Queerty is better as a member

Log in | Register
  Queerty Query

QUESTION: Did “Looking” Live Up To The Hype?

LookingBros

The boys of Looking finally arrived Sunday night, the heavens opened, the meaning of life was found, and our little gay lives will never be the same.

OK, well maybe not, but for better or worse, the series was definitely an addition to the gay TV canon that was distinctive and unique.

Even in 2014, there are so few shows that are specifically about gays that the arrival of any is an event that comes with weeks of anticipation and buzz.

So with that said, we pose the question to you Queerty members: Did Looking Live Up To The Hype?

By:           Rob Smith
On:           Jan 21, 2014
Tagged: ,

  • 74 Comments
    • B Damion
      B Damion

      I wish I could say yes. I really do.

      This is treading very close to Queer As Folk. Also, I was hoping for an hour long ep not 30 min?

      I am so over this vanilla story. They took the same white boys from all the other gay movies and put them in this series.

      I apologize. It really has nothing to do with color. I guess I was just hoping for a more interesting pilot ep.

      The story just seems stale. And I am longing for a gay series that I can be excited about. “Looking” is not that series.

      Jan 21, 2014 at 9:56 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TheNewEnergyDude
      TheNewEnergyDude

      Well, it’s only one episode in, so it’s a bit too premature to pass judgement on it yet. I want to at least wait to see Russell Tovey’s character.

      Not quite sure it’s being labeled as a comedy (at least my cable service provider is). It’s not.

      I don’t like the fact that it’s a half hour. Not enough time to get into it and by the time you do, it’s over.

      Jan 21, 2014 at 10:08 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • sportyguy1983
      sportyguy1983

      Based on the first episode, it was a total dud. Stereotypical gay storylines: random hookups in seedy places, so called committed couples doing threesomes, an aging guy upset trying to hookup with a guy too young for him then feeling old because he got rebuked, a good looking guy that can’t seem to get a date. ZZZZzzzz

      Jan 21, 2014 at 10:09 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • victorginori
      victorginori

      I found it was rather uneventful.

      Jan 21, 2014 at 10:09 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • AuntieChrist
      AuntieChrist

      It was OK, so that is unfortunate. Maybe it’s a grower, not a show-er?

      Jan 21, 2014 at 10:11 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • pinrail
      pinrail

      I enjoyed it a lot. They say don’t judge a book by it’s cover, well you cant judge a show by it’s first episode either.

      I’m excited to see where they take us with these characters, especially with Jonathan Groff’s character Patrick. His character is relatable, at least to me.

      Jan 21, 2014 at 10:11 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • orcanyc
      orcanyc

      I want to say yes too, but the show left me feeling Humm. The character’s seem a little to smarmy. Looking to see if the story gets better, but glad we have another gay focused show on TV.

      Jan 21, 2014 at 10:18 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • GingerBrandon
      GingerBrandon

      All these reactions about it being cliched are so annoying. People have to consider the context in which this is being shown. When you compare Looking to other mainstream gay relationships/interactions, it’s way and above what’s out there currently. It’s cliche? Compared to what? Compared to the likes of Modern Family, The New Normal, etc.? Not at all. So silly. Forgive a nationally broadcasted show for not exploring all nuances of gay interactions in 30 minutes. Sheesh.

      Jan 21, 2014 at 10:22 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ouragannyc
      ouragannyc

      Overall, I liked it. It was entertaining.
      I wish it wasn’t 30 minutes.
      The 3some and the park scenes could have been avoided as they are too stereotypical.

      Jan 21, 2014 at 10:42 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ouragannyc
      ouragannyc

      @B Damion: There are two latino characters (the boyfriend of the bearded guy and the club bouncer). It’s not all vanilla. Still the first episode.

