[TV] She-Hulk: Attorney at Law (*SPOILERS*)

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

Catfishing: "the process of luring someone into a relationship by means of a fictional (online) persona."

She made a dating profile as a person that she herself at that point did not embrace as her actual persona. She disliked having to be She-Hulk at work, she even disliked being called She-Hulk. She didn't want guys to like her for being She-Hulk, but she used her looks anyway because she could get the better looking guys into bed like that and then blamed them for walking out when she let the mask drop.

She made a profile as She-Hulk. Her dates were expecting a date with She-Hulk. She went on the dates as She-Hulk. No one was Catfished.

This is not complicated. If she used her She-Hulk profile to get the dates and then showed up to the dates as Jen...you could maybe consider that catfishing. Though, since they are the same person and that's a publicly known fact, it still really wouldn't be catfishing. When you are going on a date with She-Hulk...you are going on a date with Jen Walters.

[Raisei]

That doesn't mean it's a legal DRAMA. There's a difference between the topic of a show and the type of show.

Still, if it is the topic, the writer should make at least some effort to know how to write about that topic. How is that even a question? She isn't writing a friggin fan faction but a multi-million dollar show.

Nothing is, until it is. This show wants to do something different than previous series. No other MCU show has broken the fourth wall, either. This one does.

True. There also has never been an MCU show as lazy as this one. Excellent that we know have precedent for that. Gao is a true trail blazer.

You can like it or dislike it, but going "this isn't the same as we've had before!" is an absolutely silly angle to take here.

If the "new" thing comes at the cost of inner-world logic and lore and is accompanied by a sharp decline in quality then the angle absolutely legitimate.

You can say the same about the the new SW stuff. It also did things that have never been done before. For a good reason. Because they ruined the lore. And the writers there did not care any more then Gao does here. Long as people exists that defend her, there is no need to learn from those mistakes after all.

[Biomega]

Still, if it is the topic, the writer should make at least some effort to know how to write about that topic. How is that even a question?

It isn't a question, because it's not IN question. All the show promised was to involve law as a topic. It does. Everything else is a different matter. If you think the legal stuff is preposterous, fine, but you can't argue that you were misled because the show said it's about legal stuff and you don't like the QUALITY of the legal stuff.

If the "new" thing comes at the cost of inner-world logic and lore and is accompanied by a sharp decline in quality then the angle absolutely legitimate.

What's silly is complaining about a new thing not being like the old thing. You want to complain about the quality of the thing that's fine, but it's also a separate argument.

Argue properly, don't try and mix up things and get your lines confused.

[Raisei]

She made a profile as She-Hulk. Her dates were expecting a date with She-Hulk. She went on the dates as She-Hulk. No one was Catfished.

This is not complicated.

Jennifer lured him in with a body that she herself did not embrace as being her own at this point (she treated it more like an affliction), then expected him to just be fine with a completely different looking person on the next morning and when he wasn't, that was somehow his fault? It really isn't complicated. Jennifer is simply a horrible person and if a guy would do the exact same thing he would be called on much worse things then just catfishing.

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

Jennifer lured him in with a body that she herself did not embrace as being her own at this point (she treated it more like an affliction), then expected him to just be fine with a completely different looking person on the next morning and when he wasn't, that was somehow his fault? It really isn't complicated. Jennifer is simply a horrible person and if a guy would do the exact same thing he would be called on much worse things then just catfishing.

Did anyone not get a date with She-Hulk? She "lured them in" with She-Hulk's body...and showed up to the dates in She-Hulk's body. They wanted a date with She-Hulk and they got a date with She-Hulk. They got exactly what they were expecting to get. No one was catfished. What aren't you getting here?

And yeah, she was disappointed that the guy that she thought liked her for more than just She-Hulk...just wasn't interested in Jen. But that's as far as it went...disappointment.

[Fabinas]

OOOK..

Things that are BAD with this show:

It claims it's a cool lawyer show, with an totally incompetent lawyer. It's not just my opinion or claim, other people have expressed their concerns about the "legal" part of the show. I don't need to point to their posts or repeat their arguments, do i? If you do respond to this, please take the time to read the whole friggin thread as i did, despite the fact that i started watching this just 2 weeks ago.

It's supposed to have a superhero part, yet all we get is episodic stuff with absolutely no arc for the superhero. We never found out why Titania attacked the courtroom. She just did, Jen repelled her and then they are show rivals with absolutely no reasoning why their court showdown happened. And we're past the middle of the show.

If there's a superhero arc "steal her blood", we had one incident and then we had the last episode. showing the new improved syringes. We haven't seen nothing, not a hint that this may be connected with the current (or any future one ) MCU phase. Maybe they keep it for the end of the show. But not showing small hints where the road leads for She-Hulk? That's objectively bad. The rest of the superhero part of the show were cameo stuff, either directly or indirectly.

