Girls Renewed for Season 4; Lena Dunham's On-Screen Nudity Causes Stir at Press Tour

girls-season-3-panel-300Hannah Horvath is here to stay. And she’ll likely keep undressing at whim.

Days before Girls Season 3 premieres (this Sunday at 10/9c), HBO has announced that the comedy has been renewed for a fourth season, to film this spring and air in 2015.

A year ago, Girls got its pick-up two episodes into the new season.

Girls‘ cast and creatives proceeded to hold a panel at the Television Critics Association winter press tour. Here are the few highlights:

LET’S TALK ABOUT SEX, BABY…. | Sunday’s Season 3 premiere will kick off a storyline that explores Jessa’s sexuality, it was revealed.

GRIN AND BARE IT | When asked why there’s so much nudity on the show – specifically, a reporter, in comparing Girls to Game of Thrones, said to Dunham, “Your character is often nude at random times for no reason” — the series’ star/creator responded: “It’s a realistic expression of what it’s like to be alive,” while EP Judd Apatow called the inquiry “very offensive.” A bit later, executive producer Jenni Konner grew visibly and justifiably perturbed during the panel, declaring that the earlier question had sent her into a “rage spiral.” Much awkwardness ensued.

THE WHITE STUFF | Are Girls‘ girls sympathetic? “I love them,” said Dunham. “I think they accurately reflect people I know.” Exec producer Judd Apatow defended the characters’ actions — e.g. cheating and experimenting with drugs – saying, “These aren’t that weird mistakes… It’s not really that shocking.” Added Dunham, addressing the audience of critics: “You seem to like [Breaking Bad's]Walter White.”



Tags: ,

Comments (69)

  • YEEESSSS
    GIRLS fills my sex and the city hole in my heart.
    This show is brilliant and raw and absolutely hilarious.

    Thank you HBO and Lena Dunhnam

    Comment by MoreHannah – January 9, 2014 06:04 PM PDT  Reply To This Post
    • You must be easily entertained. They should rename the show “Lazy White Girls with First World Problems”.

      Comment by ajintexas – January 10, 2014 02:12 AM PDT  Reply To This Post
      • It’s so funny that you clicked on the article, despite not liking the show, and bitched about someone else’s happiness about the show. A program you don’t even watch. Hilarious and sad.

        Comment by Ever – January 10, 2014 03:02 AM PDT  Reply To This Post
        • MY God, the nerve of some people that read news articles about the entertainment industry and comment on them! Go back to TMZ airhead.

          Comment by Chuck Finley – January 10, 2014 05:03 AM PDT  Reply To This Post
          • LOL but Chuck, ajintexas was not commenting on “the news article about the entertainment industry”, he was bitching at a person who liked the show..

            Comment by Mik – January 10, 2014 10:51 AM PDT  
          • FWIW, pretty sure Chuck Finley and ajintexas are the same person.

            Comment by Leah – January 10, 2014 11:09 AM PDT  
          • Yeah I have mentioned that repeatedly on here. Blame WordPress, it likes to change my name from what I put in the blank to ajintexas. Some day I will motivate myself to fix it, but since people seem to know already why bother.

            Comment by Chuck Finley – January 10, 2014 10:08 PM PDT  
      • Unless you were born on a pot of gold, most of everybody’s 20 are spent struggling with first world problems (and real issues like abortions and divorces), very crappy relationships, and new jobs. This show may appear shallow to you, but it really isn’t. Lena has stated in the past the she writes these characters so they are hard to like. Which should be how tv is written because you will meet a lot of strong personalities in your life. And you know what, I can identify a little with each girl. Just like I could identify a little with each woman from sex and the city. There’s a reason this show is getting so much recognition, why it has a golden globe under it’s belt.