      Jan 21, 2014 at 10:47 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Dev.C
      Dev.C

      I feel like people are expecting this show to be a revival of Queer As Folk, which that show left me annoyed many times over and quite irritated by the characters.
      Looking feels more realistic and the characters are not as high strung and obnoxious likely so many other gay characters on TV. I think they should rethink their format because 30 minutes isn’t enough time to absorb Andrew Haigh’s way of telling a story. Maybe Lena Dunham was afraid of a hour long show up staging her’s. It’s refreshing for me to see a show with some artistic substance behind it, I’m patiently waiting to see how this show plays out.

      Jan 21, 2014 at 11:00 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • DickGreenleaf
      DickGreenleaf

      Two points. First, the original British QAF was only 8 half hour episodes, just like Looking. Second, as the Disclaimer on the American QAF pointed out, that show was not claiming to represent all GBLT people, just the ones in the story. Even in the gay world some people are vanilla, some engage in 3-ways. etc etc.

      Jan 21, 2014 at 11:11 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • IvanPH
      IvanPH

      I love the first ep. It could be a little bit funnier though since it’s a dramedy. I hope that the main focus of the show would always be on the friendship and each one’s relationships.

      I don’t want this show to turn out like QUEER AS FOLK which focused too much on social issues like discrimination, civil unions, homophobic politicians, HIV/AIDS, etc. I love QAF. It was great and groundbreaking but I don’t think the gay community is looking for another TV series that tackles stuff which gay men are already very familiar with. I mean, we already see, hear and read tons about these issues in the news and social media, the last thing we need is a TV show to tell us more about them.

      Jan 21, 2014 at 11:16 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Ron Jackson
      Ron Jackson

      I think it’s too early to pass judgement. The 22 minutes of story is just plain inadequate for this type of show imo. Other than that the producers seem to want to project themselves in all their hairiness on us. Kind of sick of that already. Yeah I know, some people like that but…

      I didn’t hate it but ask us again after a few episodes.

      Jan 21, 2014 at 11:32 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Cam
      Cam

      Park Cruising, 3-ways, unable to commit, a guy who only hooks up, not overly funny, takes place in San Fran.

      Yeah, they pretty much nailed every stereotype. It wasn’t horrible, but it seems like it’s very dated.

      Jan 21, 2014 at 11:33 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Darling Nikki
      Darling Nikki

      Stumbled. Out. Of. The. Gate.
      I will give it a try but it was boring. First impressions count, and it was boring.
      If this was the first chapter of a book, I might not read it much further. Perhaps it being 30 mins contributes to the problem.
      It’s QAF-lite.

      Jan 21, 2014 at 12:09 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • scrumfan
      scrumfan

      This show is a hugely missed opportunity for the very fact that Looking is set in San Francisco. It would have made a much bigger impact on middle America, gays living in conservative places, and the people whose opinions need changing by being set somewhere like Omaha, Cincinnati, or Birmingham. By being set in San Francisco, most won’t be able to relate (nothing against SF, it’s great)because that’s always been seen as the gay utopia and a place for gays to run away to. Don’t be want to be talking about gays being able to live any where and have a happy life, even in the reddest of red states? Queer as Folk really got it right by using Pittsburgh as the locale.

      Looking seems entertaining enough, but it’s not unique or ground-breaking. I’ve seen all these topics before in countless TLA and Peccadillo LGBT-themed films.

      Jan 21, 2014 at 12:18 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • gjg64
      gjg64

      I was under-whelmed but am going to continue to watch it.

      Jan 21, 2014 at 12:39 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • rickh710
      rickh710

      Riddled with clichés and characters so sketchily drawn, their only traits are questionable decision-making and neurotic behavior. Do gay men these days really begin dates with questions like “are you drug and disease free”? Even when my generation was at the HEIGHT of the AIDS crisis in the 80s we stuck to small talk for an initial conversation.

      Jan 21, 2014 at 12:57 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Kangol
      Kangol

      Snooze.

      So tired of stereotypical, blanched out, predictable gay storylines.

      There are millions of us in this country, and yet we get the same narrow band of stories over and over.

