User Reviews (136)

  • bayou_hannibal29 May 2012
    9/10
    Fresh, funny, and also a bit depressing
    I went into the first episode of Girls with pretty low expectations. I figured that it would maybe be another Sex in the City, with some pointless softcore porn here and there, but I decided to try it out. It is now, along with Game of Thrones, one of my favorite shows on television. In fact, when we get a fresh set of shows on the DVR, Girls is always the first show that I want to watch. It is fresh, funny, and also a bit depressing at times. This is definitely not Sex and the City. That show was glamour and lightheartedness. This show, on the other hand, is about that bad experience that lots of people have coming out of college called "the quarter life crisis".

    The tone of "Girls" is somewhat dark, cynical humor. It is about four young women out of college a year or so. They live in New York City, but unlike the Sex and the City ladies, they are struggling financially and, overall, they aren't very happy people. There are Sex and the City posters in a lot of scenes, as if to remind you that you are NOT watching that show. Their jobs are deadend-ish in nature, or just plain nonexistent. They have lots of what looks like unsatisfying or awkward sex. There is an undercurrent of disillusionment and shattered dreams with all of the plot lines. Graduating from college and moving to New York City, isn't the world supposed to be your oyster? Since you still have youthful good looks, freedom, and income, shouldn't your 20s be the most fun part of your life? Maybe for some, but that's not how it works for a lot of people. For some folks, either men or women, the years immediately after college are when you find out that the world truly doesn't care about you, or that you don't have the talent to do what you wanted to do. It is when you grow apart from your college boyfriend or girlfriend and wake up one day to find that you have nobody of significant romantic interest in your life. It is when you find out that there are jobs out there that are horribly boring and unsatisfying.

    I normally get annoyed by the excessive (and often boring and pointless) sex in HBO's original series, but it fits into this series just fine. This show centers around the trials and tribulations of young women in their early to mid 20s, and one problem that they all share is an unsatisfying sex life. Having been raised and gone through college with today's "hookup" culture, the men in their lives are lazy. They barely have to lift a finger to get laid and they don't need to be romantic to seduce a woman at all. They have sex and then somebody goes home right after. If you are looking for one big feature to distinguish this show from Sex and the City, I think that this portrayal of modern sex culture would be it. Sex and the City portrayed it as glamorous and empowering for women. This show (and I am not sure if this is intentional) portrays it somewhat the opposite. Hannah has been having sex with her partner, Adam, for a long time, but she barely even knows him. Marnie has a long time boyfriend, but she's not turned on by or in love with him. The relationships that these women have are shallow and unsatisfying.

    The themes are interesting, and the writing is clever too. The one liners are usually funny. The hijinx are sufficiently wacky and unpredictable. If you have shared experiences with the characters in this show, then I think that you will "get" it, and that you will find it funny. If you haven't, then this show might not appeal to you. If you were turned off from the show by its marketing or because you didn't want to see another "Sex and the City", then I highly encourage you to give it a look. Especially if you feel that you can identify with some of the characters. As a 38 year old man, I still could, despite being older and, well, male. This show doesn't appear to be too popular, and that disappoints me, because I really want there to be a second season.
  • Ang L13 January 2013
    4/10
    Commits the sins of being boring and unfunny.
    Warning: Spoilers
    I have seen many complaints about Girls only being relatable to a small sliver of the audience. I have also read someone defending it saying that we can't relate to the characters on Dowtown Abbey but still love it. I like Downtown Abbey. I think of Mary Crawley as a bit spoiled, high-minded, even snooty but still good natured and I like her with her faults and I am far from a British aristocrat. The maids, footmen, valets, and cook - I can't relate to their situation either... Secret is we do relate to them through their experiences, like Daisy learning to stand up for herself in a respectful way. Enough about Downtown Abbey...

    I think you CAN write a show about spoiled privileged self-absorbed white girls in their early 20's. Actually, that show could be really funny because on some level who doesn't like laughing at privileged sheltered girls stumbling through a big city? At the same time we are laughing, we are also being comforted by the fact that life isn't easy for anyone, learning from their mistakes, and watching them grow. I'm also not troubled by the fact that all the friends are white - I found this to be somewhat realistic. Even a boyfriend who is too nice can be upsetting - you want a partner, an equal, with opinions and not a puppy dog that follows you around. This sounds like I am going to start praising the show? All the main complaints about it don't bother me. However, my point of criticism was it forgot to be entertaining and the situations are poorly written. It isn't funny and I am bored to tears while watching it. The characters are also often just plain annoying.

