or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › HDTV › HDTV Programming › 'Girls' on HBO HD
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

'Girls' on HBO HD - Page 2

post #31 of 133
Thread Starter 
TV Notes
HBO Renews Comedies 'Girls' and 'Veep' for Second Seasons
By Michael O'Connell, The Hollywood Reporter's 'Live Feed' Blog - Apr. 30, 2012

HBO has handed out second-season renewals for both Girls and Veep.

The freshman comedies -- which debuted April 14 and 21, respectively -- each will get additional 10-episode outings scheduled for 2013.

Girls, from creator Lena Dunham, had a somewhat soft debut of 872,000 viewers. Although the pilot episode has gone on to gross 3.8 million viewers to date, it has not shared the immediate success of Veep.

Armando Iannucci's (In the Loop) comedy about a powerless and slightly neurotic U.S. vice president, starring Julia Louis-Dreyfus, pulled in the network's most promising comedy numbers since the flagship Entourage took its final bow in 2011. The series opener earned 1.4 million viewers during its inaugural 10 p.m. ET broadcast. It has since grossed 3.7 million viewers.

With a strong lead-in from the also-renewed Game of Thrones, both Veep and Girls will complete their current seasons, airing at 10 and 10:30 p.m. on Sundays, through the summer.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/liv...ls-veep-318057
post #32 of 133
Can I guess that Williams has a no nudity clause in there?
post #33 of 133
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrLar View Post

Can I guess that Williams has a no nudity clause in there?

Being the lousy actress that she is, she should get rid of it if she has one. She needs all the help she can get.
post #34 of 133
Quote:
Originally Posted by Young C View Post

TV Notes
HBO Renews Comedies 'Girls' and 'Veep' for Second Seasons
By Michael O'Connell, The Hollywood Reporter's 'Live Feed' Blog - Apr. 30, 2012

HBO has handed out second-season renewals for both Girls and Veep.

The freshman comedies -- which debuted April 14 and 21, respectively -- each will get additional 10-episode outings scheduled for 2013.

Girls, from creator Lena Dunham, had a somewhat soft debut of 872,000 viewers. Although the pilot episode has gone on to gross 3.8 million viewers to date, it has not shared the immediate success of Veep.

Armando Iannucci's (In the Loop) comedy about a powerless and slightly neurotic U.S. vice president, starring Julia Louis-Dreyfus, pulled in the network's most promising comedy numbers since the flagship Entourage took its final bow in 2011. The series opener earned 1.4 million viewers during its inaugural 10 p.m. ET broadcast. It has since grossed 3.7 million viewers.

With a strong lead-in from the also-renewed Game of Thrones, both Veep and Girls will complete their current seasons, airing at 10 and 10:30 p.m. on Sundays, through the summer.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/liv...ls-veep-318057


Really enjoyed "Entourage" and "Eastbound and Down" which are both now done. "Sex and the City" was pretty good early on, but whatever you do, stay away from the dreadful movies. "Bored to Death", "Hung", and "How to Make it in America" were all fairly good with "How to Make it in America" being my favorite, but all were canned.

Watched a few minutes of "Girls", did not really find it appealing/interesting. Hadn't tried "Veep" yet either. Disappointing that as well as HBO does the drama that they haven't done better in the half-hour comedy format.
post #35 of 133
Thread Starter 
Good episode tonight.

My "crush" was in her underwear this episode
She's such a nerd ha
Zosia Mamet
post #36 of 133
Eww, she's quite homely. And can't act on top of that. Seems to be a theme with the show though.
post #37 of 133
Thread Starter 
haha

Well shoot
post #38 of 133
Quote:
Originally Posted by Young C View Post

Good episode tonight.

My "crush" was in her underwear this episode
She's such a nerd ha
Zosia Mamet

I do not know how to say this without sounding like a pig, but I was completely shocked at how big her rack was during the cunnilingus scene. I realize that was due to the benefit of a padded bra but still, I did not expect that... THAT'S GOOD HUSTLE!

On another note, I think this show took a huge step back in terms of the characters. We all realize all of these girls are morons, but now we are venturing into Ryan Murphy's territory of having characters doing things that have no real world motivation, with the only purpose of creating conflict or moving the plot on at the expense of any rationale.

Lets snoop around.... just cuz. Lets read a belittling journal entry about myself to a bar full of strangers... just cuz. Williams appears to be pissed at poor Hannah, but in reality, Hannah is right. Hannah and Williams' relationships are both the same, just on opposite sides of the spectrum. Speaking of Hannah's relationship, her heartfelt speech to her psychopath was great, both written and acted. However, I need to know what her motivation is to stay with him? As Williams said, "youre not this stupid." Good writing tells us why a character acts the way they do. Right now Hannah is the most pathetic character on TV.