Also, others noted the power inconsistencies. Jen should have at least a broken skull from Titania, when was punched in her normal human form, if not more injuries. I won't elaborate more, the concerns have been raised already.

As a sitcom? I find Friends, Big Bang Theory, How I Met Your Mother and Modern Family far more funnier. Why should i laugh at the overplayed "don't overshadow the bride" theme?

And lastly, they chose to portray empowered females by comparison to "a parade of underwhelming men", and not on their own merits. I am repeating this direct from the show quote, because it was uttered in an episode where men were just side characters and never ever confronted the females in an underwhelming way. I would have accepted it as ok, if the plot was around the fine legal women who managed to upturn a difficult case against incompetent men in an advantageous position, but the She-Hulk copyright episode was not that.

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

It's supposed to have a superhero part, yet all we get is episodic stuff with absolutely no arc for the superhero. We never found out why Titania attacked the courtroom. She just did, Jen repelled her and then they are show rivals with absolutely no reasoning why their court showdown happened. And we're past the middle of the show.

We actually did find out why Titania attacked the court room. She was fleeing from her own traffic court hearing... it had nothing to do with Jen except for the fact that she happened to be in the room when Titania crashed through.

[MCMLXXXII]

Sitcom means situational comedy, not people sitting on a couch being funny, although the lion's share of sitcoms are mostly that.

[Biomega]

It claims it's a cool lawyer show, with an totally incompetent lawyer. It's not just my opinion or claim, other people have expressed their concerns about the "legal" part of the show.

I believe it's "fun lawyer show" not "cool", but either way - nobody is saying the show is being particularly realistic or accurate with the legal stuff. For one, because very few legal shows ever are (even the purportedly "serious" ones), but also because this is a sitcom, where whacky inaccuracies are par for the course.

If you don't like that, that's entirely fine. But the show never promised anything else.

It's supposed to have a superhero part, yet all we get is episodic stuff with absolutely no arc for the superhero.

And what, exactly, is a "superhero part" supposed to mean here? It has a super-powered individual at the center of things. It involves other super-powered individuals practically everywhere, and makes superpowers a big part of the plot. You also claim there is "absolutely no arc", but we see plenty of development - coming to terms with a new power and persona both professionally and personally has been the leading theme in almost every episode. That's THE arc.

This sounds more like "I wanted to see X and I got Y" to me. Which is fine, but is a subjective, personal preference. You're making it out to be a general thing, like the show somehow promised X and then delivered Y. That's just not the case. You can, again, not LIKE what it's delivering, but it's a bit disingenuous to frame it as though this was not what was promised.

As a sitcom? I find Friends, Big Bang Theory, How I Met Your Mother and Modern Family far more funnier. Why should i laugh at the overplayed "don't overshadow the bride" theme?

If you don't like it or find it funny, that's fine. People like different things. I like this show, but I couldn't bear 5 minutes of Friends or BBT or HIMYM. And that's fine, too.

And lastly, they chose to portray empowered females by comparison to "a parade of underwhelming men", and not on their own merits.

I'm not sure what that even means. Does the show have unlikable male characters? Absolutely. It also has unlikable female characters. Or did you find Titania or the bride from the most recent episode particularly endearing? And there's likable male characters, too. It's a comedy show. Characters will be parodies and stereotypes. Of any gender.

And what's wrong with showing empowered females in a good light, exactly? We have 80+ years of TV history that show empowered men in a good light. Even if this was swerving the other way a little, what's the problem with that?

[Jotaux]

Worse than you thought? She got a millionaire with no pre-nuptial agreement a divorce settlement that only cost him was 20 seconds of eye contact and an apology... she's a miracle worker.

Uhh no she talked it up from 10s to 20s which is highly unethical. Her duty is to the client.

[Fabinas]

I believe it's "fun lawyer show" not "cool", but either way - nobody is saying the show is being particularly realistic or accurate with the legal stuff. For one, because very few legal shows ever are (even the purportedly "serious" ones), but also because this is a sitcom, where whacky inaccuracies are par for the course.

If you don't like that, that's entirely fine. But the show never promised anything else.


And what, exactly, is a "superhero part" supposed to mean here? It has a super-powered individual at the center of things. It involves other super-powered individuals practically everywhere, and makes superpowers a big part of the plot. You also claim there is "absolutely no arc", but we see plenty of development - coming to terms with a new power and persona both professionally and personally has been the leading theme in almost every episode. That's THE arc.