    I saw an episode one night not knowing what it was. It was so boring, drab, and lifeless, I kept thinking what is this? Is it a show? Who could produce something so vanilla, limp, and dull? Thanks to the info button, I learned it was 'Girls.' So I googled it and found rave reviews and decided to watch some episodes - maybe I couldn't appreciate the show without seeing the story that came before. I watched the first 3 episodes, that makes 4 total and 4 too many. The show just fails on multiple levels, mostly at the satire it tries to be. I admit there are brief moments when the show rises above and realizes its potential, again, very briefly. Sometimes the lack of comedic timing kills a scene. The dialogue and interactions are also very simplistic and there is never any subtext.

    Things that bugged me in the first 2 episodes:

    The lighthearted abortion party was a little disturbing and I am completely pro-choice. So the British girl isn't the type to be emotional but she doesn't show up to her abortion and just confessed to you that she does want children (the conversation about her wanting children was one of the most badly written scenes I have ever watched.). What is your response? You are worried about your friend who is facing a huge life decision and is unsure about her choices? Worried she may be somewhere needing your support? Nope, you are annoyed she stood you up. What? The situation could be funny but NEVER in the way it is presented. The show then wimped out and balked on the unwanted pregnancy. (Also, she would have had a pregnancy test and medical exam to schedule an abortion so was she miscarrying?)

    Hannah makes a joke about date rape in her interview. OK, nose-diving in an interview should be funny and make you uncomfortable. Her date rape joke makes you cringe but not cringe at how out of touch Hannah is but cringe with who wrote this terrible show?

    Hannah's lover during sex wants her to pretend to be an 11 year old girl that he took from the street and is going to send home to her parents covered in semen (they use the other word) while shoving his hand in her face. He's a jerk but still this one, I... don't... get.

    Alright, it's all to character development and we aren't supposed to think they are the greatest people in the world - they are real with flaws. They certainly are not completely awful but whether we are supposed to be laughing at or horrified by them, we should be invested in their story. The characters inspire nothing. They aren't interesting, they aren't funny. I didn't like them or hate them and I didn't care. You don't have to like a character to root for them. I also had a nagging sense that the show was telling superficial people, it is OK to be this self absorbed.

    You shouldn't have to be living in a narrow section of society to like a show and relate to the characters - most shows I watch are far from depicting me but I like them, I relate, I laugh, I cry. So when a large chunk of people think a show is not relatable, it's the show's fault and not the viewers. The shows biggest failure is it's boring. I didn't absolutely hate it despite it making me cringe at times. It's just a blank void as vacuous as its characters.
  • Katy Walker29 March 2013
    1/10
    Absolutely terrible.
    Warning: Spoilers
    This is one of the most unimaginative pieces of trash I have ever had the misfortune to watch. I am usually pretty open in what I try - I'm not all too picky, and I am an open minded woman - but this, this... ugh. I don't even have the words. How do people get funding for stuff like this?

    The main character is bland and boring with the usual self-image troubles. She is also disgustingly reliant on other people - namely her parents - by the fact that she expects absolutely everything from them. The supporting roles are just as terrible - unrealistic, and frankly, they're nothing new - they are characters you expect, and dread, in every television show of this sort. The writers didn't disappoint in that way, at least, in providing generic, irritating characters who make you want to beat their heads in with a stapler as soon as they open their mouths.

    The fact that it's supposed to be "spot on" to how girls of that age are (and speaking as a 20 year old female here) - I can only be astounded at the crap people produce, or the way that young ladies are obviously viewed. We don't watch each other poop, we don't have showers together... good lord, I could go on for a long while about how this is pretty much a writer's fantasy on what he hopes young women are like together, rather than providing something slightly truthful.

    Maybe it's just the cultural differences - I'm from Australia, and I noticed that an English chap who also reviewed this has maybe said it's a cultural thing as well. I sincerely hope Americans aren't like this, because Australians certainly aren't.