      No thanks!

      Jan 21, 2014 at 1:26 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Niall
      Niall

      It was okay, started out slow, then picked up after about 10 minutes in.

      Sorry, but exactly what stories or gay life do gay people want to be told about them that will be close to the truth? The show already didn’t do a coming out, which is understandable, so what else do people want? Sex, hook-up culture, relationship issues are what gay people deal with a lot and the show is portraying that, not exactly sure what kind of storylines people want.

      I do agree with whoever said an un-cliched setting like SF might have been better.

      Jan 21, 2014 at 1:52 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • DistingueTraces
      DistingueTraces

      God, I feel like the show is Patrick and the internet is the horrible doctor from his nightmare of a first date.

      The park cruising was SUPPOSED to be anachronistic and stereotypical! Patrick is behaving “like a San Francisco gay” AS A JOKE.

      Jesus.

      Jan 21, 2014 at 2:01 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Boricuaex
      Boricuaex

      I don’t know. It seems to me that the show runners want to tell a “truth” about being a gay in contemporary America. That’s fine, but I’d much rather them tell a story about gays in America than a “truth” that is not necessarily axiomatic for all of us.

      Jan 21, 2014 at 2:15 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • sportyguy1983
      sportyguy1983

      2 out of the 3 don’t have grown up, educated jobs; none are in a monogamous LTR; known are sports oriented; known are parents; none have grown out of the childish hooking up phase; none have grown out of the catty, junior high grade school phase of asking if someone is hot and making fun of someone’s looks; etc….

      Jan 21, 2014 at 3:23 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Lane103
      Lane103

      Disappointed. Didn’t really see new ground covered…the only good thing was the waiters roommate and it’s girl….lol…don’t see much reality in this yet…

      Will continue to watch to see if the writers can actually make something of it, but so far kind of boring.

      Jan 21, 2014 at 3:34 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • CCTR
      CCTR

      I loved it! I was glad to see that the production and film locations were stripped down and not very glamorous. In my opinion the diverse characters and supporting characters are very interesting, real and believable. Brilliant for a 30 minute first episode! The artists involved in this show did a great job entertaining me, maybe I was entertained because I wasn’t expecting a gay vampire series, a coming out story nor a politicized docudrama aimed at dispelling LGBT stereotypes (all of which I appreciate as well). Looking forward to future episodes.

      Jan 21, 2014 at 4:35 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • DistingueTraces
      DistingueTraces

      @sportyguy1983:

      So, adding to the list of not-good-enoughs:

      - not white-collar enough
      - not monogamous enough
      - not sporty enough
      - not parental enough (…the fuck?)
      - too horny
      - too bitchy

      Got it.

      Jan 21, 2014 at 4:52 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ChuckGG
      ChuckGG

      Frankly, it’s a snoozer. Until a cellphone rang, I thought it was a 1970′s period piece. I deleted my TiVo “Season Pass.” I could not identify with any of the characters.

      Jan 21, 2014 at 5:08 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • LakesideM
      LakesideM

      @Cam:
      I sadly agree with you.
      The director/producer, Andrew Haigh, IMHO created the single best Gay film, “Weekend.” He did not, however, write this series. How this same film-maker could turn out a dull, characterless opener boggles my mind. And along with two of my friends, we have no affection for any of the three lead characters. Sad.

      Jan 21, 2014 at 5:14 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • AxelDC
      AxelDC

      It was worth watching once, but if it doesn’t improve over the next few episodes then I won’t be a regular viewer. It was too slow, too cliched, and I was given no reason to really care about any of the main characters.

      Jan 21, 2014 at 5:15 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Jonty Coppersmith
      Jonty Coppersmith

      Short answer, no. It was horrible. I will watch another episode or two, but if it doesn’t improve after that I’m done.

      Jan 21, 2014 at 5:16 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • alanj
      alanj

      It’s not QAF – get over it.
      It can’t be be all things to all gays – get over it.
      Andrew Haigh’s direction introduced the characters in 30mins, and I
      want to find out more – so as far as I’m concerned a job well done.

