‘Looking’ creator says Season 3 would’ve had more daddies, throuples & a shocking hookup for two of its leads

No one believes that. The show felt like, what COVID lockdowns feel like, hollow and lonely. Something about it, maybe it was the lack of background music (just thought of this) made the show so flat. Extra daddies, throuples, and hookups in between Dawson's Creek level dialogue does not make for enticing TV.

It's gays in San Fran, fuck it and give me a gay SATC, not this meandering shit fest of a show. Wasted potential.

OP- WEIRD 😛

Right now I'm watch Season two episode one of LOOKING

“Lannan says the show also received all the necessary clearances so that they could film an episode at Burning Man, which would’ve made Looking one of the first series to ever actually film at the popular desert arts festival.”

I was a fan of the show but YIKES.

OP, I always loved the show and it's cool that a younger audience is discovering it now. That said, I can't imagine it ever getting revived even if Max somehow decided to uncancel it. Groff and Bartlett seem to have moved onto big careers (Groff, especially.)

I liked that show

Poor guy, still having to talk about a show that was canceled almost a decade ago. Does he have nothing else going for him?

Sad that S3 never happened. A great show.

Nobody wants an autistic main character in a "sexy" show.

What's foreskin?? What's douching???

Richie was so fucking handsome.

[quote] And certain viewers may be delighted to hear that Looking was eager to follow-up on the frequently referenced “almost hookup” between Patrick and Dom: “”We had an idea that Dom and Patrick were going to go out one night looking for hookups and then they go home with another couple that wants to have a foursome. They end up doing it, which is fun, hot, surprising, and weird for them,” Lannan shares.

Patrick in a foursome...sure.

r8, the big problem was the set-up of making gay life (in San Francisco) exciting and new for these gay characters (and even more for the viewers) and, like Patrick, experience it for the first time. The character would've worked much better if the show started like Tales of the City with Patrick (Mary Ann) arriving in San Francisco and moving in with Dom and Augustin without a clue about gay culture in a big city like San Francisco. The way the show unfolded, Patrick was basically Charlotte from Sex & The City, shocked and surprised about a lot of things gay related. Less judgy, but still shocked and surprised a lot of times.

This show captures what everyday life is like in San Francisco for gays in the city. It's not that sexy or exciting. The characters, the locations, the apartments are all pretty on par and completely track with experiences living here. I didn't like the show at first, but did like the minimalism of it the second go around. Looking is about as close as I have seen to a slice of life shot depicting real gay friend groups that are moderately good looking and successful, but not over the top.

Who the hell is "show creator Michael Lannan" and has his name ever been heard before? Evidently the writer, which would explain why the show was so very bad.

With Andrew Haigh as director, I had high expectations. His film "Weekend" is one if my favorite films and certainly my favorite gay film. But "Weekend" was so very American. And timid. And written by a committee to ensure that every possible "hot button" issue would be included, like the most absurd iteration of LGBTQIACAPGNGFNBA2S++, with absolutely nobody left happy in the end.

The main character was a 29-year-old gay man, out since his sophomore year of college, yet after years of living in San Francisco was petrified of his own fucking shadow, surrounded by men who fuck like rabbits or spend every moment squealing like a gay stuck pig. Fucking ridiculous, along with the heavy drama of the week themes after that even more shit show, the (first) American version of Queer As Folk.

It was embarrassing, and all the more for having the very talented Haigh attached so prominently.

The Patrick character and creepy one-note (forever horrified!) actor Jonathon Groff were the weak links, but the writing was so hackneyed and hysterical. What a waste.

A third season was never going to redeem anything.

The show managed to show how regular representation isn't a rating's winner. And in a way it did further show that mainstream doesn't like their gay characters to be regular.

Russel Tovey in that bulldog sweater with the big ears to match is was everything. Yes, agreed, the story line of Patrick being in San Francisco for almost 10 years post graduation and not knowing about douching while being able to take dick like a champ was not realistic. Bartlett still working at Zuni very realistic.

