[ivysaur12]

I liked the first episode quite a bit. I'm not sure I can offer much in the way of in-depth thoughts on it, just quite yet. I feel like the show gave us a broad sense of what this show is going to be about, and that it's mainly going to be about the lives of these four girls, whom all seem to be messes that each have their own problems, all of them, the result of their own doing. It's not very interested in making large statements, which is fine. After all, not every TV show needs to be a modern masterpiece that says something about our society on a grand scale.

I would very much disagree with this.

[xbhaskarx]

My favorite line:
"My skirt feels so tight. Maybe you can cut it open with scissors?"

lol

[Sirpopopop]

I would very much disagree with this.

Then spit it out.

Based on this one episode I couldn't see, much, in the way of a large statement being made. Maybe, the "intern army" could have been a statement, if it wasn't played up for laughs.

[Dan]

4. It portrays women in a bad light, and so many shows do this already. (I'm not sure I understand this criticism. I could understand it if it was pointing towards a damsel in distress problem, which is still a big problem in television. However, the show seems to be referring to women struggling to make it through their 20s. This is not exactly territory that's been mined to death on television.)

This is a weird criticism, since the men come off pretty damn poorly too.

[Sirpopopop]

This is a weird criticism, since the men come off pretty damn poorly too.

Yup.

[ivysaur12]

Then spit it out. Based on this one episode I couldn't see, much, in the way of a large statement being made. Maybe, the "intern army" could have been a statement, if it wasn't played up for laughs.

The show is much more than just about "four friends" - it's specifically about the "struggles" that upper-middle class twenty-somethings feel. The mistakes that they make, along with the aspects of their lives that they believe are "hard" are directly talking to the twenty-something mind set. Look at the warped perception of poverty and the idea of "deserving" a job worthy of someone's skills - none of the characters actually understand anything of depth. But they're in their 20s, and that's the point.

[petethepanda]

First episode rocked. This is gonna be good.

[cubicle47b]

I thought the pilot was great.

[xbhaskarx]

This does not taste like Twix

[Sirpopopop]

The show is much more than just about "four friends" - it's specifically about the "struggles" that upper-middle class twenty-somethings feel. The mistakes that they make, along with the aspects of their lives that they believe are "hard" are directly talking to the twenty-something mind set. Look at the warped perception of poverty and the idea of "deserving" a job worthy of someone's skills - none of the characters actually understand anything of depth. But they're in their 20s, and that's the point.

Just touching on New York City itself, I can't say that it represents a version of the city many upper-middle class twenty somethings can appreciate.

Anecdotally, the upper-middle class twenty-somethings types I know that live in Manhattan/Brooklyn are well to do folks who work in Wall Street, or some sort of attached service field. There is no way they would identify with the struggles of these characters. The ones who would identify with the struggles of these characters, mostly tend to live with their parents out in the suburbs.

Regardless, I don't see how this show is trying to claim that large of a turf. After all, the four main characters of the show are all upper middle class white girls who live in Brooklyn. That seems to be a pretty narrow set of main characters. If it wanted to be "a voice of some generation" it would surely open up the diversity in its main characters.

Note: I'm not using the term liberal as an insult here. I'm just using it as an easy way to mark a difference between the perspectives of people who live in different areas.

[Devolution]

I liked it so far. I don't really see it making women look bad since it seems more a class issue and some of the guys seemed in similar positions. I went into this with a solid skepticism since hearing "it's like the new Sex and the City", I really was not a fan of that show. This seems quite a bit different and much more self-aware and critical of its characters. I hope it can maintain its unapologetic but relevant look into the world of middle class 20 somethings with no real direction and a hell of a lot of growing up to do.

[ivysaur12]

Just touching on New York City itself, I can't say that it represents a version of the city many upper-middle class twenty somethings can appreciate. Anecdotally, the upper-middle class twenty-somethings types I know that live in Manhattan/Brooklyn are well to do folks who work in Wall Street, or some sort of attached service field. There is no way they would identify with the struggles of these characters. The ones who would identify with the struggles of these characters, mostly tend to live with their parents out in the suburbs. Regardless, I don't see how this show is trying to claim that large of a turf. After all, the four main characters of the show are all upper middle class white girls who live in Brooklyn. That seems to be a pretty narrow set of main characters. If it wanted to be "a voice of some generation" it would surely open up the diversity in its main characters. Note: I'm not using the term liberal as an insult here. I'm just using it as an easy way to mark a difference between the perspectives of people who live in different areas.