        Comment by MoreHannah – January 10, 2014 06:34 AM PDT  Reply To This Post
        • That reason being Hollywood liberals like to promote promiscuity, abortion, and a whole slew of other topics to the people who watch this show, mostly women. Shows that suggest these are all ok for young women and have no direct consequences on their lives wil undoubtedly get recognition in Hollywood while the ratings suggest that the recognition is unwarranted. If you can relate to these characters, you probably need to get your life together. Not everyone is a loser that can’t keep a decent job or stay in school at 20 years old.

          Comment by Chuck Finley – January 10, 2014 08:28 AM PDT  Reply To This Post
          • I am not a loser. I am a student with 3.8 gpa studying 2 majors and 3 language minors. I’m quite successful, but I’ve had times where my life has been a complete mess. This show is more relatable than you make it seem. Especially in our culture today. You may be an uptight prick that lives in his own world, and if that’s so, just don’t watch the show! But don’t say it’s not relatable. I’ve met a lot of people with the same issues as the women on this show. It doesn’t mean they are losers, just makes them human beings.

            Comment by MoreHannah – January 10, 2014 08:35 AM PDT  
          • Hope one of your majors relates to a highly marketable skill or else you will be just like the dolts on this show. The irony of this show is you have 20 something people that are trying to “find themselves”. Just like every other 20 something kid in this country which is a major departure from just a few decades ago where a mid 20′s person would have a career and probably a family. The work ethic and drive to succeed has just been sucked out of young people today, so I guess in that way the show is relatable, although not appealing.

            Comment by Chuck Finley – January 10, 2014 08:48 AM PDT  
          • Go back to Drudge. Your 20th century points of view are not welcome here.

            Comment by Tim – January 10, 2014 08:59 AM PDT  
          • lol, not only are they welcome, I will keep giving them. If you don’t like people voicing their opinons pack up your little pink panties and take your happy ass to North Korea. Otherwise don’t speak for a site that you are not employed by.

            Comment by Chuck Finley – January 10, 2014 10:09 PM PDT  
        • Could this account of people in their 20′s be more a mega-city phenom? I don’t know a single 20-something who is divorced, and no one has mentioned having an abortion. I guess it’s good people can identify with TV characters, but frankly no one on TV seems to have real challenges of daily life…just a lot of absorption with growing up, rather than doing it!

          Comment by Mary Morstan – January 31, 2014 04:40 PM PDT  Reply To This Post
      • this everyday of the week..

        And TVLINE saying “justifiably perturbed during the panel” GIVE ME A BREAK.

        She nude just to be nude. The question was totally 100% ok to ask.

        Comment by TV needs straight men to write for them – January 10, 2014 11:59 AM PDT  Reply To This Post
    • I must say that as a 63 year old woman, “coming of age in the 60′s and 70′s” (women’s lib, civil rights and anti-war moratoriums, black power, assassinations galore, to name just few highlights) I find it hilarious, smart, real.

      Comment by rosanne preston – January 10, 2014 07:21 AM PDT  Reply To This Post
      • I agree with roseanne – I am 50 and find this show to reflect how people in their 20′s (at least the ones I know) are struggling day to day with all the BS they deal with. It’s not for everyone but I would rather have real people than fake perfect people.

        Comment by Patty (@phouse1964) – January 10, 2014 08:37 AM PDT  Reply To This Post
        • The “bs they deal with” is their own fault. Young people overwhelming voted a “community organizer” with only 3 years experience as a Senator into the highest office in the land. You reap what you sow. Who would have thought a guy with socialist leanings would screw you over? Idiots lol.

          Comment by Chuck Finley – January 10, 2014 08:53 AM PDT  Reply To This Post
          • OMG calm down. Just because you had a lame 20s doesn’t mean all of us did. And we all had jobs, and paid rent, and were successful people. It’s just a different time. Also, if you don’t live in a city, you won’t understand. I am in my 30s and find that not only do I relate to many of the situations, but I know many people who have lived through many of the situations. So calm yourself and don’t judge.

            Comment by KSM – January 10, 2014 10:14 AM PDT  
          • Fox News must be playing in the background as Chuck Finley types his tripe.

