to produce something of this quality by that age (which I am well past). Sincerely.
But this show has got to get better. And the media can’t over-hype something like this to this degree. Seriously.
“The Voice of a Generation”. And that was on multiple sites? Geesh, come on.
Your assessment of how other people should watch their shows is pretty shallow. If people don’t like the characters from the get-go, what makes you think they will force themselves to waste their time sitting through more episodes to hopefully like them more?
Hated it.
HBO made a mistake of sticking Girls after Eastbound and Down. Eastbound had already proven it couldn’t take any real action off Game of Thrones. It barely made bump when it no longer had to run with lifeless Luck. The curious crowd that might have stuck around to see the new show after Game of Thrones weren’t going to sit through Eastbound. HBO screwed up royally. This would have at least pulled in 1.5 million viewers if it had come straight after Game.
You got it slightly wrong. The fury comes from so few opportunities in the business to begin with. Then when someone gets one and squanders it, it’s an affront to all the abuse, insane workload and sacrifices everyone endures at some point as they climb up the ladder in this business. So please stop complaining about how hard it is to make even bad television, and instead make something of the legacy you are a steward of, and the precious spot you have occupied that a gazillion other people may have deserved as much as you.
It seems rather trollish to to dismiss valid criticism as trolling. The show was abysmal. Loathsome characters floundering through a bleak and dreary existence. There was no wit or charm or depth. The critical acclaim is one of the most perplexing phenomena I’ve ever experienced. It was almost as if the critics collectively thought they were missing something and declared the show brilliant to mitigate the risk of being thought of as dumb. The show was terrible in every imaginable way.
It was hardly terrible in every imaginable way. You’re a slave to hyperbole, and if you don’t know it you need to learn. “Floundering through a bleak and dreary existence”? What planet are you on? Save those comments for a documentary about a war zone, or area of famine. These were privileged children, pretending to be adults, as they try to learn to be.
It’s called “Girls.” Get it?
I haven’t seen the show yet, but I love the idea, and will definitely rent the CDs once they are out.
The actresses don’t look charismatic, so they’ll have to be witty and utterly human to make this work.
Otherwise it would be depressing (one reason I stopped watching “Flight of the Conchords”: it was very well done, but it gets tired to watch sympathetic guys lose all the time).
Wait for the tapes.
loved it! besides enlightened, my favorite new hbo show!
there can’t be any minority on this show? it sucks. it’s not real and there has to come a time when this just stops. it’s boring and not fresh. yuck.
Actually 24 year old girls or anyone of any age only hanging out with people of their own race is pretty darn real. Even in major cities where population is diverse, way more people tend to be friends with their own races than a “mixed bud light spot posse”.
and considering this ep was mostly just the friends n family — little work or neighbors — interacting it was much more real than if you plugged in a token minority like new girl or happy endings in their crew.
I wouldnt expect 24 yo white girls whose parents float their bills to have a black GF anymore than i would expect the gang on martin to be have a token white buddy. neither would be real.
as for the show either its very well written satire if she’s intentionally writing characters you wouldnt to spend 5 minutes with as a dig at everyone like that i.e near insufferable hipsters knowing full well they’re unlikable n full of shit or she actually thinks there is something deep,interesting and clever about them and that people would actually sympathize with a 24 yo getting cut off and want to listen to musings of a child about her views of the world. Which would of course mean it is a terrible show.
i would assume it was the former. Cause if its the later and she is the voice of a generation — god help us all.
Lena Dunham is the antidote to Zooey Deschanel. Her character is loathsome, and wonderful to watch.
Doesn’t get much better than “This doesn’t taste like Twix”
It was benign. Was so excited to see. Emperor’s New clothes? Am I uncool to not like it? I mean if I’m cool I’m supposed to like it…right?
I was SO looking forward to this show, and happy to see an actress who isn’t a size 0 be the lead of a show. However….
I found it utterly devoid of laughs and incredibly depressing. I thought the parents were the best thing in the show. If lighting is a shows point of view, then the goal for this show was to be bleak and dreary. And pathetic.
When Sex and The City arrived it was a new voice, a voice of women enjoying their sex lives. With humor and with style. This show is a huge step backward for womankind when a woman consents to doggie style sex although she doesn’t really want to and apologizes to the guy for not wanting anal sex.
Pitiful.
I’ve been working like a dog and saw almost none of the hype. Watched Girls and then watched it again. Totally loved it. Loved the cast.
A couple things caught me on this board.
1) So many haters. TV Shows and movies are subjective. You attack the critics for liking the show. That’s their opinion. You don’t want people attacking you because you didn’t. Maybe the show wasn’t made for you specifically. Different people have different opinions. For each person that says this was dumb and unrelatable – there are people that tweet “this is my life”.
2) Which brings me to #2 – that just because someone says this is my life – doesn’t mean they are an idiot.
3) Which goes to #3 – give the show credit – it isnt something we have seen a lot of before. Characters who are not afraid to be somewhat unlikeable. They are being real. They are not sugarcoated by the network or producers. Yes, they might not be you, but they are certain people (see #1 and #2)
4) The ratings – yes, maybe not as high as people expected or wanted BUT the to do 1.2 M viewers over the course of the night when people claim Nurse Jackie or Californication to be hits when they do 400 to 600,000 viewers is just wrong. Sure this got a lot of network support but all those shows do.
5) Which goes back to shows are not for everyone. If you don’t like don’t watch. BUT enough with all of the hate and anger.
Strangely, I found Allison Williams to be the most engaging one…Was not expecting that. I believe the issue most people have with this show is the blatant nepotism and the fact that we are supposed to buy that these four, rich white girls are supposed to be representative of the middle to upper-middle class. Not one single character was non-white except the homeless guy in the cringe worthy, final scene. How the hell did people think that final scene was funny and not racist? Also, for the people criticizing others for pointing out that the characters are loathsome…Well, of course some television characters are supposed to be loathsome…but those actors who pull off those unlikable characters have a certain charisma. Not one of these girls could do that.
Everyone here pretty much covered it. You can’t hype something as the Second Coming and then have it be this unwatchable.
This is going to go down as major league face palm-level FAIL in years to come. And deservedly so.
Sadly that deservedly comes more from the media over-hype and less from Dunham’s bad writing. Had the press just called it an intriguing new show that needed work it might not have looked like such an epic fail. Now it does.
Sorry. Saw Tiny Furniture. Dunham has a lot of talent. But this might take year to live down. It was that disappointing.
The remaining defenses for this show are literally, “Sure it’s ethnically non-diverse, but so” (which unfortunately doesn’t wash away the badness), “I identify with it so it’s good” (an even weaker argument) and “Hey I know it’s good because there’s a debate” (nope there have been debates about plenty of things which are unwatchable, this is one).
I didn’t think that this show was that bad. I know a lot of people who don’t live in NYC think that everyone is rich. But, that’s the exception to the general rule, especially when it comes to people under 30 years old.
It was well written and well acted, but I hated the characters. I’m sure that was the point. But then what’s the point in continuing to watch the show?
Except for a masochistic, low self-esteem hook-up, Girls could be a CW show. If you’re going to suggest you’re the Voice of your Generation, you better dazzle people from the outset. The SATC pilot, which is an inevitable comparison, was genuinely witty, romantic and groundbreaking. The acting was also far superior. No one forced SATC down people’s throats. It became a phenomenon on its own. I also think it’s more than slightly disappointing that HBO, the finest network on TV, had to rehash it’s signature comedy rather than continue to dig to find the next great thing.
It should be called “White Girl Problems.”
I think that was the sound of America yawning.
Enough with the white people in NY! Enough with the all white leads! Enough!
Have not seen Tiny Furniture, so my virgin experience, and pleasantly surprised by the originality of the writing. The acting and direction were a little stiff, but I think they’ll get past that. I’m sure “voice of my generation” was meant to be ironic: did you notice how few pages were in the “memoir” she was handing across as she said this?
I’m looking forward to watching the next one.
As someone who’s past her tough, Hollywood twenties, works in the industry, a fan of Apatow and painful realism in television, I was completely disappointed with this pilot. I find it shocking, actually, that critics were beside themslves… over THIS. Really?? At the risk of being hated, the hipster factor was way too high, giving the audience some of the most depressing, self-entitled, irredeemable and sometimes flat-out DUMB female characters I’ve ever seen. No, most New York women in their 20s aren’t “glamorous” a la Carrie, Samantha, Miranda and Charlotte, but what people forget is that those WOMEN were in their 30s, and were professionals. The criticism the show got for having women of that age buying $400 shoes and $1000 purses was always overblown to me because I KNOW THOSE WOMEN. The real difference between the two sets of characters is, well… CHARACTER. NOT sleeping with each other’s boyfriends, NOT stealing money or becoming angry when you’re parents cut off your GIFT of 2 years in NYC with no bills, NEVER EVER bending over, literally, to let a man use you as a semen receptacle for no reason other than you’re pathetic and sad. As a metaphor, it’s an interesting message about the powerlessness some 20something women feel, but as a reality, 30 and 40something women find it shameful and disappointing that Girls would put themselves in this position. There was something very 1965 about it. If it’s reality… I suppose it’s good to put a spotlight on it, but it also frightens some of us that it will normalize completely terrible attitudes and behavior. It’s not cool, any of it. I will continue to watch because it’s like a terrible car accident to me now… I can’t stop. But I seriously cannot comprehend the uber-hyped critical praise. It wasn’t just offensive. It was dull and forgettable. This is not “Louis.” Not by a long shot.
The writing and acting represent a new low for HBO. It’s absolutely dreadful. Who cares about these supposed white/Jewish girl problems?