Queer as Folk was hotter, sexier, and more fun. People complain that isn't the correct representation (It felt pretty real) and Looking was too boring. Both were better than Bros or Fire Island in terms of gay content.

Weekend was really good and realistic, but was also pretty mundane.

r12 if viewers wanted a realistic view of gay life in San Fran, we'd have called up a friend that lives there to visit.

The show didn't even make it's setting relevant. Could have been shot in Columbus, Ohio and the storyline could be almost the exact same. They didn't even highlight the beauty of SF, which is the point of being in that overpriced homeless shelter. The setting also doesn't work cause SF has been sort of over as the number one gay spot. It's tired, like this show.

r11 is spot on. Want to make it believable, they should have made Patrick a transplant that just came out.

You take back that Fire Island slander r15! That movie is a truly wonderful gay rom-con. It puts a smile on my face and balances our need for love with our love of fucking. I know the romantic relationships are unrealistic, but it warms my heart anyway.

I really enjoyed Looking. Not perfect, but still, I thought it was very good. Would have loved a third season. The wrap up movie worked for me. They often don't. Scott Bakula's portrayal of a successful, semi-elder gay who is together in most ways but unable to connect intimately since the death of his partner was a surprise. Just wonderful. I liked the entire range of personality types on the show.

I liked it and would have continued watching it. I actually dropped HBO when they dropped Looking.

I love "slice-of-life" dramas, so I really admired what the show was trying to capture, but I think the 30 minute structure really killed it.

I don't think the writers really had enough time to sink their teeth into the characters and flesh them out organically. It should've been an hour long show.

I also think the chemistry between the actors wasn't great. It was ok, but nothing to write home about.

If you're going to make a dialogue driven piece, where characters spend long periods of time having deep conversations about life and love, then not only does the writing need to be excellent, but the chemistry between the actors must be off the charts. You're asking the audience to basically watch two people walking and talking. The only way to keep then engaged is if they are invested in the characters and relate to them.

Richard Linklater's "Before Trilogy" does this largely in part due to the writing, yes, but Ethan Hawke and Julie Delphy had phenomenal chemistry.

Sadly, Looking didn't come close to that onscreen chemistry--or even the chemistry between Glen and Russell in "Weekend," which was a great movie and ironically made by the same person.

Funnily enough, I found Weekend interminably dull, but loved Looking.

R15- Queer As Folk was MEDIOCRE at best and was definitely not better than LOOKING.

I'm not saying LOOKING was a great show but it was a fairly good show and far better than QAF.

If this show is ever brought back it should start with all the cast at Patrick's (Jonathan Groff) funeral.

He was the worst of worst of gays. Needy, whiny, and pathetic.

Maybe have him/her have died during surgery transitioning from she/she flamer to trans female.

RIP, Fussy Farrah.

Then the show could be great.

Groff destroyed this show. Totally miscast.

It was one season too long.

I liked this show and was impressed that it got so much better in its second season. They took more time with the characters, and it felt more honest. It was on a great trajectory and I was disappointed it didn’t get a third season. But at least it got the ending movie.

I loved "Weekend." Not only for the story, but for the way it was told. I thought Haigh did a great job keeping each scene focused and present, while unfolding the story incrementally. The audience sees these two characters growing closer, while also aware from the outset that they are either going to go their separate ways at the end or re-evaluate based on their evolving feelings for each other.

This type of storytelling works great for a 90-minute film, but really crumbles in an ongoing TV series format. Along with some of the character personalities noted above (I agree with a lot of those observations), the storytelling format was my main frustration with "Looking." Each episode just seemed slow-paced. For TV, you need to frame and pace each episode in a way that piques your audience's interest and makes them eager to return for the next installment. I don't remember any single episode in all two seasons of "Looking" ending in a way that I was curious and excited about what was going to happen next week. I think Andrew Haigh might have a storytelling style that is great for film, but not adapted well for the TV medium. This was not likely to change with a third, fourth, or fifth season without some major production changes behind the camera.