      What’s the problem with setting it in SF? The original QAF was set in Manchester
      with the second largest gay population in UK and the most visible gay village. Nobody complained about that.

      Jan 21, 2014 at 5:20 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • AuntieChrist
      AuntieChrist

      @ouragannyc: It was an accurate portrayal of the gay experience…It is no Tales Of The City or Queer As Folk US not UK but having lived in the gay community for 38 years 15 of those in San Francisco. I can safely say that it is spot on…Perhaps a bit on the vanilla side.

      Jan 21, 2014 at 5:20 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • robho3
      robho3

      one word…..no

      Jan 21, 2014 at 5:27 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • DANBOY66
      DANBOY66

      I LIKE IT AND I’LL BE WATCHING IT NEXT WEEK FOR SURE….. BY THE IT SHOULD BE AN HOUR SHOW.

      Jan 21, 2014 at 5:32 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • AuntieChrist
      AuntieChrist

      @Cam: People are walking talking stereotypes…I have spent my life studying people and human beings have a limited number of traits, so just about anything can be seen as a stereotype. This ain’t Leave it to Beaver…What do you want..? Donna Reed in chaps.

      Jan 21, 2014 at 5:34 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • samwise343
      samwise343

      It seems like a lot of these critics crying “stereotype”, are kicking and screaming to get back in the closet.

      Jan 21, 2014 at 5:44 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • CCTR
      CCTR

      Some commented that the show is too vanilla, which I can easily understand. Others commented about stereotypes and cliches. I’m curious to learn of some examples of gay themed movies or gay tv shows/characters that don’t include stereotypes and cliches. Would people have wanted to see more nudity, passionate sex scenes,chiseled cookie cutter clone muscled physiques, fancier stylish trendier clothes and apartments, a soundtrack/score constantly in the background, fast cars, wealthy characters? Just curious and surprised that more dislikes here than likes.

      Jan 21, 2014 at 5:58 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Chaz
      Chaz

      The jury is still out. If they pitched it to the public as a milder Queer As Folk then I would probably have been less disappointed. All the gay stereotypes came out to play and it was a shame. I will continue watching for now in the hope the story lines becomes less cliched. An opportunity lost to show the real LGBT community.

      Jan 21, 2014 at 6:20 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Maharajah
      Maharajah

      I guess that I watched something else…

      Compared to the other shows on HBO, this was refreshing. It’s interesting to think that in this day and age, we have come so far, as a television/film industry and society where the ‘gay’ show is one of the most ‘bland’ (though I see it as non-excessive), and ‘utopian’ (here, I see it as relatable of a new future, or of a dream most of us are hoping to live in soon – without being unbelievable) and certainly the least camp (compared to True Blood, or Game Of Thrones). It’s a vision for a show that, unlike most of the other shows on HBO – is inspired by the lives of individuals that are as close to regular-humans as HBO has made in a while. These men aren’t gangsters, kings, vampires, dragon mothers, or war heroes. Considering HBO’s usual disparity between reality and their stories – this is as close as it gets for HBO. Is it wholly believable – not yet, but at least the main character is not dating a were-zombie (that we know of yet).

      I can applaud that this is a show that is primarily focused around a gay man’s life – and with the depth and ability to analyze greater aspects of it that any other TV network can make possible. This is not Queer As Folk, but perhaps it is time that we consider – we have not had another Queer As Folk since. For the sake of gratefulness, and a general unwillingness to succumb to the common, ignorant and sophomoric basing all opinions on a first glance – I’ll stick with it a while longer, at least until it annoys me, or bores me.

