I only liked Ray (the opium stirrer). I hope he keeps kicking ass, but it seems inevitable that the girls will end up being smarter than the guys on this show. Other than that, I don't think not liking the characters will really deter me from enjoying the show. I like looking in on raffish young New York culture even though I'm a complete rube in comparison. I didn't like the characters on How To Make It In America either (they were just way too cool) and rooted for them to fail, but I still liked the show.

The pink jumpsuit girl seemed like a pretty extreme caricature? Not sure where they are going with her.

Really surprised with the 87 on metacritic, with an 88 for GOT.

Nah, it's definitely come up before. I know Nicolas Cage caught some crap for it early in his career, and a lot of other actors have too. It's just a funny poster that doesn't really mean anything. I wouldn't give it that much attention.

The poster was probably put together by some very bitter, out of work, person in the industry. Their gripe is likely not that these people are getting a show, but that they were able to get their foot in the door, while so many people, who aren't related to famous people, are being pushed out. It was a hilarious poster, but this is really what the show is about (though no one gives us an indication that these are famous kids, as that's not what they're playing). These are the best people to relate a realistic experience for the story they're trying to tell. Their background is genuine, the characters are not. It would be a pretty hard sell to audiences if they basically played themselves, and that the parents in the show really were all famous people.

The issue is not Dunham's accomplishments, it's that she had a money stream that allowed her to do something that others can't, and that her connections allowed her to get it out there. No one's denying that she's talented (she obviously is), but she probably wouldn't have even gotten to do her movie if she wasn't connected (if I'm not mistaken, the movie that catapulted her to where she is is probably at least somewhat autobiographical), or had at least some money to be able to start and have time to start the process of the movie. There are a tremendous amount of people, who are probably a lot more talented than her, that have never been able to get the shot she had, due to lack of money or connections.

Nepotism is a pretty bad thing in the entertainment industry, and Warner Bros. actually had strict anti-nepotism for a long time (not sure if this is the case today). The problem with nepotism is that it takes jobs from people who are actually talented, and gives them to people who need to spend a lot of time honing their craft (I doubt anyone would say Dunham is polished, but she is clearly talented).

A point I made earlier in the thread is that we will never know how talented Dunham is, because her support system for this show is ridiculous. If she fails, she doesn't deserve to work again, because everything was put in place for her to succeed. She just has to write, figure out what kind of shot she wants to put up, direct the dialog, not get a huge ego, and not piss the wrong people off. She'll be bailed out everywhere else she needs to be.

If I was looking for a person in the industry who was bitter about Dunham- I'd start with the somebody who has devoted like 239402348 words ITT to questioning how she should be credited on the show.

OHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!

No you di'int.

very bitter, out of work, person in the industry

very bitter, out of work, person in the industry

very bitter, out of work, person in the industry

Metacritic ratings for tv shows are awful. Since most critics only assign letter grades to pilots/premieres.

It helps that Dunham has family money/connections, but there are so many people with money/connections who can't even get a pilot to the development stage. There is a massive survivorship bias irt the nepotism criticisms.

Nepotism and Hollywood are pretty synonomous if you ask me. Tells me that acting isn't all that hard as long as you are reasonably okay looking on camera and given the opportunity. An enormous percentage of current working actors are offspring (or strongly connected) who were able to get a shot when (possibly and probably) more talented people couldn't even get a shot.

Good editing can make any "actor" look like an actor. It's so easy now to put a scene together quickly.

Gee Dids, thanks for playing. Number one, I'm not bitter, at all about her. Number two, you asked me "why?", and I gave you a detailed answer, so this is me being bitter? Come on, that's ridiculous. I'm bitter about lots of other things, that is not one of them. I also have not questioned how she should be credited, I've just stated that she has a very good support system, which shows more what HBO thinks of her, than anything else (they want her to succeed, ldo). The fact that anyone could construe my writing as being negative toward her shows that a lot of people on this board have very strange ideas about normal things. That's called making a story out of nothing. If anything, I have been pumping up her potential...so lol to you who think I am bashing her.