Also, what happened to the whole HPV storyline? Did I miss how that was resolved?
post #39 of 133
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ragedogg69 View Post

I do not know how to say this without sounding like a pig, but I was completely shocked at how big her rack was during the cunnilingus scene. I realize that was due to the benefit of a padded bra but still, I did not expect that... THAT'S GOOD HUSTLE!

Ha.

I also noticed that. She's a petite, slim, women but as soon as she took her top off, she had big breasts
post #40 of 133
Thread Starter 
Graphic ending
post #41 of 133
Graphic indeed, but it is nice to see Hannah get an exchange on her loser (ex?)boyfriend. Remember when I said this show is having characters do things that make no sense and are the opposite of what their character has been portrayed as so far? Well Gawker has noticed as well:
Quote:
Laurie Simmons' daughter tries to **** her boss. Nothing in the five extant episodes of this television program even comes remotely close to indicating that the character represented by Laurie Simmons' daughter would ever consider aggressively propositioning her boss, but there you go. For the story.

While it did not make any sense, it did deliver the line of the night for me: "You're great! You don't know how to do anything, but you have so much potential."

These characters are awful, but I dont believe Dunham is writing these as serious characters. They are caricatures of the liberal art prep school students that are shocked by reality after college. Now if she is actually trying to write them as real people... geeze, I am wasting my sunday nights.
post #42 of 133
I think this show says a lot about Generation Y and how they differ from previous generations. Don't forget these were the kids that were raised with attention on "self esteem" and "everyone is a winner." The show is the results that produced.
post #43 of 133
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian Conrad View Post

I think this show says a lot about Generation Y and how they differ from previous generations. Don't forget these were the kids that were raised with attention on "self esteem" and "everyone is a winner." The show is the results that produced.

That's the problem. Dunham is writing the show as if these idiots are experiencing something no other generation has. Go watch Singles. Same issues. Nothing changes except the music and the clothes. Same problems exist. This show would work if it would actually deliver some comedy.
post #44 of 133
Quote:
Originally Posted by skyehill View Post

That's the problem. Dunham is writing the show as if these idiots are experiencing something no other generation has. Go watch Singles. Same issues. Nothing changes except the music and the clothes. Same problems exist. This show would work if it would actually deliver some comedy.

The comedy is that like "Eastbound and Down," the people that you DON'T want to see naked are always the ones that are naked.
post #45 of 133
Quote:
Originally Posted by Young C View Post

Ha.

I also noticed that. She's a petite, slim, women but as soon as she took her top off, she had big breasts

Which character are you talking about?
post #46 of 133
Quote:
Originally Posted by dminches View Post

Which character are you talking about?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Young C View Post

Good episode tonight.

My "crush" was in her underwear this episode
She's such a nerd ha
Zosia Mamet

And then see my sexist post that follows about her rack.


This episode definitely showed that the character of Hannah alone cannot carry this show. Even her dirty talk that was suppose to be funny had me shaking my head in how forced the dialog was.

If she doesn't head back to NY and have her roommates back into the fold, I think I am done with this show.

Oh and Chris Farley wants his garbage bag for his luggage joke back.
post #47 of 133
The show definitely appeals to a narrow audience, as generational coming-of-age shows tend to do, and I doubt that audience overlaps much with AVS.
post #48 of 133
Quote:
Originally Posted by URFloorMatt View Post

The show definitely appeals to a narrow audience, as generational coming-of-age shows tend to do, and I doubt that audience overlaps much with AVS.

I agree but as an old fart (older than the people playing her parents) I find it interesting and confirms my thoughts about the generation.
post #49 of 133
404 comedy not found.
post #50 of 133
I'm still washing my eyes until they bleed..... (watching Hannah's mom and dad naked and doin' it)... and clearly Hannah didn't inherit her mom's "goods" LOL

Alison Williams please bit more skin? LOL
post #51 of 133
Why do people measure this show based on his comedic offerings, or lack thereof? I think it tries to offer insight into the mind of a mid-20 year-old as she navigates the transition to full adulthood. That's what I think it is about. It may be billed as a comedy but I don't see it that way. The acting is fair but I think the writing it clever, at times. It keeps me interested for 22 minutes.
post #52 of 133
Quote:
Originally Posted by dminches View Post

Why do people measure this show based on his comedic offerings, or lack thereof? I think it tries to offer insight into the mind of a mid-20 year-old as she navigates the transition to full adulthood. That's what I think it is about. It may be billed as a comedy but I don't see it that way. The acting is fair but I think the writing it clever, at times. It keeps me interested for 22 minutes.