    What can I say about it? I want the 30 minutes of my life back that I lost while watching it. You'd honestly be better off watching a dog chase its tail.
  • CharWoman22 May 2012
    7/10
    Mixed feelings
    I hadn't been following the show yet but decided to get caught up since all the episodes were available on demand, and since they are nice and short it didn't take much time.

    I have mixed feelings about the show. I'm definitely not in my twenties anymore, and even when I was my situation was different from Hannah's (I was broke and struggling through art school without any family support, and not in New York). That was years ago--Hannah could theoretically be my daughter--yet I recognize and sympathize with a lot of what goes on in her world. A good bit of the show is funny and smart, and I do care about her--she's afraid and a little lost and going through a series of disappointments. I get how it feels to have something to say and find yourself (or others) questioning whether it really needs to be said, which must be really rough when you've spent the last few years in a crucible of complete focus on self-expression (grad school). I'm just not sure I like her. And maybe that's OK, since Hannah doesn't seem to like herself very much despite little bursts of ego and a chronic exhibitionism--but the occasional moments pop up where it feels like I'm supposed to cheer her on when I want to shake her instead. Her motives seem hollow, and too focused on trying to actively *impress* others, which could be intentional. It's hard to tell if she's having trouble being herself or if the trouble IS that she's being herself. Maybe the generation gap is to blame, or maybe there is no message and she's just packaging up and delivering a slice of life without any adjectives or claims printed on the box. And there is certainly more going on in the show besides the protagonist's character study.

    I'll continue watching to see how Hannah progresses. There is value in the writing, and it's pretty original. Feels a little like a graphic novel (a la American Splendor), weirdly. Glad to see Zosia Mamet after being introduced to her on Mad Men, and hope her character (Shoshanna) is allowed to grow out of what appears to be comic relief. Also good to see Becky Ann Baker again, the warm and authentic mom from Freaks and Geeks. She's less cuddly here but just as real.

    If you're in your twenties you may well like this more than I do. If you're {ahem}older you might like it more than me anyway. But it's certainly worth watching an episode or two to find out.
  • orangeisthenewawesome22 January 2014
    1/10
    Started out interesting, then sucked balls
    Warning: Spoilers
    I started watching the first season after reading how horrible this show was on other websites; I guess you could call it a morbid curiosity. I was pleasantly surprised and watched the entire first season. The show was quirky and I liked how Lena Dunham dared the audience to deal with her nude body that didn't fit conventional Hollywood norms.

    Then came the second season which was total garbage. The characters were gross and the writing was unbelievably bad. Tina Fey wrote a terrific show for 7 seasons; Lena Dunham couldn't even make it for 2. Not a witty line in a whole season. How is that possible? Anyway, I look forward to this show ending. I gave it a shot but it just crashed and burned.
  • imhy29 March 2015
    1/10
    Sad life to aspire to
    Warning: Spoilers
    Wow, what a f#$%ked up show. Life isn't easy and it's complicated and completely screwed up at times but this is not something to aspire to. All the people writing in saying I can relate or this is my life, than you seriously need to get your head on straight.

    This show is what's wrong with society and frankly the women or more accurately the 'girls' in our society. Worrying about fickle crap without any substance. It's why the likes of Kim Kardashian has a place in this world.

    Oh and WTF is with Lena Dunham's incessant need to put her tits out and show her gross body to anyone that will look. Is this the only way to satisfy her desperate exhibitionism. You have to write, produce and direct a show in order for anyone to cast someone that just wants to run around naked.
  • Heat Death29 March 2014
    2/10
    It's annoying.
    I can see some minor appeal to this show and I won't challenge the taste of anyone who likes it. My girlfriend watches it regularly, though she can't articulate why.

    From my perspective it's a pointless meta-tragedy where rich 30-somethings attempt to act like poor 20-somethings but wield only enough emotional depth to emulate spoiled teenagers. Each character is a razor-thin veneer that barely manages to obscure the underlying actor's radiant sense of entitlement and profound lack of awareness.

