"The Bear" and "Severance" and Justifying (Or Not) the Mistakes and Missteps.

Both critically acclaimed series have issues. The question is are you willing to overlook them and if so, why? Some answers ahead.

This post contains spoilers for S1 of “The Bear” and S1 of “Severance,” with some non-spoiler references to S2 of “The Bear.” If you haven’t watched, come back when you have.

I will get this out of the way quickly: I loved both seasons of “The Bear,” and I really liked (after arguably too many episodes passed) “Severance” enough to come back rather willingly for its second season when it appears.

But that doesn’t mean everything is fine, here, as you probably sussed out from the headline for the fact that I mentioned in my last post that I’ve been thinking a lot about the weaknesses of these two series.

Here’s my review of the flawed but wonderful indie film “Linoleum” (streaming on Hulu) and why it’s both flawed and wonderful, with a mention up top of my nagging concerns about “The Bear” (FX on Hulu) and “Severance” (Apple TV+). And yes, that post and this one share some DNA:

---

---

There are no perfect television series, nor should any of them try to be perfect. All of the greatest ones have flawed episodes in almost every season — but never a full season that was considered bad, or even mediocre. (I’m a professional and you can fight me later on that). If you believe in wabi-sabi, as I do, then all truly beautiful things have flaws and sometimes the flaws contain the beauty. But in a strictly television series-centric conversation, sometimes you have to love a great series even if its shortcomings nag at you or disappoint you.

The worlds of nagging and disappointment are (unfortunately — but that’s a whole other issue) common ground for critics. Part of the job is to find the flaws and expose them. Theoretically, there is value to society for this skillset because it helps people understand what greatness is and why, thus simultaneously illuminating what is merely good and why. (It’s a whole other circus just to bash the truly awful, but I would argue, or used to, that there’s value in that as well).

I clearly can’t turn my critic brain off as often as I would like. I now just avoid things that are bad (unless I enjoy their badness) and otherwise don’t speak of such things. I appreciate good and really good artistic efforts, even if they fall short of what a critic might call great.

It’s a whole other undertaking to really love a series that gets so much right but also trips up when you hope it wouldn’t. Sometime the missteps are dealbreakers. Sometimes they are, well, let’s just say unfortunate. And you move on. These days, I’m more interested in the reason why I will willingly move on and continue embracing something when it fails. If that sounds strange to you, well, you’re probably not a critic (and be thankful for that). In the past, too many times a very good series was nearing greatness but kept making these unforced errors, these inconsistent mistakes of judgement, and I couldn't fully embrace them. (Which, if you think about it, is kind of a joyless way to live your life — which is why I said you should be thankful you’re just a savvy and astute viewer with actual empathy and no time to hold grudges or be disappointed in the things you watch, instead of a critic — you just move on, because you’re a normal human).

OK, that’s enough of that. Boy was I annoyed — and still must be if I’m writing this now — at the end of “The Bear” S1 when Carmy (Jeremy Allen White) finds all of that money that Mikey (Jon Bernthal) hid in the specific-sized tomato cans. It’s $300,000, the same amount that Carmy owes to Uncle Jimmy (Oliver Platt). Coincidental? Convenient?

Yes.

And yay! This revelation not only balms the stress and anxiety Carmy has felt trying to keep the restaurant afloat, it also gives life to opening a new one, with a new name — The Bear — for S2. Yay!

It’s perfect. Except that, if you watched, you should probably know it isn’t. Here’s why: