It Gets Worse

It Gets Worse Feature Scores

Explore all 61 feature scores for It Gets Worse, organized into pros and cons.

Scores by Feature

Summary

61 reviewed features
  • Very positive 4.5-5.0
    17 (28%)
  • Positive 3.5-4.4
    29 (48%)
  • Neutral 2.5-3.4
    11 (18%)
  • Negative 1.5-2.4
    4 (7%)

Pros

Sort
  • 4.3
    16 reviews moderate consensus
    humor: 4.3, 16 reviews, moderate consensus
    Fast one-liners, dry observations, and awkward situations make this a frequently very funny sitcom. A few critics find the punchlines relentless or forced, and not every joke lands.
  • 4.3
    12 reviews moderate consensus
    writing quality: 4.3, 12 reviews, moderate consensus
    Clever, incisive writing often balances sharp jokes with affection for deeply flawed people. Reservations center on overfamiliar ideas, underwritten supporting roles, and occasional over-writing.
  • 4.9
    4 reviews strong consensus
    cast chemistry: 4.9, 4 reviews, strong consensus
    The central trio share sharp, lived-in chemistry that makes their long friendship convincing. Their scenes together are among the show’s most consistent strengths.
  • 4.9
    4 reviews strong consensus
    entertainment value: 4.9, 4 reviews, strong consensus
    The show inspires strong enthusiasm for its chaotic humor and enjoyable unfolding story. Even its uncomfortable moments can be part of the appeal.
  • 4.5
    6 reviews strong consensus
    main cast performance: 4.5, 6 reviews, strong consensus
    Reich, Fairn, and Gray bring empathy and believable shared history to their flawed leads. Their interactions make difficult personalities easier to invest in.
  • 4.1
    13 reviews low consensus
    Young-adult life portrayal: 4.1, 13 reviews, low consensus
    The best observations capture the uncertainty, privilege, loneliness, and contradictions of life after university. Less enthusiastic critics find the pursuit of relatability vague and familiar.
  • 4.2
    9 reviews low consensus
    friendship portrayal: 4.2, 9 reviews, low consensus
    Affection and cruelty coexist in a friendship that usually feels close, complicated, and worth following. A dissenting view finds the group artificially assembled.
  • 4.3
    7 reviews low consensus
    celebrity cameos: 4.3, 7 reviews, low consensus
    Andrew Scott, Lena Dunham, and other recognizable guests supply several memorable highlights. Their brevity also draws criticism for leaving some roles one-dimensional.
  • 4.8
    3 reviews strong consensus
    genre satisfaction: 4.8, 3 reviews, strong consensus
    For enthusiastic viewers, this is a welcome, highly entertaining addition to the young-adult sitcom. Its outrageous situations and comic energy deliver strongly.
  • 4.8
    3 reviews strong consensus
    supporting cast performance: 4.8, 3 reviews, strong consensus
    Vicki Pepperdine is repeatedly singled out for her irritable comic presence and excellent line delivery. Her appearances add some of the series’ best moments.
  • 4.7
    3 reviews strong consensus
    guest appearances: 4.7, 3 reviews, strong consensus
    Recognizable guests bring comic excitement, with Scott and Dunham particularly enjoyable in familiar personas. The wider cameo lineup also earns enthusiastic praise.
  • 4.4
    4 reviews strong consensus
    voice narration: 4.4, 4 reviews, strong consensus
    Dry, cutting narration establishes the satirical tone and exposes the gap between the characters’ self-image and reality. It is repeatedly singled out as an engaging strength.
  • 4.2
    5 reviews strong consensus
    shock comedy execution: 4.2, 5 reviews, strong consensus
    The audacious opening and provocative situations often deliver memorable laughs. The willingness to keep pushing a joke can also become uncomfortable.
  • 3.8
    12 reviews low consensus
    character appeal: 3.8, 12 reviews, low consensus
    Selfish, irritating protagonists often become sympathetic through humor and glimpses of vulnerability. Their likability remains one of the show’s clearest dividing lines.
  • 4.8
    2 reviews limited evidence
    emotional impact: 4.8, 2 reviews, limited evidence
    Career disappointments, romantic rejection, and strained friendships can land like gut punches. The show’s empathy gives its jokes a meaningful emotional undercurrent.
  • 4.3
    3 reviews strong consensus
    realism: 4.3, 3 reviews, strong consensus
    The hip setting stays grounded through recognizable situations and convincing friendships. Even wandering storylines can feel true to young-adult life.
  • 3.7
    10 reviews low consensus
    character development: 3.7, 10 reviews, low consensus
    The leads gradually reveal vulnerability beneath their selfish behavior, often becoming easier to care about. Supporting characters can remain thin, and some critics want more depth throughout.
  • 4.2
    3 reviews strong consensus
    Location authenticity: 4.2, 3 reviews, strong consensus
    The cramped flats, artists’ spaces, and alternative cultural venues create a recognizable young London. Specific local details help the show feel familiar rather than generic.
  • 4.5
    2 reviews limited evidence
    Heartbreak portrayal: 4.5, 2 reviews, limited evidence
    Romantic rejection is treated as emotionally real even when the people involved behave foolishly. The show makes room for small, embarrassing hurts.
  • 4.5
    2 reviews limited evidence
    opening sequence quality: 4.5, 2 reviews, limited evidence
    The opening’s unexpected sexual turn is a major comic calling card. It is praised as both surprising and potentially the funniest scene in the series.
  • 4.5
    2 reviews limited evidence
    self-deprecating comedy: 4.5, 2 reviews, limited evidence