    These are truly despicable, irreparably self-obsessed people. Girls would work so much better if it were framed as satire rather than as a dramedy that wants to be taken semi-seriously.
  • yogsottoth27 March 2013
    5/10
    Incredible first season followed by utter letdown
    Warning: Spoilers
    Okay, this is going to be a long one, true fans of the show who understood what was special about Girls please bear with me.

    I watched Girls season one with no expectations and was pleasantly surprised at its unique take on human nature and relationships. This show combined awkwardness and reality in such a way that a guy who says "I'll make the continent of Africa on your arm." during sex started to seem charming a couple episodes in because he made you laugh and was real as it gets. Every single character had realistic problems that you could relate to and all of them was weird and funny in their own way.

    I could not wait to see season two but I was disappointed beyond belief.

    We had left a dumped and robbed Hannah on a beach eating a huge piece of wedding cake, but that sad girl was nowhere to be found now.

    In season 2 Hannah is transformed into an extremely confident and kind of a bitchy wild party girl. Oh and she also hates Adam who she was obsessed with and now Adam is the one chasing her. What happened there? When did she come over her fears and insecurities? Why did Adam forgive her? The gap between season 1 and 2 is not supposed to be unseen character development.

    Hannah having hot sex with hot guys that were ineptly planted in every other episode much like the shallow guest stars of Friends, more than enthusiastic to feed her already over-blown ego ("Beg me to stay"? "Don't mention the word love to me"? Come on!),

    Hannah being a complete bitch to Adam and Marnie,

    Hannah being Obsessed with Elijah and who he barely enters into,

    Hannah doing coke for an article,

    all these were painful to watch with not one shred of humor in them. Why would she call 911 on Adam as if she had just met him? Why invite Marnie to dinner, tell others she's a psycho for coming, sell her out to please Charlie's whats-her-face girlfriend only to get all bff and defend her to Charlie in the end? Speaking of Charlie: "you're never getting any of this again." was a criminal line to write. That's possibly the least Charlie to thing say in that situation where he has a girlfriend himself.

    So right when I was about to give up and stop watching the show came episode 6 and 7 like breath of fresh air. Laughs from start to finish, character development, awkwardness in all its beauty, and just great writing and execution. The guys who wrote those episodes (Murray Miller and Bruce Eric Kaplan) knew the characters. Having Adam and Ray spend the day together and those lovely conversations was a joy to watch. Jessa's "But I'm the child." line was pure emotion. But guess what, those were the two out of three episodes in the whole season that weren't written by Lena Dunham.

    The last three episodes were entrusted to her again and she immediately toned the mood down to shallow comedy with sketchy plot ideas that had nothing to do with her characters. Sudden onset of extreme OCD? Wow, that's realistic! Charlie the musician guy suddenly receiving the gift of software skills, inventing an app, selling it and being rich and surrounded by ladies? That's even more realistic.. A constantly grinning Adam's dreamy blind date? I won't even go into that. Shosh who basically tells everyone that steps into her house that they can stay forever finds it shockingly irritating that her boyfriend lives with her. The handsome and funny doorman at the party was pure Apatow and Hollywood stamp and it made me feel nauseous.

    So what is apparent to me is that Lena Dunham only had a seasons worth of material in her and now all she can write is these fake sketchy ideas she tries so hard to fuse into her beautifully written characters.

    If Murray Miller and Bruce Eric Kaplan had written the entire season this would have been a show I would force my grandchildren to watch. She should watch those two episodes again and again to understand that crazy things don't have to happen with every new episode. Adam and Ray returning a dog, Jessa and her father getting together, Hannah having weird sex with a teenager... All you need is to stay true to your characters and just let us see them being themselves in normal daily ordeals.

