If Seinfeld Got the Girls Treatments

i'll get into the article in detail in a sec, but there are 2 main differences in these shows, and i can sum it up in 2 words: reality and sympathy

1. reality: seinfeld isn't supposed to be a reflection of reality. the characters are not real people. they're archetypes of characters who are nothing more than tools to serve the show's purpose (exposing social norms/behaviors that are silly). girls is supposed to be a reflection of society, and therefore is not comparable to seinfeld

2. sympathy: in no way are we supposed to be sympathetic towards the characters. other than the fact that they're not real, they are bad, bad people. this was the entire point of the finale. we are supposed to feel massive amounts of sympathy towards the characters, and this is accelerating in season 2. hannah and jessa got entire episodes that were basically "this is why you feel bad for this terrible person, and make excuses for them." that did not exist in seinfeld

quote:

---

Seinfeld stars a comedian named Jerry Seinfeld who plays a comedian named Jerry. Wow. Really, Jerry?

---

seinfeld isn't supposed to be a profound artistic statement, and jerry seinfeld was never given praise for his acting or writing ability. you cannot compare a standup comedian writing a sit com to an "artist" writing a serious, acclaimed drama

quote:

---

He also created the show and writes it. It’s like he can’t give up control of anything.

---

larry david, anyone?

quote:

---

Sometimes it seems like he’s just using this show as an excuse to play out his fantasies, y’know? Every show opens with him performing stand-up to a great crowd that loves every one of his jokes. And he’s constantly having sex with these beautiful women. Like, WAY too beautiful for a schlubby guy like Jerry.

---

it's a comedy, and any fantasies are just tools to showcase the point of the show: exposing "polite" society and weird societal rules/norms. the show makes no statement other than this

and jerry didn't really bang outside of his tier. first, the girls on the show early on weren't anything amazing, and as the show went on, they did get noticeably hotter. however, he's a financially successful alpha-type who can make girls laugh. he's also somewhat of a celebrity. those guys frick hot chicks.

hannah is a fat, ugly and stupid bitch who is a terrible person who doesn't have a real job. she's an ugly nobody

quote:

---

Even George, who’s like short and fat, and Kramer, who’s just kind of gross, both also have sex with these beautiful women. It’s like, yeah, okay, Jerry. I guess enjoy the dream while you can.

---

george dated normal/plain/chubby girls all the time. when geoge did date a "hot" chick, it was a big deal and usually the point of the storyline. that's george: he's the socially awkward and anxious guy whose overthinking social situations leads him to just frick it up in the end. he's a tool, not a person.

kramer sometimes got girls who were hotter than he was, but he had that whole absurd/outlier/alpha thing going for him. that's the whole point of kramer. he's the guy who rejects the social norms and we go "wow, those guys do pull hotter arse than they should." again, he's a tool

this is nothing like a fat/ugly girl making a rich, good looking doctor fall in love with her. especially when this girl is supposed to be a real character who could be a regular human being. the scenarios are not comparable

quote:

---

He really seems to think he’s funny. Do you think he’s funny? I don’t think he’s funny. Like, the critics say it’s a funny show, but the comedy is kind of weird.

---

not everybody finds seinfeld funny, but by the end of its run it was the #1 show on tv. that means quite a few people thought it was funny. girls? it gets about 1/35 of the viewers at best, so i'd say that the market has established which show was accepted as being funnier (and even if you want to use HBO numbers, girls is nowhere close to its #1 show)

quote:

---

And nothing ever HAPPENS. It’s just these privileged white people (and I mean, they’re ALL white)

---

again, seinfeld never acted like it was a slice of reality. it was, at its heart, a slapstick-conversational comedy that analyzed silly social conventions. the characters were only tools to accomplish this. the scenarios were obviously absurd to push the point home. they were archetypes, not real. girls is supposed to be a "slice of life" show with "real" characters and scenarios. if you want to make social commentary through "real" characters, you better show reality. girls, for all of its grandstanding, postering, and "looking down" at middle america, was shown to be just as closed-minded as those it scoffs with its racist first season

oh, and fwiw, seinfeld even poked fun at the race issues a couple times, most notably with elaine and darren. "so what do we do now?"..."want to go to the gap?"

quote:

---

And are we supposed to LIKE these characters?

---

in seinfeld? no

in girls? if we're not supposed to like them, why do we keep getting hit over the head with justifications for sympathy?

quote:

---

Did you know there’s an episode called “The Contest” that’s all about masturbation? And one called “The Apology” that’s about Jerry being casually naked around the apartment with his girlfriend. I know they’re trying to be edgy, but honestly it’s boring. Like, wow, an ugly guy doing things I’m used to seeing hot guys do.

---

this is an attempt to link ugly girl being naked, and it's just a reach. they tried to find something comparable to her statement on telling people it's ok to be unhealthy, but they failed. the funniest part of the article is thinking about how hard they had to think of a link to this, and they come up with this paragraph.

quote:

---

Also, did you know Julia Louis-Dreyfus is the daughter of the billionaire Gerard Louis-Dreyfus. It seems a little disingenuous to cast her as personal assistant when she’s probably never had to work a day in her life.

---

this one is almost as bad as the last comment. JLD had already established herself, and i believe worked with larry david prior on a sketch show. she had paid her dues. girls has multiple girls who have major media connections. there are many people who have stated that this show only got made b/c dunhman wanted them to be included so that their daddies would push HBO to green light it. again...this is not comparable at all and is a total fail of a point

quote:

---

And speaking of never working a day, what’s up with Kramer? He doesn’t seem to have a job and yet somehow he can live by himself in a giant high-rise Manhattan apartment. Are we to assume that his parents are giving him money?

---

of any character in seinfeld that you cannot compare "real" conventions to, it's kramer. that's the whole point. i hope this author had an editor that forced him to write this, and he understands how stupid this point is. i just can't believe somebody would be so wrapped up that they'd say something so idiotic

quote:

---

I guess I just like a different kind of comedy. Have you seen Louie? Now there’s a great show that can’t have the exact same criticisms leveled against it.

---

i've said this before: Louie is a sympathetic character and that's the backbone of the show. for such a good guy, who does so many good things and is so well respected and good at his job, he shouldn't hate himself. he should be more successful. he should have a talk show. he should be able to afford that house.

but even in the face of all of this...and even though he hates himself and shouldn't...he's still a great father, friend, and person. we have an emotional connection to louie because he is a good person and we want him to succeed. he's a natural protagonist.

the characters on girls are horrible, horrible people or cliche's. they're not real and/or they don't deserve sympathy

I read through this whole thread and SlowFlowBro, you just don't know.