Did anybody else watch this show? What did you think? Did you

Couldn't even finish the first season.

First season was meh, but watching the entire second one really grew on me. I liked the anesthetics, the music and the melancholic tone. It basically feels like a live action BoJack, minus most of its humor

>>83737408
I liked the first season as a whole, even though the plot had some rather weird and unnecessary parts it really stood out in it's aesthetics and everyday portrayal of LA, even down to the kombucha.

Haven't seen the second season yet, but I'm definitely going to.

>>83738168
>feels like a live action BoJack, minus most of its humor

I think this was common complain in season 1. Will Arnett trying to do more serious acting is great but it's like he took away the wrong bits about BoJack when he chose this show

>>83737673
I can see how people wouldn't like it.

I didn't think it was amazing, or even great by any means, but I found it enjoyable. Since nobody is replying I'll write what I thought about this show, cause why not.

I felt like the second season contained a lot of "filler". The first season had somewhat of a narrative plot; it centered around the creation of a new expensive highrise to the community of Venice. We saw Chip (and the community) exploring how it would affect their town, and finally it's development. It was mostly the backdrop to the relationships Chip had with the other characters, but it still informed the plot.

The second season picks up after the climax of the highrise plot, but it only spends about half an episode on the aftereffects from the first season. Then the show essentially drops the highrise plot entirely, and it becomes completely irrelevant to the rest of the show, never to be brought up again. We have a few moments of the characters telling Chip "you betrayed us! now the rent of our properties has skyrocketed!" after the first episode we never hear about it again. The only material the show has is to fall back on Chip and his life. Which doesn't really amount to a whole lot of storytelling. I found Will Arnett a compelling and interesting character, which is the only reason I spent the time watching this show, but the second season needed SOME kind of plot to keep the story moving. This season also relied on cheap storytelling devices to the point of being eye-rolling bad. These devices served to create melodrama and create plot points, but they felt cheap and cliched. For instance we have Dennis pretending not to be an alcoholic to Rosa, because he believes if she finds out he's in AA she'll dump him. In one episode he's trying to tell her he's in AA, and is about to say it when she literally puts her finger over his lips and says something like "don't say another word bb everything is ok ;)". That felt cheap as fuck.

>>83738590 continued
And it's pretty hard to believe a grown adult like Dennis wouldn't tell Rosa he was in AA at the next available moment, like right after they had sex? That would be a perfect opportunity. But no, the show keeps up the lie to get cheap laughs and hokey melodrama. Maybe if Dennis was fifteen or twenty years younger he would think he could withhold a major truth from a significant other and still be able to maintain a relationship, but grown 40 year old adults should surely know better.

On the subject of their relationship, the incident caused by Dennis giving Rosa a Hootie and The Blowshirt t-shirt was weak too. After Rosa gets mad at Dennis for giving her the shirt, Chip and Dennis explain to the benefit of us, the audience, that George suffered a major slip up at that exact concert with Rosa twenty years ago. Apparently, George has been telling that story every month for the last ten years. But somehow, we're only just hearing about this now, even though it's supposedly been going on in the background constantly. The backstory felt retrofitted and fake. That was bad writing. Or maybe the scene was just executed poorly. Idk. Either way it felt stupid.

Chip and London's relationship made no sense to me, and I hated every second of her on screen. Why would London want to be with the man that (she thinks) killed her brother? Why would Chip want to be with the sneaky liar who infiltrated his life? A relationship based on so much fucked up backstory would never happen irl.

>>83738583
I've been seeing the Bojack comparisons a lot too, but I don't think the shows have much in common. The only similarity I see is that Will Arnett plays an alcoholic character.. I was reading a bit about Flaked yesterday and learned Arnett is actually an alcoholic irl. So really, Arnett is just drawing from his own life when playing substance abusers on Bojack and on Flaked. The comparisons should be drawn to Arnett's own life and experiences, not to Bojack imo.