I watched the episode with the hospice, and besides noting that Rashida Jones has, if anything, gotten even hotter, I thought it was mediocre. I’ll try a few more - maybe that was just a fluke.
And why are there so many (well, 3) actors from “The Office” showing up in this?
I kinda did. With Wilfred being as preachy as he is the show itself is kinda preachy.
The dog-human dissonance jokes are almost always brilliant. I love the sight gags with Wilfred chasing the laser pointer, humping the bear and wiping his ass on things. When he shot him with the squirt bottle and he acted like he was being tortured, that was priceless.
The rest of the show with Ryan, the cute neighbor and the busy body sister has yet to really interest me. I like Elijah Wood and he can play angsty pretty well, so that works, but thus far his character isn’t particularly likable. I don’t really have any stake in if he has any success with anything and I don’t really care one way or another what happens to him for good or bad. The other characters are generally annoying, but that’s probably because the time spend developing Ryan and Wilfred left little time for anyone else.
I like the show and plan to keep watching. It’s quick, funny and doesn’t require too much investment. It could be better, but the jokes that work REALLY work. In a sit-com, that’s the most you can ask for. I like Wilfred a lot better than Louie, which either says a lot about the two shows or about me.
I love it, but humor can’t be too dark for me.
This is pretty much it for me, too. I’ve all but given up after four episodes. My son, age 14, likes it, though.
I loved it up until the hospital episode, that one sucked and the one after wasn’t very good either.
You guys are right on, definitely funniest when Wilfred is acting like a dog, it just doesn’t get old.
Ryan isn’t all that interesting or likeable, I find myself wishing that I liked him instead of rooting for him.
Me 3. The idea sounded funny when I first heard it and the commercials are funny but the actual show just isn’t. I’ve only had a few LOL moments over the 3 episodes I’ve watched. The characters are all unlikeable AND boring, which is a bad combination for a TV show. I know it’s supposed to be all artsy and whatnot but I think they need to at least address the whole man-in-a-dog-suit thing and move towards explaining why he appears that way to Ryan.
Otherwise, yeah, I’ve deleted it from my DVR.
I saw Helms and Jones. Who was the third?
Why does Calvin see Hobbes as a tiger but everyone else sees a stuffed animal?
The comics established that it’s in Calvin’s imagination. Wilfred hasn’t done that.
As it happens I like the show, but either way I don’t think that spoon-feeding the audience would improve it at all.
Seems pretty straightforward to me that Wilfred is a device to allow Ryan to have a dialog with his “wild” nature. It works, and it doesn’t need any exposition to explain why it works.
Did it? Not someone like his parents his parents saying he’s imaginary, but did it ever have a “powers that be” or internal moment that revealed he’s truly imaginary?
Either Wilfred and Ryan really have a link, or Wilfred is Ryan’s Tyler Durden. Or perhaps his Harvey, either in the Elwood P. Dowd sense or in the David Berkowitz sense.* Whichever, I don’t suspect it will be a plot point soon. We just have to accept that he sees/hears/interacts with Wilfred uniquely.
*In spite of the Son of Sam moniker, the dog that Berkowitz claimed gave him orders (while demon possessed) was named Harvey.
Many times Hobbes was shown as the stuffed tiger he really is. Hobbes has been put though the washing machine, he has been propped up in a chair in a restaurant (with waiters rolling their eyes as Calvin tries to order for him), he’s had tea with Suzy (where he is shown as stuffed) and many others.
But they’re just six episodes in. I figure they’ve got time to get around to telling us that.
It is an unusual show, but it has its funny moments. I don’t think they need to explain why Ryan sees and interacts with Wilfred in the way he does. Why does it matter if Ryan is nuts or not? The whole premise and source of humor of the show is that Ryan has a “special” relationship with Wilfred. I just don’t know how they can come up with on-going interesting stories on this single premise. Maybe it’s just meant to be a one-time short series.
I think explaining why Ryan sees Wilfred the way he does would ruin the series. It could be magic, it could be that Ryan has had a complete psychotic break; the ambiguity is part of the fund of the series. That same ambiguity worked will in Harvey, only Jimmy Stewart saw the rabbit, but there were moments that made it seem possible that Harvey really existed.
So from the above comments, I can assume there’s never been a scene/POV where Wilfred is an actual dog?
Charles Esten,the jogger at the beginning of the hospice episode, was the boss of the Stamford branch that Jim transferred to.
So far, the show has never shown Wilfred as anything other than a man in a dog suit and I hope they never do.
The recent episode with the car accident answered some about his finances: he’s been living on savings and now is almost broke. And it also answered the question everybody’s wondered about at some point, which is “What would a cunnilingus scene between Elijah Wood and Jane Kacsmarek look like?”
By the end of the film I think any ambiguity has pretty much vanished :). The trick with the gate could be explained away, but not the one with the dictionary.