The irony is that none of them are the voice of their generation, at least not in the ways that they think. There are some aspects that completely transcend the 20 something experience (that sex scene, the pregnancy), but none of them are as important as they think. Except when they are. But that line and distinction is quite blurred to these girls.

Not "claim that large of a turf" is much different than "not interested in making large statements." Because there is a lot here.

[Sirpopopop]

The irony is that none of them are the voice of their generation, at least not in the ways that they think. There are some aspects that completely transcend the 20 something experience (that sex scene, the pregnancy), but none of them are as important as they think. Except when they are. But that line and distinction is quite blurred to these girls. Not "claim that large of a turf" is much different than "not interested in making large statements." Because there is a lot here.

I would view a large statement as something that applies to more than a narrow demographic.

If you're going to say Girls is making a large statement, then you might as well say shows like Home Improvement made a large statement too.

[Buckethead]

Main character reminds me of my ex-girlfriend, albeit fatter.

I didn't hate it. That sex scene was super awkward.

I'll watch a couple of more episodes.

[ivysaur12]

I would view a large statement as something that applies to more than a narrow demographic. If you're going to say Girls is making a large statement, then you might as well say shows like Home Improvement made a large statement too.

Girls is talking about the experience as a 20-something girl without any clue on where they're going or where they'll be in a month. Regardless of its peppering of upper-middle class hipster ennui, it's a very transcending topic.

Your second sentence literally makes no sense. Come on, dude.

[ezekial45]

I liked it so far. I don't really see it making women look bad since it seems more a class issue and some of the guys seemed in similar positions. I went into this with a solid skepticism since hearing "it's like the new Sex and the City", I really was not a fan of that show. This seems quite a bit different and much more self-aware and critical of its characters. I hope it can maintain its unapologetic but relevant look into the world of middle class 20 somethings with no real direction and a hell of a lot of growing up to do.

Agreed.

[Sirpopopop]

Girls is talking about the experience as a 20-something girl without any clue on where they're going or where they'll be in a month. Regardless of its peppering of upper-middle class hipster ennui, it's a very transcending topic.

In the way you can apply it to yourself, sure. However, as I pointed out in my original post, this show isn't overtly pushing that point on you. It doesn't care if you tease that viewpoint out of it.

As seen by the fact that it seems to be playing a lot of those moments out for laughs.

Your second sentence literally makes no sense. Come on, dude.

Home Improvement is about the experience of upper middle class white suburban households in Middle America.

That's also a fairly narrow demographic, albeit one much larger than the one Girls is aiming for...

[ivysaur12]

In the way you can apply it to yourself, sure. However, as I pointed out in my original post, this show isn't overtly pushing that point on you. It doesn't care if you tease that viewpoint out of it. As seen by the fact that it seems to be playing a lot of those moments out for laughs. Home Improvement is about the experience of upper middle class white suburban households in Middle America. That's also a fairly narrow demographic, albeit one much larger than the one Girls is aiming for...

How is the point not there? It's very blatant in its mission - showing this self-importance and mistakes. It's a mirror on the twnety-something mindset; even if those moments are humorous, it doesn't make them any less important or meaningful. Not to be a dick, but if you think the show isn't concerned with painting a picture of youthful ignorance, then I'm not sure what you just watched. Satire is one of the most powerful forms of social commentary.

And I can't tell if you're trying to be cute with your Home Improvement quip, or you actually think that the two shows are in any way comparable beyond their minute length.

I didn't exactly love the pilot, but it's thesis is extremely clear. It's probably what I respected about the show the most. That and the sex scene.

[Devolution]

You're both arguing something that's up to the audience in my opinion. Whether they want to see the show as greater commentary on the struggles and spoiled aspects of my generation (since it's pretty much pointed towards upper middle class gals) or just peek into that world and watch how the characters roll with the punches is up to the viewer.

