IHaveNoCommentToMake

Alright, let's be real: Episode 3 of Stick totally nosedived the moment they introduced that girl-Zero. It's like the writers hit pause on everything that was working about the show so far, then dumped in a character that felt like she'd been pulled straight out of some Gen Z marketing focus group. You know the type: hyper self-aware, spouting vague platitudes about "mental clarity" and "living in the now," all while acting like she's too cool to even exist in the same plane as the rest of us mere mortals.

Zero is introduced as a bartender-slash-waitress at Sparling Meadows (because of course she is), and within minutes she's suddenly the moral compass and emotional coach for Santi, the actual young protagonist who we were just starting to get invested in. The show basically stops just to let her deliver this half-baked wisdom, like she's some kind of Gen Z Yoda. It doesn't come off as helpful, or insightful, or even mildly grounded-it just feels smug and irritating.

And that smugness is the real problem. Zero doesn't feel like a character; she feels like a stereotype masquerading as empowerment. She's that stock "alt girl who knows better than everyone" trope who has no patience for the world but still makes time to drop life-changing advice on a boy she's known for all of five minutes. Like... how does she suddenly know exactly what Santi needs to hear? She's not been set up as wise, or experienced, or emotionally insightful. She just appears, says some vaguely "deep" nonsense, and we're supposed to clap?

There's this painfully obvious attempt to make her cool in that hyper-curated Gen Z TikTok way: aloof but somehow emotionally attuned, sarcastic but sincere when the plot needs her to be, and dressed like she's perpetually ready for a Depop photoshoot. It's like the writers tried to craft someone "relatable" for a younger audience but forgot to actually give her a personality beyond the vibe.

What makes it worse is that she doesn't mesh at all with the tone or pacing of the show. Stick had been rolling with a nice balance of awkward comedy and character growth, especially with Pryce and Santi's dynamic. But when Zero arrives, it's like someone flipped the genre switch to "Teen Drama Meets Twitter Therapy Session." The dialogue shifts from character-driven to message-driven, and not in a subtle way. It's all very "listen up, viewer, here comes the Important Emotional Beat." It's exhausting.

And honestly, she's just not likable. That sounds harsh, but it's true. There's a difference between a character being edgy or challenging and one who just radiates this unearned superiority. Zero treats everyone around her like they're dumb or hopeless until she decides to grace them with a nugget of wisdom. There's no vulnerability, no backstory to justify why she's like this, no charm-just this wall of ironic detachment and faux-deep one-liners.

At best, she's a narrative speed bump. At worst, she's the show trying way too hard to be "in touch" with a demographic that can see right through this kind of pandering. If she's going to stick around (god help us), they're going to need to actually flesh her out beyond the Tumblr-era buzzwords and ironic eye-rolls. Because as it stands? Zero is the least interesting, most grating part of an otherwise solid episode-and she might just be the character that breaks the show if they don't figure her out fast.

Broadchurch Series 2 Episode 3 falters significantly with its implausible courtroom drama, particularly the subplot alleging Ellie Miller had an affair with Alec Hardy. In real life, the introduction of such a baseless and sensational claim would be highly unlikely in a court of law, especially in the absence of substantial evidence.

In actual legal proceedings, introducing accusations of a personal nature, like an affair, would require a strong evidentiary basis and relevance to the case at hand. The defense's strategy in this episode seems to disregard these legal standards, instead opting for shock value. Such tactics in real life would likely be met with objections and could even be deemed inadmissible, as they could unfairly prejudice the jury without contributing any meaningful insight into the facts of the case.

Furthermore, real-life legal professionals are bound by ethical guidelines that prevent them from pursuing such spurious lines of questioning. The court scenes in this episode not only misrepresent how evidence and personal accusations are handled but also undermine the seriousness of legal protocols. This departure from realistic legal practice makes the drama feel superficial and undermines the show's credibility.

By focusing on sensational and irrelevant personal drama, the episode distracts from the more pertinent legal and emotional issues at the heart of the story. This misrepresentation of legal procedures and ethics not only diminishes the integrity of the narrative but also misinforms viewers about how actual court cases are conducted.