I was a San Francisco gay when "Looking" aired and I *really* wanted to love it. Sadly, I just didn't. The most enduring part of the series for me is the music score. I have an Apple playlist with 100+ songs used in episodes throughout both seasons, that I still listen to often.

The only time I enjoyed looking was when Murray Bartlett was pounding hole or when Kevin and Patrick hooked up

People are still talking about this dreck?

Looking ended at the right time. The final "wrap-up" movie was great

R23- The thing I disliked the most about him was his

HAPPY GO LUCKY-ness

Especially when they had the party on the decommissioned warship.

Murray Bartlett's character was the most realistic to me. He knew he was considered hot yet he was very insecure about himself. He seemed so real unlike Patrick.

Patrick in a throuple would have been so awkward

R31 Patrick doing ANYTHING was so awkward

"Queer as Folk" was awful, esp. after they exhauseted the original storylines from the UK original. "Looking" often promised more than it delivered---the drawn out Patrick-Richie relationship and some of Patrick's naiveiety were a bit much. R16 is hilarious---no place is duller than Columbus and it gets the gays who are frankly too incurious or afraid to move to a place like SF (or even Chicago, which is much closer). It's a less annoying version of Atlanta, which seems to have the mostsuperficial, dullwitted, incurious gays imaginable.

I only watched the Halloween episode once, and can't watch it again. I only have so much second-hand embarrassment to give.

No way the Patrick character could have ever handled being in a throuple. He had difficulty with the concepts of foreskin, douching, dating a non-WASP, and having a partner with a blank Grindr profile. It didn't occur to him to not wear his co-worker/new boyfriend's clothes to work if he wanted to keep the relationship private from their other co-workers.

I've wondered if the writers were trying to replicate something similar with the QAF Justin character with his naivete. However, Justin was a 17 year old high school student who lost his virginity in the pilot. It made sense that he didn't know shit. Patrick being 30 and ignorant of all these different things, after living in San Francisco for years, was not logical.

R34 100%.

Justin made sense. Patrick was like..."ARE YOU RETARDED????"

Patrick was not a well drawn character. Still, had Jonathan Groff not played him as a fucking idiot, a wide-eyed innocent deer caught perpetually in the headlights, with his fawning innocence tempered by the occasional dusting of petulance, the show might have been much better. It still would have been worn down by too many preachy themes and bad writing, but it might have had a chance. Had the writing been brilliant, Groff would still have stunk the place up. He was fundamentally wrong for the part and annoying as fuck every second on the screen.

I blame the writing more than Groff. No one could've made Patrick make sense.

It was giving wayy too uptight middle class white dude as an aspirational thing.

Groff's been entertaining in everything else I've seen him in. Even when hilariously miscast, as in that 4th Matrix movie. So I'm going to chalk the bland, implausible awfulness of Patrick up to the writing rather than his acting.

I nearly passed on watching "The Normal Heart" because of Groff. Glad I didn't though; in retrospect (as R37 said) it was more the fault of the writing of the character, but Groff's constant doe-eyes (mentioned by R36) didn't help either.

I watched "Looking" before discovering DL. Then when the show would come up and DLer after DLer would post about how much they loved and identified with Patrick..... I'm not even sure how to complete this sentence.

"Acclaimed series"? By whom?

R40 being awkward at gay parties is one thing. God knows I am. Being in your 30s and flabbergasted by foreskin and douching...not any gay man I know.

[quote]when the show would come up and DLer after DLer would post about how much they loved and identified with Patrick..... I'm not even sure how to complete this sentence.

Ha, R40. I was one of the posters who inspired those defences of Patrick/Groff. They got deeply bothered if anyone didn't share their affection for the character Patrick or Groffś acting, both of which were miserable to my view. But the odd thing was just that, they identified with the character Patrick and thought he was an entirely realistic in his dithering, dizzying past 30 innocence in the San Francisco of 2014-2016.