[ivysaur12]

You're both arguing something that's up to the audience in my opinion. Whether they want to see the show as greater commentary on the struggles and spoiled aspects of my generation (since it's pretty much pointed towards upper middle class gals) or just peek into that world and watch how the characters roll with the punches is up to the viewer.

Sure. But Sir originally stated that the show wasn't interested in making a point or large statements - I see that as fundamentally incorrect.

[thatbox]

I really enjoyed this first episode, and don't understand how anyone could think that the show doesn't have anything to say. It's fine if what you think it's addressing is dumb, but it's absolutely trying to comment on a certain set of experiences with some decent amount of weight.

[EleventhDoctor]

My wife watched this and I actively disliked it.

[Expendable.]

Pilot was everything I liked and didn't like about Tiny Furniture. Thankfully the former outweighs the latter. Will definitely keep watching. Get some Jody Lee Lipes in there! Also, Zosia Mamet is awesome. She's good friends with my roommate and just as nice in person when we hang out. Funny to see her as a character like this.

[Memles]

My favorite line: "My skirt feels so tight. Maybe you can cut it open with scissors?"

I don't mean to nitpick, but the actual line is "cut it open with a scissor," which is that much better.

[Buckethead]

Pilot was everything I liked and didn't like about Tiny Furniture. Thankfully the former outweighs the latter. Will definitely keep watching. Get some Jody Lee Lipes in there! Also, Zosia Mamet is awesome. She's good friends with my roommate and just as nice in person when we hang out. Funny to see her as a character like this.

[gketter]

I'm one to give shows a shot and enjoy even if they are relegated as a "chick show" (ie Gilmore Girls is awesome). I will say the pilot was well shot, well written, with realistic 3 dimensional characters with their noticeable flaws out for display. But maybe it was too effective because I think i dislike everyone on the show. Especially the main character. Well the uptight girl was somewhat ok, and the opium cooker at least was semi entertaining.

Maybe its because i'm in my 30s now or because its in the cliche location of NY, or that I'm not sure why i'd want to root for any of these people that it puts me in a odd spot. I'll continue to watch the show for a bit, but if i don't like anyone it would be a unique viewing experience. I mean I've watched shows where i actively hated the main character (ie: Big Love, Breaking Bad) but there's always characters on the show that were people i rooted for, or a narrative that was compelling

[anaron]

Well that certainly quelled a lot of my concerns: I pretty much loved it. The friend interactions to the hilarious, cringey sex scene were so authentically endearing. I fucking DIED at the Sex and the City bit because who hasn't heard at least one person refer to themselves in that exact mind-numbing way. (And yes, this gag has been done before but Zosia just sold it so well)

But what I'm especially relieved about now, is the obvious recognition for Hannah's privilege and the way it's addressed through herself and the other characters. Not only does it provide a richer starting point and path for development, but it's far more comforting knowing the creator is fully aware of the position these people are in compared to those in much worse ones.

I'm one to give shows a shot and enjoy even if they are relegated as a "chick show" (ie Gilmore Girls is awesome).

You know what's up.

[Expendable.]

Oh, shit. Jody Lee Lipes actually did shoot that pilot. I thought I noticed his touch in a few scenes. I think he might direct some.

[brianjones]

ugh i want to hate this so bad but i kind of liked it

[TripOpt55]

Going to check this out tomorrow. Didn't realize it was on tonight.

[grounded_dreams]

How much money did Lena Dunhams parents leave for her in the hotel room?, I couldn't work out the figure on the bills.

[gketter]

How much money did Lena Dunhams parents leave for her in the hotel room?, I couldn't work out the figure on the bills.

It looked like $20? And then she stole $20 from the maid :/

[xbhaskarx]

How much money did Lena Dunhams parents leave for her in the hotel room?, I couldn't work out the figure on the bills.

$20 for her and 20 for housekeeping (she took both), unless there were multiple bills in each envelope, I can't remember...

[Sirpopopop]

How is the point not there? It's very blatant in its mission - showing this self-importance and mistakes. It's a mirror on the twnety-something mindset; even if those moments are humorous, it doesn't make them any less important or meaningful. Not to be a dick, but if you think the show isn't concerned with painting a picture of youthful ignorance, then I'm not sure what you just watched. Satire is one of the most powerful forms of social commentary.

