We can't have two sociopaths living together?
shareI agree. I enjoyed it much more when they didn't go about explaining why everyone was as horrible as they were. It was better when they seemed to be having some kind of break through moment, and BOOM! One of them cr*pped on the other.
share
Try Casual. Those people really are the worst!
"She wasn't emo! She just liked cutting herself!"
Because having a show with zero character development season after season would get repetitive and boring.
shareThe developed characters in the first season and did so unrepentantly. There were no excuses for why they were as sh!tty as they are.
Now they are showing how, boo-hoo Jimmy had a horrible child-hood. Or, boo-hoo Gretchen has the weepies.
How?
Those aren't even presented as excuses. Edgar by far has the most tragic backstory and he's the only one who isn't horrible. Which shows that the show doesn't use having a bad past as an excuse for acting sh!tty in the present. The show is saying that EVERYONE has stuff in their past, but that isn't an excuse for acting the way they do. This isn't Always Sunny or Veep, funny shows with zero character that can get stale after a bit. I'm glad You're the Worst gave its characters some character.
The show is saying that EVERYONE has stuff in their past, but that isn't an excuse for acting the way they do.
It's not. Just because some people interpret it that way doesn't mean that's the intent of the show. i have depression. I'm glad that it's getting representation in the mainstream. But I don't act like Gretchen. Pleanty don't. Go back to my Edgar comment. The show clearly doesn't use it as an excuse. Yes, it's a reason to connect with the characters, but not an excuse for their actions.
Veep and Always Sunny are the shows you wish this show was. They're shows where you have no reason to care about the characters, and all the people are irredeemably awful. The only reason YtW isn't a straight comedy is because you feel for the characters. If you didn't, you wouldn't care about any dramatic stakes in the show.
Character development, backstory and empathy are fundamental aspects of a good story. Especially in TV.
Edgar is the whipping boy for this show. He's the only one with legitimate issues and, because of those issues he's not strong enough to break away from the toxic environment that is Jimmy and Gretchen.
Yes, it's a reason to connect with the characters, but not an excuse for their actions.
Veep and Always Sunny are the shows you wish this show was.
all the people are irredeemably awful.
He's also a good person. So is Paul I guess. And they have the most legitimate issues on the show. By the logic of "bad things happened to Jimmy/Gretchen so they're justified in what they're doing" then Edgar and Paul would be worse. They're not. Meaning the stance the show takes is "everyone has little tragedies in their lives. That's not an excuse for acting sh!tty"
Connecting with a character doesn't excuse their actions. I have no idea where this logic jump could come from. You can "connect" with Jimmy if you have a bad family but that doesn't excuse him taking pictures of his dick on every camera at the wedding. Neither does Becca rejecting him. Just like I can excuse Edgar for getting pissed that Jimmy didn't show up for his improv thing, even though I don't connect with that situation at all. I understand that that'd probably hurt. Just because you connect with someone doesn't mean they're clear of all blame.
That's what Veep and Always Sunny are. Horrible characters with no given reasons and no sympathy. That's what I meant by irredeemably awful. Those shows are fun, but they can get boring after a while because a lack of sympathy brings a lack of dramatic stakes. Why would I care about their relationship if I didn't sympathize with them? And if I don't care about any of the characters in a show with an ongoing plot, why would I come back? "Ha-ha- they made fun of Edgar again?!? Wonder what'll happen next episode!" They need dramatic stakes and character evolution to keep audiences engaged season after season. Otherwise it's the same episode repeated 100x.
In my experience, I have found that you can have writers that excel with dialog and writers that excel with plots, but you generally can't have both. To this day, I have no idea what Pulp Fiction's story was- and I've watched it numerous times. But when someone says 'Burger Royale,' a smile instantly comes to my face.
The character development that they navigated in recent episodes has pretty much been a case of dialog people not really knowing how to deal with the plot. If you're going to enjoy this show- or any show that's almost entirely dialog driven, you really have to tune out of the story aspects and not really give a crap where the characters end up.