Oh, and Brickbacon, could you elaborate on this:
I’m not sure I follow.
(Also IIRC, G.O.B. was in jail as part of an act where he said he said he could escape and indeed voluntary).
I like AD a lot, but do not love it. I think one thing that bothers me is that the show is just so surreal and I really don’t have anyone to identify with. On Seinfeld I could identify with Jerry, everyone else were exaggerated caricatures for comic effect. On AD I want to identify with Michael but he just winds up in so many cringe-worthy situations that are his own fault, that I can’t.
The second part was more about how at the time, when there were reports of financial crime after financial crime, unpopular wars, etc. people feel out of control. They felt powerless at the hands of these criminals. A so that is able to satirize them so well made them so well made it something to laugh at rather than fear.
The first part is part and parcel of what most successful shows do. It’s something I think people always miss with Tyler Perry. His show are arguably simple from a writing standpoint, but they are successful because his audience feels validated watching it. I don’t think he or anyone else is under the impression they are watching Shakespeare. They just want to escape to a world where their fears, desires, and dreams are reflected in the characters they see.
Seinfeld did the exact same thing. Seinfeld was set in a NY where there are basically no minorities, nobody works a blue collar job, you almost always eat out, and you can spend hours a day focusing on mindless minutia. I actually like the show, but I can see why many people with different sensibilities can think it’s terrible. The same goes for shows like Frasier, Girls, Community, The Office, etc., etc.
I guess what I am basically telling the OP is that you don’t need to make excuses for why you don’t like something, but that if you are trying to understand WHY you probably don’t like a show many people love, it’s most likely because the show was not written by people who have the same values, outlook, or sensibilities as you do (and there is nothing wring with that).
Yeah. He’s trying way too hard to justify his dislike of the show. As if he needs to find it objectively bad.
I consider a comedy “smart” if there’s so much going on, so much densely layered humor, that you pretty much can’t get everything the first time through and need to see it multiple times to catch it all (if that’s even possible).
In that regard, AD is pretty much the smartest show to ever air on network television.
Could not have said it better. AD is not nearly as smart as it or its audience considers it to be.
<<It seems to me that the plot of AD is derived from the humor mentioned above, and not the other way around. It is like the writers came up with a clever play on words and then tried to figure out a way to contrive a plot to fit that quip. This is backwards and just kind of lame.
People call this “intelligent humor” or rave about AD being the “smartest comedy,” but I would argue there is nothing overly intelligent about coming up with cheeky quips in a fictional world where anything is possible because the characters are built stupid or selfish enough to do anything (BUSTER, JOB, TOBIAS, LINDSAY, POP-POP, LUCIEL) and the world has no real consequences no matter what they do.>>
Sometimes it is so dumb (by dumb I mean irrational) I can’t stomach any more of that shit and I puke a bit up into my mouth.