            Comment by HAP – January 10, 2014 01:46 PM PDT  
  • Gross.

    Comment by Et al – January 9, 2014 06:15 PM PDT  Reply To This Post
  • i just binged seasons one and two… was going alright, but by the end of it i hated all the characters and am not keen to see it ever again… to compare those characters to Walter white epitomises everything that is wrong with that show… a pretty narowminded comparison really…

    Comment by theConundrumm – January 9, 2014 06:21 PM PDT  Reply To This Post
    • I don’t think she was comparing the character more pointing out how people like Walter White even though he is an evil drug dealing murder.

      Comment by Rook – January 9, 2014 08:02 PM PDT  Reply To This Post
      • oh, i got that, but WW is MORE than evil, more than a drug dealer… Girls characters are selfish, self involved, ignorant… very one note… nothing redeemable or interesting there…

        Comment by theConundrumm – January 9, 2014 08:59 PM PDT  Reply To This Post
        • Walter White is a murderous drug manufacturer. I’m not a fan of Girls, but to make the argument that Walter White is a better person than anyone on Girls is extremely ridiculous.

          Comment by Kat – January 10, 2014 12:44 PM PDT  Reply To This Post
          • there is a difference between “better” and “more intersting” y’know…

            Comment by theConundrumm – January 12, 2014 03:32 PM PDT  
    • Agreed. None of the characters is a bit likeable. Plus, nobody wants to see a naked fat lady with a lot of tats because it’s an HBO show.

      Comment by Jules' fan – January 10, 2014 09:46 AM PDT  Reply To This Post
  • Reflect people I know? I guess this person need to get out more often.

    Comment by Lena – January 9, 2014 06:40 PM PDT  Reply To This Post
    • 1 – he didn’t say “reflect everyone I know”. It’s possible to know shallow people among a broad spectrum of personalities.
      2 – Judd Apatow said that. I think he gets out.

      Comment by Jen – January 10, 2014 05:52 AM PDT  Reply To This Post
  • I don’t love this show, but I don’t hate it either. Regardless, I don’t get the whole “renew a show before it even airs the previous season” thing.

    Comment by Jellymoff – January 9, 2014 07:11 PM PDT  Reply To This Post
    • well, it’s being renewed on it’s artistic merit, not a monetary gain… this is a good thing…

      Comment by theConundrumm – January 9, 2014 09:01 PM PDT  Reply To This Post
      • I wish the “artistic merit” goodwill could have been extended to Enlightened and Getting On. I’m guessing HBO is looking to syndicate this. Either that or Mumsy and Daddypoo Dunham cut HBO an extra large check this year.

        Comment by Et al – January 9, 2014 09:32 PM PDT  Reply To This Post
      • I really wish “artistic merit” had extended to The Comeback. I am still bitter about that show getting cancelled.

        As for “Girls,” I really want to like it, but it’s not great. The characters are one-note and undeveloped. The story lines have no depth – things just happen out of nowhere and go nowhere, unresolved. It plays like a string of random “shocking” scenes.

        I’ve been rolling with this show for a while, waiting for it to get better, but it hasn’t happened yet. I’m starting to think it never will.

        Comment by Helena Handbasket – January 13, 2014 06:25 PM PDT  Reply To This Post
  • Love this show!

    Comment by Jared – January 9, 2014 07:39 PM PDT  Reply To This Post
  • She’s right though, there is a major double standard going on here that it’s awesome for male characters to be horrible and terrible (i.e., Walter White and Jax Teller), but female characters can’t act that way on television without being reviled, criticized, and hated. And not in a love-to-hate kind of way, but more of a plain old hate kind of way. They’re not even allowed to be full-figured without getting called fat by every single troll online. It even goes as far as the actresses who portray those characters getting harassed, threatened, bullied and insulted through websites like this. I applaud Lena Dunham for not letting these trolls prevent her from doing what she wants to do on her show. I will fully support Girls and will stick with it until the end.