    I'm still hoping for a better third season.
  • Ashlee28 May 2015
    1/10
    Keep Your Clothes On Lena
    Warning: Spoilers
    When I first saw the trailer for this show it reminded me of a cheap version of Sex and The City. I ran out of shows to watch so out of pure boredom I decided to watch Girls on demand. I wish I could get my time back. Why Lena Dunham thinks everyone wants to see her naked body every few minutes is crazy to me?? Yeah I get the whole female empowerment issue but showing your gross body every episode is way too much. And in what real world would any attractive man want to have sex with someone so unattractive and I'm not just talking about her ill built physique. Her attitude alone is disgusting. Hannah is so self absorbed, narcissistic and egotistical that it's shamefully pathetic. In what world does someone like her dress so poorly and act so selfish and still is able to maintain a sexual relationship and any real friendships?? It doesn't happen like that. SO what makes this good television?? Nothing about it does. Even with all its awkwardness, it lacks heart and depth. I don't find entertainment in false relations between females. All they do is talk crap about each other then smile in each others face but still call each other friends. Everyone praises Lena Dunham on her writing of this show but in all reality the writing is junk, the acting is terrible (especially Lena's character Hannah), and the grotesque nudity and sex scenes are so uncomfortable that if any 20 something females say they can relate to this garbage then they really need to reevaluate their lives. And please tell me in what world does NYC always have sunny days and never a day of cold ass winter? Please cancel this joke of a show and make a show that is more realistic that empowers women by proving that not everyone has to be a supermodel to be confident. Please keep your clothes on Lena. In the show and on social media cause no one wants to see your naked body. Look up the word DECENCY and apply to all you do cause that is what real art possesses.
  • EddyOne28 May 2012
    7/10
    From a guy's perspective
    I am a straight (if that matters...) 30-something guy and I just watched the first five episodes of HBO's "GIRLS". So in a nutshell:

    I really dig this show. I think it has an extremely unique vibe to it, that kinda reminds me of "How to make it in America" (with a pinch of Woody Allen). It's nothing like "Sex and the City"... well it's about a group of Girlfriends, that happen to live in New York City and well... yes Sex is an issue. But still, it's nothing like "SATC". It's much more down-to-earth, realistic and... different. I like all the girls and their facets. The casting is great. Though they work with some (New York) clichés in the show, I really have the feeling that I know people like that from my own life and experiences. The early 20s, an age where you're on your own for the first time of your life, grown up but still clueless about life and what to expect from it. It's kind of an adventure to figure out who you are, what you want and where to go. I really feel that "GIRLS" makes a great job capturing that feeling. Lena Dunham, creator, director and protagonist of this show is crazy talented. People will hear (even more) from her in the future. Mark my words.

    Hopefully HBO won't axe this show as they did with "How to make it...". It's a great show and I really enjoy watching it.
  • Chappy Watched28 May 2016
    1/10
    Chappy Watched: Girls - Season One
    Wow!

    This show has taken A LOT of effort for me to finish.

    It is definitely not something to do in a marathon, it's something that should be watched once a week with some time (and better shows) in between episodes.

    I couldn't stand any of the 4 leads actresses, their characters and their stories.

    I can't even think of one good thing to say about this show.

    Don't really understand any of the hype around Lena Dunham and this show. There are way better shows than this, getting not enough recognition.

    The only way I would watch any more of this is if I am being tortured with my eyes taped open.

    :)
  • shark-4319 March 2013
    1/10
    GIRLS - Overrated
    I admired Lena Dunham when she had her success with TINY FURNITURE - I didn't like the movie, but I was impressed she wrote,directed and starred in her little indie and got such amazing press for it. Good for her - but now with GIRLS - again, huge success but everything that left me cold in her film does the same with her HBO series. First off, I don't think Dunham is that good of an actress - she has this sing song manner that I find irritating and as a writer - I find that she is kind of lazy - it seems like when she gets stuck in writing a scene and doesn't know what to do - she'll just write in an awkward, humiliating sex scene and boom - wow - it's like life man! Yes, I know things like this happen in life and there are girls and boys like this in life, but that doesn't make it entertainment. There's also child rape and animal cruelty but that doesn't mean it should be a series - hey wait a minute!!! But seriously, Dunham seems to think she can just write something shocking or vulgar and pass it off as insight. The show is incredibly overrated to me - I find the emperor has no clothes - in fact,. when Dunham is nude she looks just like the emperor.
  • oh deltoro26 March 2013
    1/10
    Hate love hate
    Warning: Spoilers
    At first I hated this show. After watching the pilot i thought to myself why is this even airing? Especially on a network like HBO?! Then one day a marathon of the first season was on so I thought I could give it another shot. I sat down and watched the whole season. There were some episodes that I loved and the show started to grow on me. For a while I was even a fan and I couldn't wait for the next season. When season two came out I was so excited to check it out. After watching the first episode I was very disappointed but i kept on watching. Second episode aired, third episode aired and so on and it just kept being awful. The season ended and I just couldn't believe that there was not even one episode of the show that I loved. It's clear that the writers are suffering from a lack of inspiration. The main character Hanna became unbearably annoying and yet there's an episode that involves only her. It seems to me that the writers of this show had no idea what to do with their characters so they did all the wrong things and ruin everything good about them. At the end of season one there was so much potential but it all went down in season two. I am surprised that season 3 is announced and that this show still has a huge audience. I am sure that I will not give season 3 a shot and I hope that will be the last season as well.
  • wordwench19 March 2013
    3/10
    what is realistic?
    I know it's only a show, but I am SO tired, bored in fact, with the laziness of writers and producers who, for the sake of entertainment (and advertising dollars)continue mining the same sad, vaguely misogynistic territory where women are laughable, but not funny.