      - A cast that is made up of gay movie actors. Yes, we’ve seen them all before. But for me that’s a great thing – gay men, most of them being cast in gay roles (in which they were openly out) and many of these films/shorts – were decent. A gay man, is playing a gay man, on film – and he has done it before. Isn’t that half the battle? They’ll see the critiques and work on the acting, tweak the vision a bit – but this is a victory for me. It’s the first episode – and so the diversity of the cast is yet to develop. I am hopeful – but share the opinion of most here – it needs to be more diverse in order to be more real/relatable. We’re not all Caucasian, wealthy (or hell even employed), well educated, handsome, and accepted by our families as the main character is. But, time will tell – and I’ll form an opinion with it.

      -Stereotype/Cliche – Yes, initially it is – you have the “Carrie”, the “Samantha” and the “Charlotte” even with the associated baggage/dialogues of the older narcissist versus younger man, Naive and looking for love, Monogomish couple. At first, it feels like one of the movies that these guys are from – smashed together. But, it is only the first episode. Could they have done it without the stereotypes – yes, but what impression would each character have made – what would have been their characters? Again, I am with the concesus of those that ask for more diversity – it will improve the credibility of the storyline, but I am not to much so distressed by the ‘cliched’ stereotypes if they do lead to new, creative and expressive ends.

      - Utopian gay world – I get that criticism. At no time during the episode does any of the characters show real fear (or, at least, signs of being in the closet). It’s a hard sell from some of us. For many, myself included – I live in a state where I can still be legally fired for being out. Simple as that. No right to legal recourse, no right to benefits. For me, the story is relatable, but not realizable at the present moment. It’s ok for me. As utopian as it feels, it makes the characters seem more refreshing and believable within that society. It’s hard for me to find Mr. Groff’s portrayal as light, and effervescent young man without redefining, or even perhaps defining the world and conditions necessary for him to exist. You needed a believeable New York (one in which women could be expressive, sexual, dominant, independent, and still grapple with their holds to society). In the little that I have seen – I can understand the vision here. We need to build a suitable environment for that. Do I think that this accurately describes San Fransicso – no, but more so than Sex And The City did New York, and the lives of the average woman.

      I am not fan-boying this show, but I am willing to give it a chance. It’s young, and can be drowned by some of the cliches that it has painted itself to (considering that these actors have been down these roads before on film), however it has a cast that is experienced, and diversity will only aide in the credibility of future storylines and experiences, and is set in a city that can more conceivably (than any other HBO series) hold true to the audience that it is trying to portray. The inexcessive-ness of this show is perhaps it’s greatest appeal, and with time, I hope that it will get better. Until such time that I have reason to stop watching – I am a fan.

      Jan 21, 2014 at 6:32 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Zodinsbrother
      Zodinsbrother

      It kind of felt like a complete short film rather than a TV episode.

      Jan 21, 2014 at 6:48 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • OzJosh
      OzJosh

      It made Queer As Folk look like Shakespeare.

      Jan 21, 2014 at 7:00 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • jel1955
      jel1955

      I thought it was all right, but it didn’t grab me by the throat and demand that I see another episode. I don’t subscribe to HBO, in fact I am one of “those” who’s dumped cable altogether; and “Looking” will not move me to subscribe. That said, if HBO puts another episode up on YouTube, or if I can see the series later on Netflix or Hulu, I will probably watch the whole thing. Frankly, I think another “relationship” series, about any set of people, will probably be working through previously explored material. Still, if asked my opinion, I would have enjoyed seeing Groff’s character enjoy his time in BV Park, and I would have enjoyed seeing the two men speak about their three-way with relish and pleasure when we saw them all next. Still, I understand that Groff’s character needs to be clearly painted as a good boy, right off the bat; and I understand that “relationship” series need conflict in relationships. Spoiler alert: I see problems ahead for Groff’s character and the sweet Latino fellow who chatted him up with complete honesty on the Muni. (Quick question for all reading this: “Has that ever happened to any of you!? Very nice idea, but completely unbelievable situation in my assessment. We gay men are way too inhibited in public to chat one another up like that. The only time I remember having a man make that kind of smart pass at me was in a very sheltered “gay” venue.) A game designer who lives somewhere in the Haight is not going to stay with a Latino from Oakland for long, at least in a “relationship” series. Too bad, because I love that guy’s smile, and Groff’s character needs to be wooed, as far as I can tell. Still, “relationship” series need conflict to move themselves forward, and what is a better conflict than the double threat of class and culture? I hope they keep the actor on beyond the break-up. I am expecting good things from him. He could be the anti-Big, maybe?

