Save this article to read it later.
Find this story in your accountsSaved for Latersection.
This time, Jackson McHenry, Nicholas Quah, and Kathryn VanArendonk debate the virtues and vices ofHacks.
The HBOMax series, which just concluded its second season, is often spoken of in glowing,rapturouslanguage.
It reveals truths aboutcomedy!
It speaks to the cuspy zoomerboomerdividein a way nothing else can!Meg Stalter!…
So Ill ask: IsHacksbad, actually?
I love Jean Smart.
I like the concept of a show about the compromises you make working as a comedian.
ButHacksdoesnt have the deftness or critical perspective to pull its setup into something compelling.
Most of the dialogue is clunky, and the characterization is rote.
Deborah feels like an outside-in replication of Joan Rivers that misses her core.
Ava might as well be a collection of quirks described in aShouts & Murmurspiece about the youth.
I find everything involving Stalters characters obsession with Paul W. Downss agent so broad its grating.
Nicholas Quah:Hacksis not perfect, but its certainly notbad.
Theres an essential sweetness to the show that speaks to me and, I think, many others.
KVA:Yes, there are two separate threads here.
One is less a criticism ofHacksthan it is frustration with the heights of its praise.
Your fun time iswrong!
But when a show gets into Emmys territory andthinkpieces-about-its-importanceterritory, the impulse to pump the brakes seems more reasonable.
The second thread is maybe the show does have some frustrating flaws that are worth examining.
For instance, Im curious to learn more about your issues with its lack of critical perspective, Jackson.
This makes her a fascinating figure to put into a television show.
Shes callous toward her daughter and often rude to Ava, but never quite cruel.
Even her lawsuit in the second season is played for laughs.
I long for a portrait of a character like her who is more alienating but also more complete.
NQ:Well, lets be clear.
This isnt a Joan River biopic (bioseries?
Part of me suspects the hang-ups withHacksmight be different if Deborah werent a stand-up comedian.
(The less said about the details ofthe episode about selling a comedy specialthe better.)
Its also interesting to me that a lot of this has been about Deborah Vance.
Yes, its a silly, impossible capper.
But it made me realize I dont understand who Deborah is supposed to be.
Is she a fantasy, or are we impressed with her as a real person in a fantasy life?
Is Deborah one of them?
Or is she the only grounded one?
IsHacksa show about people were supposed to care about, or is it … gulp …Entourage?
JM:The heightened comedy around Stalters character and Paul W. Downs really confuses me.
IfHacksis trying to race in their league, its being lapped.
She should be annoying and a bit privileged.
But the lack of specificity in the way Deborah is written rebounds back on her.
She doesnt have a lot of steering room.
Relatedly, the Sixers gag early in theHacksseason was … not good, and delivered poorly.
I lovedthe diner scene.
Ava and Deborah going to see a psychic.
I also love shows about people making shows see: myrelatively high marks forJulia.
Or at least, it becomes tough to not register that gap.
I miss the part where she was kind of proud of being hacky?
Often, I hear people say that its okay thatHackss jokes arent great because theyre supposed to be hacky.
Audiences deserve more depth!
It does look like the showwill be with us for a while, for better or (and?)