This sounds more like "I wanted to see X and I got Y" to me. Which is fine, but is a subjective, personal preference. You're making it out to be a general thing, like the show somehow promised X and then delivered Y. That's just not the case. You can, again, not LIKE what it's delivering, but it's a bit disingenuous to frame it as though this was not what was promised.


If you don't like it or find it funny, that's fine. People like different things. I like this show, but I couldn't bear 5 minutes of Friends or BBT or HIMYM. And that's fine, too.


I'm not sure what that even means. Does the show have unlikable male characters? Absolutely. It also has unlikable female characters. Or did you find Titania or the bride from the most recent episode particularly endearing? And there's likable male characters, too. It's a comedy show. Characters will be parodies and stereotypes. Of any gender.

And what's wrong with showing empowered females in a good light, exactly? We have 80+ years of TV history that show empowered men in a good light. Even if this was swerving the other way a little, what's the problem with that?

When the protagonist is incompetent in a legal show, the show is not fun or cool. I am not asking for legal fidelity. i am asking for cases where the protagonist, who is supposed to be a smart lawyer gets to shine. But here Jen is mostly portrayed as an inexperienced assistant DA and then lawyer who gets lucky. Where's the fun in that?

If it's a legal show (fun, cool, sitcom-ish, whatever) it should be fun to watch in the legal part. Why i shouldn't be expecting that from She-Hulk where the protagonist is constantly contrasted by her "normal" and her hulk form? The legal part is a constant in her life, at least she aspires it to be.

This show is her SUPERHERO INTRODUCTION. It is (supposedly) a part of the MCU and should be on par with the rest of introductory shows that Disney+ puts out. If there is no arc for She-Hulk, then her metamorphosis becomes a gimmick for the (again supposedly) sitcom show that you all people try to "explain" to us. Is it supposed to be like "Moon Knight" where it was clearly stated it's a one off? Because that's not what i gathered so far, feel free to correct me if you have such information.

You may not stand the comedy of the shows i mentioned and, obviously, that's fine. But you cannot deny that those shows were: Long running, successful, and in all those episodes they managed to touch menial, everyday subjects in their own original way through the characters. The She-Hulk show fails immensely to do that. The only sitcom-ish part i liked was her online dating part, because it portrayed Jen and her struggles between her two selves.

I mean that whenever a man is portrayed bad, it is always in comparison with a woman or because of his attitude to a woman. And vice versa.

There's nothing wrong showing empowered females in a good light. Is that what you gathered from my post? My problem is that they don't show us empowered women in a good light on their own. It always has to come through the comparison with "a parade of underwhelming men".

And it's not about the good light on each individual gender. Feminism should be about doing justice to women, not revenge against men.

[Endus]

Mhmm, kay, I could swear that Jennifer herself called it a "cool lawyer show" in the very first episode. The only people I heard calling this mess a sitcom are those in this thread. Also, aren't sitcoms usually ... uh... funny?

I'm laughing out loud every episode. Humor is subjective. You continue to basically just say "but I don't like it!" as if that's an argument.

Okay, champ. You don't like a thing. Run along then and stop pissing in people's Wheaties.

Better Call Saul says hello.

That's, like, one show. Congrats, She-Hulk is not up to the standard of that one show, in terms of how accurately it presents the law. So what? Why aren't you making these same complaints about every other lawyer show?

Don't think that has ever been said. But feel free to point me to that scene.

10:30 of Episode 2, Jen's hired to head a "new division" at GLK&H.
11:30, he reveals it's the Superhuman Law Division she's heading up.
13:29 we meet Pug, also in the SLD.
Episode 3, 5:23, Mallory Book is introduced as "also in the Superhuman Law Division".

None of this is subtext, it's all openly stated. Why is it that you're consistently ignoring what actually happens in the show, and making arguments about things that aren't actually in the show?

So, that would make her Jen's subordinate, since she is head of the division? Despite being there longer and being infinitely more competent then Jen? Only because of Jen's skin colour? Wow. Here we are right back at the logic thing. A lawyer with her skill would not take that, she would quit and find a new job in a heart beat. Maybe sue her company for discrimination on top.

And at this point I'm really sure you don't watch the show and just get fed highlights by some online outrage machine. Because the arguments you're presenting as a criticism of the show are introduced directly and overtly in the show itself. Jen knows she only got the job offer because she's a visible superhuman. Book's irritated by this, with good reason, though she's smart enough to not blame Jen. Also, you're missing that GLK&H is one of the biggest law firms in the world; Book can't just up and "find a new job" at a comparable firm.

Yes, you're catching onto some of the themes of the show. The problem is, you don't watch the show, and you think they're mistakes, rather than intentional story elements.

