Netflix Fails Again...

Overview

This video is a review of Netflix’s new adult animated comedy “Dang”, created by Andrew Law. The presenter revisits an earlier prediction from weeks prior—that the show would be mediocre, bland, and unfunny—and says they watched the series themselves because no one in the comments had returned to “prove him wrong.” Their conclusion: the show largely does not improve on the trailer’s promise.

Main Positives (Limited)

• Trailer-level humor largely matches expectations, including quirky Gen Z jokes, occasional “runchy” comedy, and generally unlikable characters.
• A small number of jokes land, including:
  • A Sailor Moon-related gag
  • Deadpan voice delivery, especially from a co-worker associated with the eldest sister’s workplace
• The sibling dynamic (among the three main siblings) is sometimes functional, creating a few likable moments.
• Some sequences use the animation style in mildly amusing ways, such as dream sequences and over-the-top violence.

Key Criticisms

Unlikable-character-for-comedy trope

The presenter’s biggest complaint is that the show repeatedly treats insufferable protagonists as “peak comedy.” They argue this only works if:

• the character is inherently funny, or
• the world clearly acknowledges the character’s behavior as wrong.

In “Dang,” they feel the main siblings—especially the sisters—aren’t written in a way that earns empathy or meaningful growth.

Ruthie (eldest sister)

• Depicted as cartoonishly evil and hard to like.
• The review highlights her cheating and betrayal subplot, her willingness to “air out secrets,” and a lack of redeeming traits.
• The only takeaway is framed as a narrow lesson about reputation-based wrongdoing.

Ununice (youngest sister)

• Criticized as lazy, incompetent, and aggravating, described as “like a woman-child.”
• The reviewer notes at least one attempt to provide development, including:
  • a subplot involving dating a man who stereotypes Asian women
• However, they argue the show backs up quickly and undermines the seriousness of the message.

Tone inconsistency / message hypocrisy

The presenter argues the show wants to be taken seriously about social issues (such as stereotypes), but later episodes reward or celebrate the same obnoxious behaviors. They compare this mismatch to sitcoms that deliver “serious lessons” in a format that doesn’t support them.

“Serious scenes” feel out of place

They claim the show’s reflective or moral moments don’t mesh with its comedic framework—likening it to other animated series where “life lessons” land poorly.

Side characters

• Mostly described as “fine,” but insufficient to outweigh the main cast’s problems.
• A coworker (Greta) is said to wear thin quickly due to constant focus on microaggressions and apologizing.
• An ex-husband character (Warren) is portrayed as a punching bag whose main flaw is being too nice, with inconsistent treatment depending on whose “self-advocacy problems” are being mocked.

Comedy repetition and weaker execution

• The reviewer says several jokes feel derivative.
• Even jokes resembling familiar setups land worse than comparable shows, particularly when the writing “explains the joke,” reducing impact.

Animation vs. potential live-action approach

The reviewer notes a claim by the creator that “Dang” was originally intended as live action, and suggests staying with live action might have made some awkward or outrageous setups funnier—arguing certain moments don’t translate well to animation.

Overall Verdict

The presenter ultimately rates the show 4/10 among adult animated comedies. They argue it fails to connect emotionally due to overly unlikable main characters, and that the humor is either mediocre or highly annoying.

Presenters or Contributors

• Andrew Law (show creator)