    Self-awareness and self-mockery make the central comedy more appealing. Its affection prevents every joke at the characters’ expense from feeling cruel.
  • 4.0
    3 reviews moderate consensus
    acting performance: 4.0, 3 reviews, moderate consensus
    The empathetic leads and generally solid ensemble earn substantial praise. A more qualified assessment finds occasional performances overly careful and calculated.
  • 4.3
    2 reviews limited evidence
    episode length: 4.3, 2 reviews, limited evidence
    Compact installments make the difficult personalities easier to absorb. The bite-sized presentation contributes to the show’s accessibility.
  • 4.3
    2 reviews limited evidence
    Housing insecurity portrayal: 4.3, 2 reviews, limited evidence
    Flatshare finances and London’s rental pressures feel painfully recognizable. Small domestic failures can hit harder than the show’s more deliberate attempts to shock.
  • 4.3
    2 reviews limited evidence
    renewal interest: 4.3, 2 reviews, limited evidence
    Positive responses leave viewers eager to see the characters grow and the story continue. Their uncertainty creates room for further development.
  • 5.0
    1 review
    comic timing: 5.0, 1 review
    Vicki Pepperdine’s delivery turns some of the script’s best lines into standout moments. Her supporting presence brings particular comic precision.
  • 3.6
    6 reviews low consensus
    dialogue quality: 3.6, 6 reviews, low consensus
    Wicked one-liners and perceptive jokes are a major attraction. Dense punchlines can sometimes sound unnatural, over-written, or forced.
  • 4.0
    2 reviews limited evidence
    Atmosphere: 4.0, 2 reviews, limited evidence
    Candid awkwardness, provocation, and escalating embarrassment define the mood. The tone gives this hangout comedy an invigorating edge.
  • 4.0
    2 reviews limited evidence
    visual style: 4.0, 2 reviews, limited evidence
    A brash contemporary aesthetic gives the show fashionable energy. Its hip presentation can still feel grounded in a recognizable social world.
  • 3.7
    3 reviews moderate consensus
    season pacing: 3.7, 3 reviews, moderate consensus
    The run often builds an urge to continue once the characters become familiar. Less positive reactions find the overall execution shaggy and unfocused.
  • 3.5
    5 reviews low consensus
    sexual content level: 3.5, 5 reviews, low consensus
    Frank, awkward sex is often appreciated for its vulnerability and comic lightness. One strong dissent finds the attention to the characters’ sex lives excessive.
  • 4.5
    1 review
    bingeability: 4.5, 1 review
    The series creates a clear desire to start the next episode. Its tight momentum helps keep the characters’ ongoing troubles engaging.
  • 4.5
    1 review
    Gender-role satire: 4.5, 1 review
    The tech-company boss sharply embodies the contradictions of contemporary girlboss culture. Her appearance makes the satire immediately recognizable.
  • 4.5
    1 review
    nostalgia appeal: 4.5, 1 review
    An awareness that youth will not last gives ordinary setbacks a bittersweet glow. Even mundane responsibilities can feel like the future’s treasured memories.
  • 4.5
    1 review
    Self-discovery and fulfillment: 4.5, 1 review
    The writing thoughtfully exposes contradictions between confidence, ambition, and uncertainty. Its characters’ searches for direction are more perceptive than their bad behavior initially suggests.
  • 4.5
    1 review
    sound design: 4.5, 1 review
    A precisely placed, disgusting sound effect turns one major argument into a comic highlight. Its timing makes the gross-out detail work.
  • 4.5
    1 review
    title distinctiveness: 4.5, 1 review
    The title neatly captures the escalating embarrassment and farce of these confused young lives. Its familiar phrasing gives the premise an effective ironic hook.
  • 3.5
    4 reviews low consensus
    theme depth: 3.5, 4 reviews, low consensus
    Privilege and vulnerability can coexist in a thoughtful portrait of young adulthood. Some critics wish the show explored its serious or topical material more deeply.
  • 4.0
    1 review
    casting quality: 4.0, 1 review
    Billy Rilot is singled out as a welcome surprise in the role of Jake. That supporting casting choice brings an unexpected pleasure.
  • 4.0
    1 review
    class commentary: 4.0, 1 review
    The show acknowledges how unequal family support changes the friends’ choices. Abi’s need to work makes the class differences within the group meaningful.
  • 4.0
    1 review
    Grief portrayal: 4.0, 1 review
    The funeral storyline allows for a quieter, bittersweet emotional register. Its restraint offers a change from the louder comic crises.
  • 4.0
    1 review
    Guilt and regret: 4.0, 1 review
    Attention to unspoken guilt and regret adds tenderness to otherwise petty disputes. The show notices feelings its protagonists struggle to admit.
  • 4.0
    1 review
    Narrative structure: 4.0, 1 review
    The story becomes more connected than its initial episode-by-episode setup suggests. That continuing arc makes the journey enjoyable.
  • 4.0
    1 review
    season length: 4.0, 1 review
    The compact season sensibly divides a film-sized story into manageable doses. Its limited running time helps introduce the show’s distinctive social world.
  • 4.0
    1 review
    soundtrack quality: 4.0, 1 review
    The fashionable playlist suits the show’s hip London setting. Its music is favorably compared to the taste of a Hoxton coffee shop.
  • 3.5
    1 review
    ending satisfaction: 3.5, 1 review
    The conclusion gives the leads a discernible journey without much concrete improvement in their lives. That circularity makes the payoff somewhat qualified.