    Comment by Britta Unfiltered – January 10, 2014 12:03 AM PDT  Reply To This Post
    • This!!! Love your post.

      Comment by joey – January 10, 2014 02:58 AM PDT  Reply To This Post
    • I don’t believe it is “awesome” for any character to be horrible and terrible. I am happy that “Breaking Bad” is finished and I think that Lena Dunham has been over-hyped and is not my definition of a talented writer/actor. I think it is possible to tell a good story with characters who are interesting without the use of sex, violence and bad language. Do I think that there are people who act/talk like that in real life? Of course. I just don’t consider it to be “entertainment.” I’m sure this will get me slammed in comments, but like everyone else in these forums, even those who wouldn’t recognize good grammar if they stepped in it, I have a right to express an opinion.

      Comment by Gwen – January 10, 2014 07:24 AM PDT  Reply To This Post
    • It’s like the whole kerfuffle with the Patrick Wilson episode last year. No one believed that someone as handsome as Patrick Wilson would have a weekend fling with someone who looks like Lena Dunham, and felt just FINE professing that all over social media. But how many network sitcoms have featured fat, schlubby-looking men with hot hot hot wives? They’re a dime a dozen, and no one every questions that. Nor do they question the long string of hot actresses that Woody Allen casts as his love interest in his movies. Double standards-R-Us

      I don’t actually like “Girls” (watching characters I don’t like is not entertaining to me, that’s all), but will defend to the end her right to make her show the way she wants to make it.

      Comment by uh huh – January 10, 2014 08:04 AM PDT  Reply To This Post
    • Tried to watch this show – found all the characters unlikeable. And as for Lena’s constant nudity… While I wouldn’t go so far as to say she’s fat, she is definitely not toned or remarkable in any way. And as a woman, I don’t want to have her less than stellar tits in my face constantly. I would venture that most of the audience is female and feels the same way. There’s no need for it and it’s not ‘tit-ilating’ in any way shape or form. Strap ‘em down and cover ‘em up Lena! Properly supported boobs with some nice cleavage are a lot sexier than naked, flappy ,floppy ones.

      Comment by MLO – January 10, 2014 10:17 AM PDT  Reply To This Post
    • you know y’r clutching at straws right… there’s been enough female characters that receive the same kind of critical acclaim as their male counterparts… nurse jackie, orange is the new black… the key is to the characters being interesting… Girls can cry discrimination all they like, but at the end of it, bad behaviour alone does not make an interesting character…

      Comment by theConundrumm – January 15, 2014 05:11 PM PDT  Reply To This Post
  • I tried to watch, but I guess I just don’t get it. None of the women are attractive in the least. Yet they are supposed to be hot young things? The are way below average and not the least bit sexy. This just isn’t a good show at all and all four characters are not easy on the eyes. The show is just not believable or funny.

    Comment by Katlynn – January 10, 2014 12:11 AM PDT  Reply To This Post
    • I can’t take the fat girl with bad tattoos constantly wanting to take her clothes off. We all get the message she is trying to send, and no we still don’t want to see it. I doubt women turn on the TV to see some fat slob take his clothes off.

      Comment by ajintexas – January 10, 2014 02:15 AM PDT  Reply To This Post
    • Why do the women have to be traditionally attractive? Is the world only populated with women who fit the stereotypical societal definition of beauty? No? So why does your TV have to be populated only with women who fit the stereotypical societal definition of beauty?

      Comment by uh huh – January 10, 2014 08:06 AM PDT  Reply To This Post
      • You should ask yourself the same question. Women fawn all over the “hot” men on TV. You give them labels like “McDreamy” and “McSteamy”. If I am going to have to see a naked woman on TV, I prefer it to not be so dumpy girl with horrid tattoos. You can keep buy this crap that people are trying to sell you that it is ok to be fat an unattractive. And alone. With your cat(s).