Side Question While I Think About It: How good was "It's A Sin"? I've heard somewhat mixed reviews, leaning toward positive.

I’ve known many Patricks in real life. Guys who play naive to mask their insecurity or indecisiveness. When it works for them, they hold on to it far longer than shelf life. Groff actually seems to be exactly that kind of person, which is why the show and the character worked for me.

R44: I don't regret watching 'It's A Sin' and there were some good moments in it, but overall it was disappointing. It was well-intentioned, certainly, but so heavy-handed and determined to work into the story every horror and anecdote of the plague years. For me it was too much a story written by checklist ('we have to include something about this, oh and about that, and we need a ridiculously saintly character, and a counterpoint vile character, and every outrageous character and story and affectation...') It was pulled down by trying to be everything to everyone and to tell all the personal stories of AIDS in one small cluster of stories.

Princess Patty : I'm a top !

I did like when Patrick talked shit to his sister after she fold him how easy he had it being gay and thus not having the normal het child expectations thrust upon him. Julia Duffy as his mom was a nice treat. I always fluctuated with Ritchie - and that's why I liked the character. At time he seemed the sanest, other times he was annoying.

R47 I tried to get my boss to buy that movie. Groff was popular coming off of Glee and I said he was gonna be big. I was ignored.

Always found DL excessively harsh on the show. Maybe it’s an age thing? I was 23-24 when it was on, and found it interesting. It’s definitely minimalist and not exactly riddled with incident, but the only character I truly despised was Augustin.

Richie was and remains incredibly sexy and I would love to be hit on by him while riding the train. That was probably the biggest flight of fancy the show employed.

The less of Murray Bartlett, the better. I finally saw him in something when I watched the Chippendales miniseries. He's a terrible actor and not all that attractive. If you have that much white chest hair, you might consider a wax.

Richie was delish!

I loved the scene that takes place at Richie's barbershop, between he and Agustin. Also, I love that photo of Murray Bartlett. It was filmed in the steamroom, at the former EROS location in San Francisco. Such good memories of that place.

[quote]The less of Murray Bartlett, the better.

At risk of a stoning from fellow Dataloungers, I agree, R51.

In interviews he is modest and easy to like, it's just that I've never seen him give a very good performance. I think his age, his looks (a lid for every pot), and having played a character coming to terms with his age in Looking all contribute to his seeming popularity at DL. It's just too bad he's not a very good actor.

Damn

It was a better idea for a show than it was a show. The writing was super pedestrian. All but like two episodes in the first season revolved around an "occasion". It was always a party, a restaurant opening, a wedding. Shows amateur writing. They don't know how to tell regular day life. There's always need a backdrop. Oh it's Folsom Festival!

Interesting. Neither the linked article or an earlier post has mentioned my favorite character:

Smart-mouthed, fag hag Doris.

I found the gay characters to be unappealing. Doris was the only witty one.

Lauren Weedman knocked the shit out of that part and was hands down the best actor on the show.

Lauren is what made me believe of these guys as friends. When she was in scenes with them, she conveyed chemistry and a shared language that made the group look tight.

[quote]Always found DL excessively harsh on the show.

As opposed to it's look on the bright side approach to, oh, everything else. ;)

The show was done in for me by the coupling of people I REALLY didn’t want to imagine having sex - an unattractive straight couple and a fat hairy bear and whoever he was hooking up with. In the words of our beloved Valerie Cherish “I don’t need to see that!”

At least this was much better than QAF which was a minstrel show even IN its day - in Pittsburgh, no less. The gay scene they portrayed in Pittsburgh was more fantastical than NYC. Yes let’s protest for our right to have anonymous gay sex in the back room of clubs!

You just know a third season now would have a Dominican deaf trans character with hairy ass cheeks.

One of the good things about it was that it was a gay show for gay men. No trans / bi BS.