Cons

Sort
  • 2.0
    2 reviews limited evidence
    character screen time: 2.0, 2 reviews, limited evidence
    The focus on the three leads leaves compelling supporting characters with too little space. Brief guest scenes can struggle to establish more than a sketch.
  • 2.3
    3 reviews moderate consensus
    story quality: 2.3, 3 reviews, moderate consensus
    Believable everyday situations appeal to some viewers. Others find the plotting aimless, meandering, or too close to disconnected observations.
  • 2.0
    1 review
    ensemble balance: 2.0, 1 review
    The lead trio dominate at the expense of a potentially interesting wider ensemble. Supporting characters could use more independent storylines.
  • 2.0
    1 review
    plot clarity: 2.0, 1 review
    A critical assessment finds the show shaggy and ill-defined. Its observations do not always add up to a clearly shaped television story.
  • 2.7
    3 reviews low consensus
    joke originality: 2.7, 3 reviews, low consensus
    The comic references can feel refreshingly current and accurate. Opposing views find familiar young-adult clichés and at least one gag recycled from an older sitcom.
  • 2.5
    1 review
    lighting visibility: 2.5, 1 review
    The dim presentation is a visual reservation in an otherwise funny farce. Brightness and visibility are less appealing than the comic writing.
  • 2.5
    1 review
    narrative repetition: 2.5, 1 review
    Some unrequited-love plots feel too similar, especially within a compact season. Repeating the same lesson across different characters can blunt their individuality.
  • 2.5
    1 review
    Political context depth: 2.5, 1 review
    Contemporary political references can feel like window-dressing. They establish the period more effectively than they develop substantive political ideas.
  • 2.5
    1 review
    romance quality: 2.5, 1 review
    The parallel unrequited attachments of Sam and Ethan can feel insufficiently distinct. Their romantic disappointments sometimes repeat rather than complement each other.
  • 2.5
    1 review
    tonal consistency: 2.5, 1 review
    A near-constant preference for comedy limits room for serious moments. More tonal variety could give both the emotional material and the jokes extra weight.
  • 2.9
    5 reviews low consensus
    originality: 2.9, 5 reviews, low consensus
    Some critics appreciate a distinct voice within a familiar sitcom tradition. Others find the young-adult premise and execution derivative or overdone.
  • 3.0
    2 reviews limited evidence
    drama quality: 3.0, 2 reviews, limited evidence
    There are worthwhile flashes of dramatic intrigue, but serious material can be short-lived. Letting uncomfortable moments breathe would deepen the experience.
  • 3.0
    1 review
    pilot episode quality: 3.0, 1 review
    The first episode needs time to settle into its characters and rhythm. It is a more tentative introduction than the later engagement suggests.
  • 3.3
    2 reviews limited evidence
    episode structure: 3.3, 2 reviews, limited evidence
    An enjoyable continuing story sits beneath the seemingly episodic sitcom format. Individual setups occasionally feel like devices for manufacturing another disagreement.
  • 3.3
    4 reviews low consensus
    Topical relevance: 3.3, 4 reviews, low consensus
    For admirers, the references and outlook feel closely connected to young adulthood today. Detractors see superficial topical decoration or exaggerated claims of relevance.