    It's like the underlying message is: never mind, woman are just silly, not to be taken seriously. Makes women less of a threat professionally, socially. You can't admire, cheer on, (or fear) women as flat out lost as Hannah and her friends.

    Girls is no more realistic (or relate-able) than Sex In The City was - single women in NYC, w/o steady full time employment? Who IS paying their rent? (I am a single woman in NYC. Cheap,it's not)..Both shows take place in a New York City filtered through California goggles:where it's Summertime all year round (again, NOT the NYC I live in!)

    There was a more pro-woman HBO series that came close to what I'm trying to say here: "The Number 1 Ladies Detective Agency". At least this was a show where a single woman (overweight and NOT a conventional beauty), who got her emotional grounding from her father,built her own business, bought a house, AND had a boyfriend. Imagine that.
  • kikkapi2029 August 2014
    1/10
    Girls! Go home!
    For people saying they love this show and that it funny i just don't get it..... this has got to be the worse show i have ever watched there is no just to the story apart for 20 somethings sleeping about and being weird..... i cant believe show like this got renewed for season 2 when they canceled season 2 of secret circle and season 3 o alphas these programs were million times better than this. I have seen a lot of bad TV shows, but Girls may in fact be the worst one of all time! The cast on this show has some of the worst acting I have ever seen on a TV.

    Terrible dialogue -

    It has bland jokes and it's not interesting at all...
  • Leftbanker17 April 2017
    1/10
    Story Reads Like Text Messages Sent from the Mall
    Warning: Spoilers
    First of all, this show is the dictionary definition of nepotism as most of the people involved are the offspring of the rich and connected. Go look it up. I guess the story pulls all the right strings about women and lesbians or whatever the hell else is fashionable because, man, has this project ever been pampered by the press who just can't get enough of it. I had enough after about ten minutes of the first episode when the protagonist is shell-shocked because her wealthy parents are cutting her off a few years after graduation…from college! What horrible people! But I'm just an intern! Interns are all kids rich enough to not get paid, something I could never swing.

    Fast forward to the last episode.

    Just a bit of the glow from the press, this from the NYT:

    "For starters, it was straight-up funny, an aspect of "Girls" that tends to get lost in all the big-picture conversation around it."

    What do you call the opposite of funny? That's what it was. She walks around without pants and a cop stops her, like that is supposed to be funny. They need to put "funny" in quotation marks like I did because their definition is definitely non-standard. The sort of hot chick gets caught jerking off and throws her phone. Was that supposed to be "funny?" The episode is full of moronic pop culture references, stuff like Full House. Here's the deal, it's OK if you watched total crap like that growing up but using them as references in adult life is just creepy. Here is another "joke" that shows just what a shallow idiot she is:

    "A live jazz trio? That's the most disgusting thing I've ever heard."

    Unfunny and incredibly anti-intellectual at the same time.

    "I'm in emotional pain." Would anyone other than a self-centered half-wit actually say that out loud?

    Jia Tolentino writes in The New Yorker the opposite of a hatchet job:

    "The main characters are never more ridiculous than when they are explaining the way they see themselves—in one of Marnie's funniest moments, at her infelicitous wedding, she described her aesthetic as "Ralph Lauren meets Joni Mitchell," with a "nod to my cultural heritage, which is white Christian woman." The fruitlessness of endlessly fine-tuning your self-image—of frantically trying to echolocate* your personhood* against someone else's story, real or fictional—is baked into every episode of the show."

