>>114241512For something to be a show it's gotta have something to show for, which it doesn't.
Can't call something a painting when the paint hasn't even left the tube, let alone touch the canvas.
Besides that, what does it have to offer besides being edgy or dare I say it "controversial" in a way that was already considered outdated 20 years ago?
Oh the gay character swears a lot has sex and is a drug addict.
Will&Grace did it 10 years ago and by then the joke was already geriatric.
The creator doesn't even have the balls to give him 42 STDs or make him a pedophile.
Go big or go home, and this is a clear case of "should have gone home during conception".
The only thing it does right are facial expressions but that's about it.