Use Cases

Best for

Sort
  • 4.6
    4 reviews strong consensus
    Gen Z audience viewing: 4.6, 4 reviews, strong consensus
    The show’s worldview, anxieties, and humor are closely tuned to Gen Z. Its recognizable contemporary world is a major part of the attraction for that audience.
  • 4.8
    3 reviews strong consensus
    Twentysomething audience viewing: 4.8, 3 reviews, strong consensus
    Especially rewarding for viewers navigating rent, work, dating, and changing friendships in their twenties. Its messy protagonists offer recognizable company without tidy answers.
  • 4.7
    3 reviews strong consensus
    London audience viewing: 4.7, 3 reviews, strong consensus
    Young Londoners are likely to recognize the cramped housing, uncertain careers, and alternative social venues. That local familiarity can make the comedy hit unusually close to home.
  • 4.5
    1 review
    British comedy fan viewing: 4.5, 1 review
    British comedy fans have a particular draw in Vicki Pepperdine’s appearance. Her strong material and delivery reward that interest.
  • 4.5
    1 review
    Coming-of-age viewing: 4.5, 1 review
    A good fit for viewers interested in coming-of-age stories that continue beyond adolescence. It insightfully considers identity, relationships, and work at 24.
  • 4.5
    1 review
    Fleabag fan viewing: 4.5, 1 review
    The opening offers a strong attraction for viewers who enjoyed Andrew Scott’s Hot Priest appeal. Its combination of sexual frankness and awkward comedy recalls that particular enthusiasm.
  • 3.5
    2 reviews limited evidence
    Girls fan viewing: 3.5, 2 reviews, limited evidence
    One devoted Girls admirer sees a worthy successor in its chaotic humor and difficult characters. Another critic finds the comparison unfavorable because the writing lacks similar insight.

Conditional or not ideal for

  • Older-audience viewing
    2.0
    1 review
    Older-audience viewing: 2.0, 1 review
    An explicitly cautionary assessment finds the show’s aesthetics and worldview narrowly generational. Older viewers may struggle to connect with its preoccupations.
  • Millennial audience viewing
    3.0
    2 reviews limited evidence
    Millennial audience viewing: 3.0, 2 reviews, limited evidence
    Younger millennials may recognize the London milieu and stalled-adulthood anxieties. An opposing assessment cautions that older millennials could find its outlook alienating.

Cast & Creators

  • Ethan
    4.6
    11 reviews strong consensus
    Leo Reich: 4.6, 11 reviews, strong consensus
    Reich earns praise for sharp, perceptive comic writing and an appealingly unabashed lead performance. His strongest scenes combine self-mockery with believable rapport among the friends.
  • Sam
    4.8
    5 reviews strong consensus
    Olive Gray: 4.8, 5 reviews, strong consensus
    Gray’s work gains praise for believable ensemble chemistry and an empathetic, layered portrayal. One otherwise skeptical critic singles Gray out as the show’s real discovery.
  • Actor
    4.6
    5 reviews strong consensus
    Lena Dunham: 4.6, 5 reviews, strong consensus
    Dunham’s brief screen appearances are praised for their comic presence and pointed girlboss characterization. Reich also warmly values her feedback on the pilot script.
  • Abi
    4.8
    4 reviews strong consensus
    Emily Fairn: 4.8, 4 reviews, strong consensus
    Fairn helps make the central trio feel authentic and emotionally layered. Her interactions with Reich and Gray are a recurring performance strength.
  • Actor
    4.8
    4 reviews strong consensus
    Vicki Pepperdine: 4.8, 4 reviews, strong consensus
    Pepperdine repeatedly stands out as Ethan’s irritable mother. Her delivery supplies some of the show’s strongest comic moments.
  • Actor
    4.6
    4 reviews strong consensus
    Andrew Scott: 4.6, 4 reviews, strong consensus
    Scott’s brief appearance makes a memorable comic impression. His familiar screen persona and the outrageous opening scene draw particularly warm responses.
  • Narrator
    4.3
    3 reviews strong consensus
    Zadie Smith: 4.3, 3 reviews, strong consensus
    Smith’s dry narration adds a sharp comic frame to the characters’ misadventures. Her contribution also stands out within the show’s highly praised guest lineup.
  • Actor
    4.5
    1 review
    Amelia Dimoldenberg: 4.5, 1 review
    Dimoldenberg contributes to a cameo ensemble described as dazzling. Her participation is part of the guest lineup’s strong appeal.
  • Jake
    4.0
    1 review
    Billy Rilot: 4.0, 1 review
    Rilot brings a welcome surprise to the role of Jake. The supporting turn is singled out positively.