I would say that Devo illustrated my point quite clearly.

A show like MTV's "I Just Want My Pants Back" is very interested in making the exact same generational point that Girls is making. It pushes it by having more diversity in its characters. It's baiting its audience to at least identify with one of the characters by saying, "Hey! Your archetype is in here, somewhere." That is a show interested in making large statements.

Ultimately, though, like Girls, it's about a bunch of upper middle class twenty somethings in Brooklyn. There problems are not the type of problems that even many upper middle class twenty somethings will be able to relate to, at all. It's pretentious to make that assumption.

What makes Girls a far superior show is that it's not trying to make the statement that it's a show speaking to everyone in a certain socioeconomic class...

It effectively mocked such a statement.

The showrunner is drawing on what she knows, and putting up a good product as a result.

And I can't tell if you're trying to be cute with your Home Improvement quip, or you actually think that the two shows are in any way comparable beyond their minute length.

The correct answer would be: Execution.

The world of the characters of Girls actually makes sense. The characters aren't cookie cutter. You can certainly draw out sensible inferences about wanderlust in your 20s in the modern age as a result.

[JGS]

I like the show primarily for the lead. I'm not sure I care for any of the other characters yet except her parents and they aren't staying around. Lena is a one woman show and hopefully she doesn't run out of ideas too soon. She should have at least a couple fo seasons worth of material though.

[JumpingTheGun]

Thought it was pretty decent for a pilot. Hanna's mom was great.

[Expendable.]

Thought it was pretty decent for a pilot. Hanna's mom was great.

She's from Freaks and Geeks right? Made me miss that show :(

[Cornballer]

- The entire pilot is up on HBO's youtube account for anyone that wants to watch it

[xbhaskarx]

- The entire pilot is up on HBO's youtube account for anyone that wants to watch it

That is a smart move by HBO.

But can Youtube show sex scenes? Or are those sorts of things edited?

[TJ Bennett]

The pilot was ok. Performances were strong, but so many of the characters were grating. I'll definitely keep watching to see where it goes.

Lena's mannerisms reminded me a female edition of Jesse Eisenberg's Mark Zuckerberg. As the credits rolled, I felt as though I had just watched a bizarro version of The Social Network where the socially inept protagonist accomplished nothing rather than the socially inept protagonist changing the world.

The ratings will be awful and only get worse. Luckily for Lena, HBO doesn't care so much about the numbers as long as the glowing reviews keep pouring in.

[anaron]

HBO's 'Girls' starts modest, 'Thrones' ratings steady

Sunday night’s debut delivered 1.1 million viewers across two airings. That’s down from its lead-in, the Eastbound & Down (1.6 million) third-season finale. Still, Girls fared way better than the premiere of HBO’s last comedy, Enlightened, which launched on Monday. Still, that series still received a second-season order despite weaker reviews and lower ratings, so… expect a pickup unless numbers plummet. And I could see Girls growing in the ratings — last night it was coming out of two male-friendly shows.

[onlyindreams]

[Devolution]

That poster is so damn salty I need some water.

[IAmtheFMan]

Pilot was okay although I feel the whole thing's gonna get much more snarky than it is right now. I just hope they make the characters at least somewhat sympathetic.

[saunderez]

I don't understand how it's nepotism.

People in the entertainment business have children who enter the entertainment business, news at 11!

[Amir0x]

pilot was...hm. It felt like one of those really pretentious indie movies that are all about the burgeoning sense of disconnection that the hipsters feel with their fellow man, but I do think the female lead was really fun to watch and that, on her performance alone, it might turn into something moderately watchable.

[white dynamite]

Great pilot. Really liked the writing and the characters felt very relatable.

What are the chances that HBO puts the second episode on youtube?

[brianjones]

[Cornballer]

What are the chances that HBO puts the second episode on youtube?

Not very good. They're just trying to drum up interest in the series through releasing the pilot everywhere, and I doubt they'll put up additional episodes.

[charsace]

So far everyone in the first ep seems to be the typical upper-middle class manhattan dipshit. All are different flavors that I know. You have the art dipshits, the serious workforce dipshits and the european dipshits. I thought the show was great. Very realistic.