      Jan 21, 2014 at 7:28 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Faggot
      Faggot

      @ouragannyc: How do you know that the bearded guy’s boyfriend is “latino”? His character name is Frank and his real name (or stage name) is O.T. Fagbenle, and he is black. The bearded guy, though, known as Agustín on the show (stage name, Frankie J. Álvarez) is referred to by Frank as cubano.

      Putting Hispanic or black characters on a show does not make it any less vanilla, the script and plot do that. Why one assumes that black and Hispanic people cannot be “vanilla” themselves sounds rather biased.

      Vanilla = ordinary or conventional. “A vanilla kind of guy.”

      Jan 21, 2014 at 9:07 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Faggot
      Faggot

      @Dev.C: And yet 30 minutes is enough for Lena Dunham’s GIRLS to develop quirky and interesting characters to draw the audience in, hook them, and have the twitter-sphere go ablaze with responses. Perhaps Miss Dunham should have created, wrote, and directed LOOKING FOR NOW. Then we’d have a show worth watching.

      Jan 21, 2014 at 9:13 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Hank
      Hank

      Not sure if I liked it. I thought quite indie, not that it’s bad.
      I’ll keep watching, but I still think Queer as Folk USA insuperable.

      Jan 21, 2014 at 9:18 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Faggot
      Faggot

      @Cam: One of the show’s creators and its principal writer, Michael Lannan, said (specifically speaking of the ménage à trois scene) that LOOKING FOR NOW wanted to show true intimacy among gays today. Yes, anonymous sex is quite intimate. The only thing more intimate than that is sex with mulitple partners.

      If one is LOOKING FOR NOW, can one genuinely hope for true intimacy — ever?

      Jan 21, 2014 at 9:30 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Faggot
      Faggot

      @jel1955: “(Quick question for all reading this: “Has that ever happened to any of you!? Very nice idea, but completely unbelievable situation in my assessment. We gay men are way too inhibited in public to chat one another up like that…)”

      It happens often — usually in bars and clubs across the USA and Canada — approximately ten minutes before the bartender closes up and when guys are intoxicated just enough to have their inhibitions obliterated. Last call isn’t just for the booze.

      Jan 21, 2014 at 9:44 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Kangol
      Kangol

      @samwise343:

      I am not trying to get into anyone’s closet. The show was tired. You liked it. Keep watching. I won’t.

      Jan 21, 2014 at 9:49 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • robtexas
      robtexas

      I actually think that the storyline was good. Patrick is extraordinarily likable and good looking, but the reason the show looked like a period piece was because most of the main characters looked like ’70′s porn stars. There was so much hair which I find very unappealing. It looked sorta grimy and sleazy. Everyone doesn’t have to look like Goff but it would be nice if they look more random and not so old pornish. Two of the minor characters- the Asian guy and the female roommate- were very good and I look forward to more of them.
      Btw: the last scene was fantastic.

      Jan 21, 2014 at 9:54 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • SteveDenver
      SteveDenver

      Looking forward the the entire first season.
      Seems like plenty of people have already made up their minds that they will dislike it for a myriad of reasons.

      Oh well.

      Jan 22, 2014 at 12:51 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • SteveDenver
      SteveDenver

      @Hank: “insuperable” is a great word when used correctly, not the case here.

      Jan 22, 2014 at 12:54 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • mz.sam
      mz.sam

      @SteveDenver; So true! Typical of arm chair critics with any new show. There were many defunct pilots that stirred excitement and fascination, then became trite and ran out of storyline steam. Whereas there were cable shows with small ratings but a faithful audience that eventually exploded as the seasons progressed. I feel this is one of those special shows.