I've been thinking the same thing. Girls is not written or designed to elicit laughter, more a wry smile of recognition. I enjoy it for what it is, but it is not really a comedy in the traditional sense (laugh out loud funny). Now Veep on the other hand, I do laugh at that.
post #53 of 133
I would also suggest watching Dunham's feature film "Tiny Furniture" to get an idea of where much of the concept comes from. It's available on NF WI.
post #54 of 133
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrLar View Post

I'm still washing my eyes until they bleed..... (watching Hannah's mom and dad naked and doin' it)... and clearly Hannah didn't inherit her mom's "goods" LOL

Alison Williams please bit more skin? LOL

I maybe out in left field but I was kind of hoping that we would see Hannah's mom's goods. Hannah on the other hand should keep her clothes on.
post #55 of 133
Quote:
Originally Posted by dminches View Post

Why do people measure this show based on his comedic offerings, or lack thereof? I think it tries to offer insight into the mind of a mid-20 year-old as she navigates the transition to full adulthood. That's what I think it is about. It may be billed as a comedy but I don't see it that way. The acting is fair but I think the writing it clever, at times. It keeps me interested for 22 minutes.

I never thought of it as a comedy. However, I don't think that her writing reflects the mind of most 20 years olds. Dumb ones, sure. But the ones that I know aren't as dumb as Hannah and her friends. And the acting is fair but the British girl is flat out horrible.
post #56 of 133
Quote:
Originally Posted by rkhopkins View Post

I've been thinking the same thing. Girls is not written or designed to elicit laughter, more a wry smile of recognition. I enjoy it for what it is, but it is not really a comedy in the traditional sense (laugh out loud funny). Now Veep on the other hand, I do laugh at that.

Veep by far is my favorite out of the two. So many great quotes.
post #57 of 133
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian Conrad View Post

I agree but as an old fart (older than the people playing her parents) I find it interesting and confirms my thoughts about the generation.

a mediocre tv show confirms your thoughts about a generation? that's pretty laughable and sad.
post #58 of 133
Quote:
Originally Posted by dminches View Post

Why do people measure this show based on his comedic offerings, or lack thereof? I think it tries to offer insight into the mind of a mid-20 year-old as she navigates the transition to full adulthood. That's what I think it is about. It may be billed as a comedy but I don't see it that way. The acting is fair but I think the writing it clever, at times. It keeps me interested for 22 minutes.

It has a definite satirical bend, so in that sense it's a "comedy." But it's not a sitcom, which may explain the disconnect between people who like it because it is funny and people who don't. If you don't know 20-something, (over)educated, upper-middle class urban whites, then I'm not really sure how you could enjoy it because the humor in this show isn't all that generalizable. It pokes a lot of fun. These girls are caricatures that highlight various common dysfunctions (and that's where the satire/humor comes in).

I do think the show is a bit uneven in its writing--particularly when it comes to Hannah's sexual insecurities/issues. (I'm thinking particularly of her encounter with her law firm employer.)

Quote:


That's the problem. Dunham is writing the show as if these idiots are experiencing something no other generation has. Go watch Singles. Same issues. Nothing changes except the music and the clothes. Same problems exist.

I don't think this is true. Are there some overlaps between generations? Of course. But the idea that a woman who came of age in the 1960s, a woman who came of age in the 1980s, and a woman who came of age in the 2010s all faced the same problems is patently absurd. If nothing else, Hannah's career problems have been brought about by a once-in-a-hundred-years kind of economic meltdown. And women in the 1930s had life experiences that most women in the 2010s would consider alien.
post #59 of 133
Quote:
Originally Posted by URFloorMatt View Post

These girls are caricatures that highlight various common dysfunctions (and that's where the satire/humor comes in).

I absolutely agree, however I dont necessarily believe that this is Dunham's true intentions for how these characters should come across. I think she has tried to write real, relate-able characters, but because of her lack of ability to write a coherent narrative, they end up making nonsensical choices and this is what ruins the characters.

I do not like Hannah and I am okay with this. Infact, it is very satisfying schadenfreude watching this show. However, what I hate about this show is Dunham's storylines and character decision making.
post #60 of 133
Last night's episode was weird.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: HDTV Programming
AVS › AVS Forum › HDTV › HDTV Programming › 'Girls' on HBO HD