Well I would have loved for the dynamics between the characters to change, but we all know that’s not going to happen. Given the constraints, I liked the resolution. At least now I can imagine Meg smugly accepting their abuse and knowing that she could stand up to it if she really needed to. So its a case of liking the lesser evil rather than thinking everything’s fine
I’m unfamiliar with some of those characters, but I would say that of people like Dextar, House, or the Seinfeld crew, there are redeeming characteristics and they are at least capable of being funny or ingenious, so the viewer begrudgingly recognizes that instead of just dwelling on the negatives.
I just find absolutely no redeeming qualities at all in Allen Gregory, from the little I’ve seen of him. If he was a real boy, I would drown him in acid.
I disagree that Seinfeld was right in general: just that he was right for his show. Put another way: if you’re going to have a show with uniformly repellent protagonists, it has to either eventually lead to their comeupance or avoid certain questions. The “Meg confronts everybody” episode was a bad idea because it breaks the fourth wall far, far more than the show usually does; that is, it applies real-world standards to a ridiculous situation. It would be as if Justice League had suddenly started applying real-world physics.
I just saw this thread since I tend to go sub-forum by sub-forum rather than looking at the latest post listing. I just want to say that I had this set to record, watched about 5 minutes of the first show and thought WTF? There is no level on which I can even conceive of this being funny.