    If you are using this series to "echolocate" your "personhood" I would suggest finding a source a bit more substantive. Why would this nitwit want to bring a child into the world when she obviously is completely inadequate of managing her own pathetic life?

    I will be the first to admit that I am too old and too male to get this show. It's made for young women. I get that, but why can't we just ask a little more out of this demographic instead of celebrating the completely mediocre, stupid, and—much, much worse—the anti-intellectual? As if spewing crappy TV show references is what passes for wit and sophistication among this crowd. The same dumpy and lazy kids from Reality Bites who think they are cool but they are mostly just poorly-educated sheep feeding on celebrity gossip, lousy pop music, and whatever food/diet fad is du jour.

    *Ironically, the spell-check at IMDb flagged these as non-words. I would agree.
  • asc8527 July 2012
    6/10
    Not sure what to make of this show anymore
    Warning: Spoilers
    The first four or five episodes were hilarious...it was one of my favorite new shows on TV, and I totally understood why it was so well-received by critics. Then, inexplicably, it changed from "a comedy with some dramatic parts" to "a drama with some comedic parts." The characters became extremely unlikable...especially Hannah. The episode with Adam flipping out multiple times was one that I despised, and I would have stopped watching the show at that point, but there was only like 2-3 more episodes to go, so I thought I should hang in there. The last 2-3 episodes got a little bit better, but the wedding in the final episode was so ridiculous, which I guess might have been the point.

    So I'm not sure whether I'm going to give "Girls" a shot for Season #2. I probably will, but will keep it on a short leash. If it continues to be unfunny with unlikeable characters, I'm done.
  • Haether O'Shaunessey23 April 2012
    10/10
    Realistic and more than relevant to my generation
    I'm twenty three. My girlfriends and I have real conversations like this. We're poor, fresh out of college, and headed toward grad school (hopefully.) What I'm getting at is this show is relevant to our lives, it's realistic and actually funny. Not all women were like Sex and the City and it's been said that Carrie's extravagant lifestyle was not realistic, this show is. I hate to compare the two but Girls blows SATC out of the water. This show is fresh, funny, and so true that it hurts. Lena Dunham is not only a phenomenal actress but the entire premise is so new and amazing that it's hard to believe she writes and directs each episode. Love is so far and I recommend it.
  • jnewm77722 March 2014
    1/10
    Everybody Looks Like They Need A Bath
    I had a professor who use to say "there's no accounting for taste". Some people are going to love things you hate, some are going to find things funny that you find stupid, and some are going to find things compelling and inspiring that you find boring at best and pure bullshit at worst. He was right. This show is nothing but a trashier, newer generation of Sex in the City where the characters are even more narcissistic (I never thought it possible) and less appealing. Some folks might like it and they're welcome to it. I know that I've liked shows over the years that most hated, so to each their own. That said, the show might be a little more appealing if the entire cast didn't always look like they needed a bath.
  • Scout792 June 2013
    2/10
    Welcome to that part of society that you hate!
    This show is absolutely AWFUL! Read the other reviews - they indicate viewers kept going in hopes the show gets better. It doesn't.

    This is an awful show made by awful people for awful people to enjoy.

    Lena Dunham is not cute. She is not quirky. She is not pleasant. She really needs to stop - stop everything and work at a place where no one could see or hear her.

    I am not taken aback by the sex and nudity of the show or any adult themes. I am taken aback by watching a bunch of hipster-esque jerks for humor. It is not funny. And Dunham highlights the "me generation" of it all. I imagine she thinks her "edge" highlights that manic pixie dream girl image - it doesn't. It highlights her character and writing style as a self-centered jerk.
  • Noah Stobor26 April 2014
    2/10
    Trying to be smart but not
    I admire Lena Durham for all that she did with this program and her attempt to make something different, but it doesn't mean she deserves and HBO show about it. This is a copy of Sex and the City, but with more younger, annoying people. Durham's writing also reeks of Juno and after one time seeing that movie, that was enough. How many Hollywood movies are going to continue have this sort of writing? Self deprecation, gratuitous sex and a bad premise make this show a waste. There is nothing appealing about any of Durham's characters at all. They are annoying and ridiculous. The actors are annoying as well. HBO, please make something original and appealing!
  • ammbc2526 December 2013
    1/10
    A show for the uneducated and intellectually challenged
    The show has all the excellent production quality HBO has to offer and the writing is perfect for it's niche audience. The show feeds the void left by a life time of neglect for learning. I would say the average fan has a complete lack of understanding of the world and has absolutely nothing to contribute to humanity except complaining and gossip.