      Jan 22, 2014 at 2:27 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • kenso2033
      kenso2033

      Ordinary at best – not a good start to the series

      Jan 22, 2014 at 3:07 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • PRINCE OF SNARKNESS aka DIVKID
      PRINCE OF SNARKNESS aka DIVKID

      @Hank: “Not sure if I liked it. I thought quite indie, not that it’s bad.
      I’ll keep watching, but I still think Queer as Folk USA insuperable.”

      I think you meant to say “superlative”..will also accept “insufferable.”

      Jan 22, 2014 at 3:17 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • jasentylar
      jasentylar

      I would rather watch “Looking” than “sean saves the world” or “the new normal”. Or the last few seasons of QAF. Looking was way more realistic and very well acted.

      Jan 22, 2014 at 3:38 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Steve318
      Steve318

      I have a man crush on Jonathan Groff, so anything he is in gets me excited.

      Jan 22, 2014 at 4:40 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • concettamiller
      concettamiller

      My Uncle Bentley just got Hyundai Veracruz SUV only from working parttime off a pc at home. over at this website http://bit.do/gFwd

      Jan 22, 2014 at 8:29 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • alanj
      alanj

      @jasentylar:
      Absolutely agree with you. Looking has a good start.
      Boy did QAF USA outstay it’s welcome.

      Jan 22, 2014 at 9:12 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • alanj
      alanj

      @Faggot:
      Each to their own.
      I really want to like Girls, and have dipped in and out of it, but I just don’t get it.
      I’m fairly sure that the first 30 min episode of Girls would of had the same mixed reaction if it had the same expectations as Looking.

      Jan 22, 2014 at 9:24 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bee Gaga
      Bee Gaga

      @ouragannyc: Latino isn’t a race, it’s an ethnicity. And they chose the whitest latinos they could find. Just like the bachelor being criticized for a lack of diversity, what do they do? They get a “latino,” but omg guess what he’s still white.

      Jan 22, 2014 at 11:45 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • CCTR
      CCTR

      @jasentylar: I agree, Thanks!

      It’s becoming quite obvious that a lot of gay men have trouble watching gay characters on screen (with the exception of porn). Finally a show with gay characters that is not over the top and people bash it after the first 30 minute episode. QAF was ground breaking, but Looking wasn’t meant to be an extension of QAF.

      Jan 22, 2014 at 12:45 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • CCTR
      CCTR

      @jel1955: I see problems ahead for Groff’s character and the sweet Latino fellow who chatted him up with complete honesty on the Muni. (Quick question for all reading this: “Has that ever happened to any of you!? Very nice idea, but completely unbelievable situation in my assessment. We gay men are way too inhibited in public to chat one another up like that. The only time I remember having a man make that kind of smart pass at me was in a very sheltered “gay” venue.)

      You are making a generalization that holds little truth. Have you ever lived in San Francisco or been on Muni? That has happened to me several times on Muni at Muni stops, at gyms, yoga classes, coffee shops to name a few. It happens for sure. Often people have their faces buried in their electronic devices and their ears plugged with earphones which does not make them very approachable…that was missing in the scene if I remember correctly.

      Jan 22, 2014 at 12:53 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • CCTR
      CCTR

      @jel1955: “I see problems ahead for Groff’s character and the sweet Latino fellow who chatted him up with complete honesty on the Muni. (Quick question for all reading this: “Has that ever happened to any of you!? Very nice idea, but completely unbelievable situation in my assessment. We gay men are way too inhibited in public to chat one another up like that. The only time I remember having a man make that kind of smart pass at me was in a very sheltered “gay” venue.)”