        Comment by Chuck Finley – January 10, 2014 08:32 AM PDT  Reply To This Post
      • It’s just not that Lena Dunham is fat, it’s that she and her character are completely unlikeable, which makes her uglier. I would have no problem with a chubby woman going nude if she were actually beautiful on the inside.

        Comment by Mikael – January 10, 2014 09:29 AM PDT  Reply To This Post
      • Because television is an escape. Pick one: if you only had one hour a week, would you?

        1) Devote that hour every week to tune in to watch your average looking neighbors do average things that you, yourself, do every day (e.g. laundry, dealing with bratty kids, etc.)? Or…

        2) Would you devote that hour to watch unusually attractive looking people doing unusual, interesting, amazing things you wish you could do instead of all the IRL crap you have to deal with?

        I thought so.

        Comment by MLO – January 10, 2014 10:23 AM PDT  Reply To This Post
  • Here is the differences between Walter White and the characters on Girls. It isn’t that we like him, it is that he is interesting and characters on Girls are not.

    Comment by Jane – January 10, 2014 05:50 AM PDT  Reply To This Post
  • I’m not a fan of huge show; wasn’t my cup of tea. But the amount of hate that Dunham gets is outrageous and appalling. The fat shaming and name calling is completely disgusting and uncalled for. I really feel for her. I know that there are many women in their 20s that watch Girls and feel that it speaks to them and I say good for them. I just don’t get why Dunham just pisses off so many people when no one is putting a gun to their head to watch her show.

    Comment by charlotte – January 10, 2014 07:24 AM PDT  Reply To This Post
    • I’m going to guess it’s because people have real problems in life and she trivializes them with the drivel she writes (because she so often let’s people know that she thinks what she writes is what happens with people in the real world). People don’t like fat shaming? I would never mention it if she wasn’t doing things like getting naked in the Emmy’s intro. No one wants to see her naked, so she forces it on them. Not amount of her forcing her body on people is going to make them find her attractive.

      Comment by Chuck Finley – January 10, 2014 08:37 AM PDT  Reply To This Post
      • Chuck Finley do you even know any people in real life, to justify your claim that no people behave like the cast in ‘Girls’? Have you not yet entered your 20′s or are they so far behind you, that you don’t remember/know what kind of troubles you deal with at that age?
        I think the reason this show is so popular is because it gives us realistic and completely believable characters, no matter if you like them or not. I don’t particularly care for the Shoshannah character, but I recognize so many of my female friends in her, it makes me relate and care for her none the less. And I recognize some of my friends in all of the show’s characters.
        Also, when you’re in your 20′s, your main concern is, and should be, to get your life on track. This means struggeling with love, sex, money, jobs you hate but have to do, and living away from your parents for the first time ever. You can’t expect people to take care of others, if they have not yet learned to take care of themselves.
        And being naked and having sex is just part of life, including chubby people’s lives. And I for one think that Hannah is quite pretty…

        Comment by Elm – January 10, 2014 10:30 AM PDT  Reply To This Post
        • This is isn’t “so popular”. The ratings say quite the opposite.

          Comment by Chuck Finley – January 10, 2014 10:15 PM PDT  Reply To This Post
          • show*

            Comment by Chuck Finley – January 10, 2014 10:15 PM PDT  
      • I agree with you that her show is irritating in the idea that perpetuates the whole “voice of a generation” message or whatever. Though I do acknowledge that I know people in their 20s who really do identify with the show. I don’t, but they do and I get that. But I have to disagree with you on the idea that she’s somehow forcing her body on people. No, she’s not. No one is being forced to watch her show. There are tons of shows that I have absolutely no interest in and I manage to not spew hateful comments about those working on those shows. If you don’t find her attractive, whatever, don’t watch her show.