    If there is anything to be learned after 30 minutes of watching this show, it that if you loved it, it's time to crack open a book and grow a personality.

    Utterly terrible.
  • dragonbate11 July 2016
    6/10
    Time to end this show
    Warning: Spoilers
    I actually liked Season 1 but it went downhill from there. Now I'm watching Season 5 and am appalled by how bad it is but at the same time very interested to understand why Lena Dunham feels she must have her character show her vagina to her supervisor, steal a poor guy's bike, hike a mountain in her bikini and generally show off her naked body in random moments even though the plot doesn't require it. The answer is simple.

    The show is doing terribly. The plot is silly, the female characters are all variations of one character, that of a narcissistic, confused, spoiled brat. The only thing that can make people passionate about this show and keep watching it, is their hatred for Lena Dunham's character. She must have thought "you want to hate me? I'll give you reasons to hate me". Hence this last year Hannah became even more obnoxious, spoiled, rude and narcissistic. But the worst thing is the flaunting of her naked body in every episode. This is not the healthy reaction of an overweight woman who feels confident in her own skin. Nope. It is provoking and of poor taste and every time she shows me her naked ass I feel like she's also screaming: "in your face then!" Agh. No, no thanks.
  • Avis Ramsey4 May 2012
    10/10
    Just Enjoy It For What It Is
    I personally LOVE this show. It's incredibly funny and extremely refreshing. It's quirky and almost every dialogue makes me smile like an idiot. The sex is also a lot more realistic than in other shows (Since most of the time sex can awful and unsatisfying, not earth-shattering like they portray on romantic movies and also, not everyone is built like a model.)

    I think people need to stop over analyzing the show and enjoy it for what it is; a heartfelt comedy about young women who traverse a complicated world filled with heartbreak and uncertainty with no one to lean on but each other. It's a unique take on an old idea and I will definitely stay tuned for more.
  • lavatch18 April 2012
    A Disgrace to the Name of HBO
    Warning: Spoilers
    I took a chance on the pilot program of HBO's "Girls," due to the stellar review from USA Today. Unfortunately, the program did not live up to its billing as an edgy, humorous, and true-to-life portrait of a quartet of young female New Yorkers. The main problem was the lack of honesty in the scripting of this pseudo-reality style series. Here are three examples of how the situations were completely lacking in credibility:

    The program begins with the parents of the young protagonist cutting off support for the young college graduate struggling in the big city. I never believed for one moment that the parents would sever ties with their daughter in the callous, mean-spirited way depicted in the program. The mother was especially virulent in her astonishing treatment of the young woman.

    In the graphic sex scene in the program, the lack of intimacy or any connection at all between Hannah and her partner was truly shocking. I cannot recall any film or media portrayal of sex that unfolds in a more impersonal way, as shown in this program. The scene may be best termed "intercourse," as opposed to love-making, and it had neither an erotic nor emotional note throughout the excruciating sequence.

    The most intimate dialogue among the four young women occurs in bathrooms. Those scenes sound "scripted," as opposed to coming from real-life experience. In the two main bathroom sequences, the scenes are interrupted by one of the male characters barging in without even knocking, undermining any sense of believability. In the second bathroom scene, the man blunders in with one of the women seated on the toilet. And she doesn't even react to his appearance!

    The clear intent of "Girls" was to dramatically portray the pressures facing young women in the urban jungle of the twenty-first century. But from start to finish, the scenes fail to deliver a credible human portrait of contemporary women in their twenties playing out their lies in New York. This program is billed as a comedy. But based on the content of this pilot show, "Girls" would be more aptly termed tragedy.
loading
An error has occured. Please try again.