      You are making a generalization that holds little truth. Have you ever lived in San Francisco or been on Muni? That has happened to me several times on Muni at Muni stops, at gyms, yoga classes, coffee shops to name a few. It happens for sure. Often people have their faces buried in their electronic devices and their ears plugged with earphones which does not make them very approachable…that was missing in the scene if I remember correctly.

      Jan 22, 2014 at 12:55 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • viveutvivas
      viveutvivas

      I don’t know in what way it is “stereotyped.” What “types” would not be considered stereotypes by you guys? A white picket fence upper middle class monogamous married couple? A sporty gay guy? Those are some of the oldest (and boringest) gay stereotypes and have been done to death. On the other hand, people hooking up, having threesomes, etc. Those are only the reality of most of us, not stereotypes.

      What I don’t understand though, is how we are supposed to believe those people can live in central San Francisco, never mind the Castro, without high paying jobs or large inheritances.

      Jan 22, 2014 at 1:18 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • CCTR
      CCTR

      @viveutvivas: Some of the characters live in Oakland which is a little cheaper, they seem to be in roommate situations and it appears they have jobs, some renters/leases are protected under rent control.

      Jan 22, 2014 at 1:32 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • frshmn
      frshmn

      I’ve actually had a guy ask for my number on the N Judah not too long ago. San Francisco is a gay utopia, where you can hit on a guy in public without being in fear of being bashed or humiliated. I’ve hit on straight guys there, and was kindly turned down. It’s no surprise they chose the setting where one can feel that free to be who they are. Outside major cities, and gay neighborhoods, I’m still real hesitant to show any PDA or hold hands, and have mad respect for those who do. I don’t want to see my life where I have homophobic neighbors and am in the closet at work, I want to see the fabulous fantasy life of these handsome guys in SF.

      Jan 22, 2014 at 9:49 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Faggot
      Faggot

      @alanj: What expectations were there (if any) for LOOKING FOR NOW?

      Jan 22, 2014 at 11:58 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • alanj
      alanj

      @Faggot:
      We had a huge amount of hype throughout the holiday period – press, web and cable promos.
      Here it was billed as the next big show from HBO and given an 8pm time slot.

      Jan 23, 2014 at 1:49 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • viveutvivas
      viveutvivas

      Queerty you keep crashing on iPad today. An advertiser?

      Jan 23, 2014 at 10:46 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • viveutvivas
      viveutvivas

      What is wrong with looking “for now”? It’s after all the daily reality for most of us.

      Jan 23, 2014 at 10:48 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • alanj
      alanj

      @viveutvivas:
      Ipad and MacBook issues seem to be happening on and off since New Year. Very slow and finally error mssgs.
      Trying to fix it through an error report goes nowhere – multi times it does not recognise my password etc.

      Jan 23, 2014 at 12:11 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • babybabybaby
      babybabybaby

      Saw the first show really boring … if this was my first show I would have came out hot out of the gate …. maybe it will pick up we will … see if not they need to take a page from Queer as Folk now that was a well written show…

      Jan 26, 2014 at 12:12 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Suburban
      Suburban

      I don’t have HBO so I have only seen small pieces on the Internet, which doesn’t show much. I don’t like that it’s only 30 minutes, won’t they have to stuff a lot into an episode? I read in a comment that one of the guys is aging, aren’t they all under 40? I’m guessing that person is very young. If we’re all lucky we will all age. I put the show on my Netflix account but I won’t see it likely for months but I will give it a chance. It would have to be pretty awful for me to stop watching after only 1-2 episodes. You have to give it a chance. Sounds like it will never live up to the expections of some.

      Jan 29, 2014 at 5:32 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·

    Add your Comment

    Queerty now requires you to log in to comment

    Please log in to add your comment.

    Need an account? Register It's free and easy.

  • POPULAR ON QUEERTY

    FOLLOW US
     



    GET QUEERTY'S DAILY NEWSLETTER


    FROM AROUND THE WEB

    Copyright 2014 Queerty, Inc.
    Follow Queerty at Queerty.com, twitter.com/queerty and facebook.com/queerty.