        Comment by charlotte – January 12, 2014 08:21 AM PDT  Reply To This Post
  • Allison Williams: If people don’t like that, they don’t have to watch it: thttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UgGdR9tBlFM

    Comment by Joseph Azzi (@joeyazzi) – January 10, 2014 07:29 AM PDT  Reply To This Post
  • I must say that as a 63 year old woman, coming of age in the 60′s & 70″s (woman’s lib,
    black power, anti war moratoriums, assassinations galore, to name a few highlights) I think its hilarious smart and yes, real. “Fat” woman taking her clothes off……..i’d say “real” woman taking her clothes off. Its not easy to make me laugh but I do!!! Did I do and feel those things when I was in my twenties? Hum…..now let’s be real!

    Comment by rosanne preston – January 10, 2014 07:30 AM PDT  Reply To This Post
  • I tried watching a few episodes but my problem with the show wasn’t the nudity…more than anything I just found I couldn’t stand any of the characters which is pretty unusual with a show for me but none of them are likeable in the least. Not a fan and don’t get it

    Comment by Shannon – January 10, 2014 07:41 AM PDT  Reply To This Post
  • British shows do this as well, nudity of ‘sverage looking people. I’m not a fan, but If they want random nudity of ‘average’ looking people, that’s not a big deal and does lend a ‘realism’ to the show. I honestly prefer that US TV shows have the best looking casts, best hair/makeup to make everything look fantastic, but some shows should break the mold.

    Comment by cheryl – January 10, 2014 08:07 AM PDT  Reply To This Post
  • Earth to Lena Dunham: we all liked watching Walter White because he was a great character and did things to constantly amaze/shock us. Relying on nudity to shock is kind of lazy.

    It’s amazing how defensive these people are and how quick they are to attack those who don’t like the show.

    Comment by mike c – January 10, 2014 08:14 AM PDT  Reply To This Post
    • So maybe they are defensive because this is the shows third season and people are still talking about the nudity, its not mentioned with other HBO shows that do nudity.
      And at this point Lena Dunham getting nude on Girls isn’t “shocking”

      Comment by Rook – January 10, 2014 08:50 AM PDT  Reply To This Post
  • So, Tim Malloy of The Wrap wrote the initial article for this. I’ve read and I’m with him. I’m completely with him…I don’t get the big deal about the question of nudity. Sounds like Dunham, Konner and Apatow had their crabby pants on at that event!

    Comment by LC – January 10, 2014 08:25 AM PDT  Reply To This Post
  • I adored the first season, couldn’t wait for the second, then I couldn’t wait for it to end. Lena lost something in the 2nd season, the show became cringe worthy & yes it did seem that the second season somehow became the Hannah Nudity Show. I am completely fine with nudity, I watch a great deal of BBC & cable shows with plenty of nudity in them, the difference between those shows & the second season of Girls was that the nudity had a purpose in those shows. Lena Dunham is a great writer & I would prefer to see her let her writing shock me, I agree with the earlier commenter who said her use of nudity to shock viewers is lazy. I had no problem with her nudity in the first season, it made sense for the scenes, not so much for the second season, it really did feel like she was finding excuses for her to get naked on camera. Though honestly even when she was dressed I found I was constantly cringing in her Hannah’s choice of clothing. I will give season three a shot since sophomore seasons are notorious for being bad but if I’m not in love with the show again after the first few episodes then it’ll be the TV show graveyard for thos show for me.

    Comment by Christina Sherwood – January 10, 2014 08:44 AM PDT  Reply To This Post
  • I don’t like the show at all. I think it highlights the lowest common denominator amongst young women of that age.

    The nudity seems very gratuitous and narcissistic. I don’t have a problem with Dunham showing nudity, but it often times doesn’t seem to be well used or used in a meaningful way. Bad story telling.

    And the Adam character is beyond disgusting.

    Comment by WTactualF – January 10, 2014 09:34 AM PDT  Reply To This Post
  • I have zero desire to watch another episode after the way season 2 spiraled down the drain.

