Judd Apatow hopes "people fight every week" about Girls

Judd Apatow

While you may or may not have been staying up at night worrying about the inevitable backlash against Girls, executive producer Judd Apatow isn't bothered by it, and says it's all part of the plan:

"When we made it, we always knew that it was a show you should fight about. It was built to be a show that you'd have to defend or argue about — for some people, it would make them angry — and we go over that terrain for the course of ten episodes. So hopefully people will fight about it every week! Not just one week."

In particular, Apatow seems unfazed by the endless critiques that Girls (unlike, you know, every single other show about young people currently airing on television) only represents the experience of unrealistically wealthy, privileged white people:

"There's funny things to hate about it, because it is about people who are self-entitled and smart and screwing up their lives. It's supposed to be about people who are a disaster and privileged, and every time you do something about people like that, people go, 'Why are they like that?' Well,because that's the point of the show. The joke of it. People go, 'Why are men immature in your movies?' Well, because they are immature and it's funny to see them to try to figure it out." 

He does have a point here — just because a character is irritating or incompetent doesn't exactly make them unrealistic. In fact, it's more likely to be the other way around. He also dropped one last sad-but-true nugget of wisdom about the ideology behind the show: "Girls are just as demented and neurotic as guys." Um, heartening?

Commentarium (5 Comments)

Apr 18 12 - 5:40pm

If I hear someone say whitegirlproblems one more goddamn time

Apr 18 12 - 8:20pm

You know what I bet is absent from the life of Barry White? Girl problems.

Apr 18 12 - 10:11pm

I think the reason people keep asking "Why are there no people of color in your version of New York?" isn't just "Why aren't there people of color on television?" but more specifically "Why have you chosen to give us a vision of such a multicultural city that presents it as very white?" For a show that really does seem to be making an attempt to be honest, the all-white class (except for one token Asian guy) seems like a pretty glaring misstep, and it's disappointing to see it brushed off. (Not to mention, as always, it is the privilege of white people to say that they are representing people 'in general,' or that their stories are 'not about race.')

WITH THAT SAID, I really enjoyed the first episode, and that is a fairly minor criticism and it is way too late for it to have any meaningful effect.

Apr 19 12 - 8:53am

This show is mediocre, with bad writing and bad acting. The subject matter is also a bore. Girls all over the US and in the world are fighting injustice, participating in revolutions, having better sex and conversations. Lena Dunham represents herself and her own precious group which is the 1% of the world. Their moment is over. Nobody will be talking about it in a week. It was a show based on a gimmick. They should let a two-year-old have her own show about potty-training next. Vive le zeitgeist!

Apr 26 12 - 11:32pm

What part of NYC has no minorities in it? Last time I walked down a side walk in the upper east side the only thing that was all white was my sneakers and after a while even they had a little color!