Girls: Season 2
  • Network: HBO
  • Series Premiere Date: Apr 15, 2012
  • Season #: 1 , 2
User Score
6.0 out of 10

Mixed or average reviews- based on 90 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 54 out of 90
  2. Mixed: 12 out of 90
  3. Negative: 24 out of 90

Review this tv show

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
view
per page
  1. VonSeux
    Mar 24, 2013
    3
    A show that is called "GIRLS" but still it's all bout Men, Marriage, and "felling protected". Not so foward-thinking right. Hanna freaking out as a 6 year old on last episodes was some of the most pathetic drama i've seen season two went downhill fast.
  2. NewYorker1044
    Mar 19, 2013
    0
    I think lena is a great writer and everything, but she needs to stop being so naked all the time. i mean come on girl, what are you doing? she should not be getting naked all the time because I personally find it horrifying and it does not add to the series whatsoever. PUT ON CLOTHES LENA!
  3. nerdgirl
    Mar 15, 2013
    3
    I will begin this review by saying that season 1 of Girls was epic. It was funny, charming and original. The characters were amazing and uncomfortable and beautiful in their own skin.

    Fast forward to season 2. WTF has happened? There is no visible plotline. It is like watching a 30 minute indie flick once a week that doesn't coherently tie together in any realistic fashion. Lena Du    nham (whom I still love) gets her tiny out every change she gets. We get it. You are comfortable with your body, but please move on. As for the secondary characters, Marnie continues to annoy, Shosh continues to be odd, Jessa continues to be messed up... Sigh. There is nothing happening here. Cringe worthy at best. I don't even know why I continue to watch. I think I'll cancel my HBO because this was the only thing making me hold on and it isn't worth it anymore.… Expand
  4. jaime829
    Mar 10, 2013
    4
    I don't get it. And actually I really don't WANT to get it. Thought It was going to be hysterical, think I smiled twice.. lame. Maybe I'm not the "target audience" I'm 36 and married and live in the suburbs but if this is what it is to be 21 now, I'm glad I was a teenager in the 90s.
  5. oilcanboyd09
    Mar 1, 2013
    2
    Lena Dunham is quite talented and presented a fresh energy in her first season of Girls. However, season 2 is a total disappointment. From improbable sexual rendezvous that make no plot advancement (e.g., One Man's Trash), to innumerable, useless nude imageries, to obligatory racial diversity insertions, to Kardashian-esque, docu-soap, tween dramas, the season stalls in terms of originality and cleverness. As Dunham’s character struggles from a difficult breakup and youthful uncertainty, she burrows into a sexual oblivion that, in my opinion, is played out. This narrative is neither clever, original, nor amusing. Rather, the character behavior and plot summaries are reminiscent of an eastside Melrose Place. I find the season a discredit to Dunham’s artistic sparkle evident in the first season.… Expand
  6. meuandthem
    Feb 21, 2013
    2
    Boring and not entertaining chicks drama. Comparing to other HBO shows this one is one of the worse ones.
    Who paid critics to give this high score to this
  7. Tuckahoe
    Feb 4, 2013
    2
    Lena, You are indeed witty and charismatic, and the first season started off with a flurry of twist and turns exploring the beautiful and the grotesque aspects of young life here in New York. Unfortunately, I must say that this 2nd season has really made me cringe and is honestly so far from believable. Shock value no longer sells (at least as well as it used to). High on coke shirt off at Greenhouse with a bunch of glow stick kids isn't hip, fun, or even slightly cool. How did you even get past to door guy looking like a sweaty turd? Maybe you could have expanded upon that experience as there is nothing more real about New York than being denied club access because you look like crap. That would have been worth writing about... I understand this is a scathing review and I honestly hope it serves you well because bad reviews tend to full the fire. Good luck, I hope this show gets better for all of us...… Expand
  8. rancor
    Jan 19, 2013
    0
    This show is terrible. It just follows a bunch of hipsters around New York doing typical stuff that's been done a million times before in other TV shows.
  9. Xenugears
    Jan 17, 2013
    1
    HBO's worst show since Arliss. A ponderously unwatchable mess. That Girls gets so much respect from critics is one of television's greatest mysteries.
  10. rocketpackpanda
    Jan 14, 2013
    4
    Dear Lena Dunham, your show is dull and your characters have no redeeming qualities. Aside from a chuckle here and there season 2 of the spectacularly undeservedly praised show, begins with a whimper. The pilot is a rehash of everything that was terrible in the first season. The characters are cardboard stereotype cutouts and their dilemas are the same drama that is featured on shows like the hills and gossip girl. Yes the dialogue is realistic, but that doesn't make it compelling, Dunham's dialogue is dull and lifeless and the stories are pointless loops of one another. Also if you're gonna have a token black guy on your show, at least give him some cool lines or god forbide characterization beyond simply being "her new black love interest". That's not a personality, pandering.… Expand

Critic Reviews

All reviews »
Metascore
84 out of 100

Universal acclaim - based on 19 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 17 out of 19
  2. Mixed: 2 out of 19
  3. Negative: 0 out of 19
  1. The Detroit News
    Reviewed by: Tom Long
    Feb 1, 2013
    91
    Girls continues to delight and provoke in a way too few shows can.
    Read full review
  2. People Weekly
    Reviewed by: Tom Gliatto
    Jan 14, 2013
    75
    Girls can still be Girls. [21 Jan 2013]
  3. Boston Herald
    Reviewed by: Mark A. Perigard
    Jan 14, 2013
    91
    There hasn't been a show since "The Sopranos" so concerned with bodily functions, and it makes its oft-compared predecessor "Sex and the City" look like a TeenNick production. But it's also fresh, bracing and original.
    Read full review
See all critic reviews »