I actually don't care about nepotism, as long as the person can do the job.

Placing aside how Dunham got the show and whether it deserves to be on the air, I thought it was above average. It's one of those shows that is familiar enough to be easily digestable, yet different enough to have its own identity. I'm on board, especially since my wife really liked it so I'll win "TV points" by watching this. Who knows - it might even get me out of having to sit through True Blood, or perhaps convince her to give Game of Thrones another shot.

Oh, and I definitely got a "female Michael Cera" vibe from Dunham.

"If she fails, she doesn't deserve to work again, because everything was put in place for her to succeed."

This is an absurd contention and that's why people are accusing you of being bitter. If the show is a failure, she will get other opportunities - you don't get an HBO show, auteur-style, just by knowing the right people.

I was pretty much under the impression that everyone who ever got a show on the air either had family connections or was willing to blow someone in power so I could give a crap how this show came into being. I don't hear people whining about how Game of Thrones only got made because one of its exec producers is married to Amanda Peet (I am insanely bitter & jealous about that, but for a totally different reason).

If the show's good, I'll watch it, and the pilot left me intrigued so that's a good start. HBO has a history of putting its shows in a position to succeed, so I don't think there's much there there.

It's absurd that you cherry pick that quote out of context. I said she's not going to fail, it's impossible. If SHE does fail (not the show), then she doesn't deserve to work again (though I should have said at that level of control).

This was the important part of that statement:

"She just has to write, figure out what kind of shot she wants to put up, direct the dialog, not get a huge ego, and not piss the wrong people off. She'll be bailed out everywhere else she needs to be."

That's an honest fact, and you can disagree with it all you want, it won't make your thoughts the truth. Also, if you think I'm just making stuff up, start clicking on those imdb links I provided, and tell me they just let her do her own thing (they set up her NOT to fail). This is a GOOD thing, not a bad thing. She's not in a sink or swim situation. She's in a cocoon, and HBO is going to make HER and her SHOW as successful as they want it to be. As I said, we will not know how much of her success is directly attributed to her, and how much of it will be attributed to her support system. Does it matter? No, especially because this is going to make her super famous, and sought after.

THIS!. saw the show, and while I am tired of all these shows based in williamsburg/chinatown/les , I liked it .

The criticism of Dunham where if she fails she doesnt deserve another shot combined with the comparisons to Louie should be really really hilarious for anyone aware of the TV show Lucky Louie.

I'm playing so haven't read all the posts but who criticized the show? It's a funny pic, that's all. calm down gais!

edit. I suppose if you're intimately familiar with rampant nepotism in hollywood then it's not so funny! (I assumed it was much less common for **** that's actually good).

The criticism we're referencing isn't in this thread. I actually haven't seen much of it, just a few dumb comments on blog posts- but I've seen a lot of critics on twitter being critical of the criticism.

Btw I have no idea who Laurie Simmons is, and even after googling her have no sense that she is famous enough to matter. And daughter of Bad Company's drummer is a foot in the door?

Yeah, I should have clarified that I was referring more to the larger discussion of this show that has been all over the place. It's all put me on major life tilt and the poster just reminded me of it. There's been a huge backlash on this show for the dumbest reasons after only one episode and it just bothers me.

I had no idea there's been any backlash. Carry on!

So I watched the show, and I wonder if I can enjoy a show where the main character is someone I detest. I enjoyed the show because it is different, however my girlfriend hated it because Hannah is so unlikeable.

Weird weird show. Clearly with her fake drama with the parents and stealing the money in the end scene we're not supposed to sympathize with her.. which is bizarre considering she's the main character and acted by the creator of the show. WTF? Have to wonder how meta this is. Guess we'll find out in a couple episodes.

Didn't really like it. Perhaps I will watch it again sober.