    Comment by Magically Suspicious – January 10, 2014 10:11 AM PDT  Reply To This Post
  • I think the reason the Girls crew got their panties in a twist (if they were wearing them, that is) was because unlike GoT, the nudity in their show has no purpose. When the characters in GoT reveal themselves onscreen, it’s within the context of the episode; in Girls, there isn’t any real reason for them to do so other than because they can. And when Apatow and company got essentially called out on it, of course they got very defensive.

    That, plus their rationalization that no one relates to the characters… well, duh! When all your characters on the show have no redeeming qualities and are pretty much griping about first world problems, of course no one will relate. (Shoot, most of my female friends didn’t act like them when they were in their twenties…)

    My challenge to Lena Dunham, Judd Apatow, and Jenni Konner: create an episode of Girls without any nudity whatsoever, and focus on the storytelling aspects instead.

    Comment by Steve F. – January 10, 2014 10:34 AM PDT  Reply To This Post
  • First of all, I’d like to say these people in the comments who keep complaining about Lena’s nudity because she’s “fat and ugly” are disgusting.

    That being said, it’s not like I watched the press conference myself, but from the context given the reporter sounds like she’s asking about the nudity in comparison with Game of Thrones’s nudity, which seems like a perfectly good question to ask. Game of Thrones is known for using nudity only in scenes where nudity makes sense, and they don’t shy away from nudity, but watching the show you can easily see that they never just throw in the nudity randomly. A reporter asking the producers and cast to justify that they’re doing the same thing seems reasonable.

    Another reason Game of Thrones is a good comparison, to combat against the people here that are making the terrible argument that Lena shouldn’t be nude because they don’t like their body, is that, although GoT has many actors who do look like supermodels, they have a large percentage of people who do look like real people on their show. A good example is Brienne of Tarth, who they showed naked just as they have shown the beautiful people like Cersei or Ygritte naked.

    Maybe the producers and cast are especially sensitive to this question as I imagine there is a large double standard, as shows who do only portray “the beautiful people” and use nudity just to be shocking or get more viewers probably never get asked this question. But that doesn’t mean those shows shouldn’t be asked the same question. It’s a perfectly good one.

    Also, to Lena’s constant claims that she is the voice of the people, (or rather people in their twenties) I don’t know that that’s true. Maybe in her world and the circles she travels in, but I think for anyone to claim that they’re the voice of a generation is kind of obnoxious. Maybe she accurately portrays a certain section of people, and that’s fine and there’s no reason that group of people shouldn’t be represented on TV, but, really, to say all kinds of people at this age are like these four girls and their boyfriends/lovers is silly and untrue. And if a large section of the 20′s male population is like Adam, I have lost faith in humanity.

    Comment by Mary S. – January 10, 2014 07:34 PM PDT  Reply To This Post
    • TL;DR. She is gross to see naked and reporters have every right to ask what her point is with the constant nudity. “It’s life” isn’t an answer. She opened the can of worms by doing it on the Emmy’s and as much as possible last season. I’m not surprised she couldn’t explain herself. Her writing sucks so why should we expect a thoughtful answer to a question? I like the “rage spiral” comment. Liberals have anger issues.

      Comment by Chuck Finley – January 10, 2014 10:18 PM PDT  Reply To This Post
      • Don’t associate your argument with mine, please.

        Comment by Mary S. – January 11, 2014 05:36 AM PDT  Reply To This Post
  • This is my absolute favorite show of all time. I watched all three seasons in a week and restarted at the very beginning to rewatch them all! Hannah is such a perfect character. I have nothing but positive comments about ‘Girls’! Please continue this show for many many seasons, I WILL WATCH THEM ALL!!! Thank you to all who made this show come together.

    Comment by Charlie0227 – April 3, 2014 06:59 AM PDT  Reply To This Post

Leave a Reply

Comments on TVLine.com are monitored. So don't go off topic, don't frakkin' curse, and be gone with your offers of discount leather goods. Talk smart about TV!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s