Feels more like there are 3 lawyers in the company so every case goes to one of them, no matter what type.

In the Superhero Law Division. We're not seeing every case GLK&H handles, and that's a ridiculous suggestion on its face.

There is also the inherent problem even if these three are in that division. This would mean that they get any case that has a super in it, no matter what speciality is required. From murder to divorce to public masturbation (see Homelander). That is simply impossible to handle. You would have to know the entire law with all specializations to be adequate at that job.

Again, not a criticism. They can always tap someone in the firm if they need support on a case, and they're already specialists, handling superhuman cases, which can twist how the standard law's applied in strange ways. Literally the reason for the SLD.

Stated outright in the show, which I'm more and more convinced you do not watch.

At least they could have had some kind of sharing of duties. Jen as the former assitant DA could get the criminal cases, Mallory the white collar stuff, Pug the family stuff. But even that much is beyond the scope of the show. It feels simply LAZY.

You don't have grounds to argue that this isn't the case. Just that we haven't overtly been shown that, but that would be a wasted scene that communicates nothing useful.

Catfishing: "the process of luring someone into a relationship by means of a fictional (online) persona."

She made a dating profile as a person that she herself at that point did not embrace as her actual persona.

That claim's a lie, and her using she-hulk as an actual representation of herself was literally proven in court. Again, you clearly don't watch the actual show.

There's nothing fictional about Walters being She-Hulk, and she never misrepresented who she was.

Nah, you got me all wrong. I am claiming the writers don't understand anything that happens beyond the realm of their very narrow personal experience and I am claiming that they made ZERO effort to rectify this. They do not understand law, they do not understand superheroes and instead of getting advice on how to write for an audience that expects these things they dependend on people like you to excuse everything they did.

And that claim in bold is laughable, because they're nailing the She-Hulk interpretation, here.

I'm not "excusing" anything. You're making claims that are objectively, determinably false, repeatedly. To such an extent I can't believe any more you even watch the show.

You're also trying to shift this back to culture-war bullshit without coming right out and saying it.

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

Uhh no she talked it up from 10s to 20s which is highly unethical. Her duty is to the client.

Again, because he was going to blow the deal. That's on him. She saved the rest of the deal by pre-emptivly "raising" the settlement to 20 seconds of eye contact.

You are getting that Mr. Immortal is guilty of multiple state and federal felonies, correct? He was married to at least 8 people at the same time. Crime. He faked his death and set up new fraudulent identities multiple times. Crime. All of those spouses had him by the short & curlies. Mallory promised him that she would get him the best deal that she could...and she delivered. I would challenge you to find a bettter deal in the history of divorce law than "20 seconds of eye contact and an apology".

[Biomega]

When the protagonist is incompetent in a legal show, the show is not fun or cool.

That's completely subjective. As is calling Jen "incompetent", which is a pretty harsh term to use for someone who's won most cases we've seen on the show.

There's also legal shows where the lawyer being incompetent is what makes it funny. Say, Harvey Birdman, Attorney at Law. Competence is in no way a requirement for something being funny. That's purely subjective.

If it's a legal show (fun, cool, sitcom-ish, whatever) it should be fun to watch in the legal part.

Nothing "is" fun. It's only received as fun by particular audiences; and, conversely, not perceived as such by others. Many people find this show fun, including the legal parts. If you do not, that's unfortunate; but it doesn't mean others don't find it fun just because you don't.

If you want to critique the quality of the show, by all means, do that. But "it isn't fun" isn't a critique, it's just a preference. Those are fairly worthless when it comes to convincing others in a discussion.

This show is her SUPERHERO INTRODUCTION. It is (supposedly) a part of the MCU and should be on par with the rest of introductory shows that Disney+ puts out.

Says who? This show does something different. This CHARACTER does something different, and always has. She-Hulk was never the same as the Hulk just with a different gender. It was always about parodying the genre in a self-aware way. Breaking the fourth wall. Doing silly shit. Just because something is part of the same creative universe doesn't mean it has to be the same as every other series set in that universe.

Complaining that a show that wants to do something different isn't the same as everything before it is a bit of an absurd premise.

If there is no arc for She-Hulk

But there is. Jen is trying to come to terms with her newfound powers and second persona. That's the arc right there. Or what other thing do you mean by this?

You may not stand the comedy of the shows i mentioned and, obviously, that's fine. But you cannot deny that those shows were: Long running, successful, and in all those episodes they managed to touch menial, everyday subjects in their own original way through the characters. The She-Hulk show fails immensely to do that.

First off, whether or not She-Hulk ACTUALLY "fails immensely" at doing what you describe is very much up for grabs; you can't just unequivocally assert that, much less for an incomplete first season vs. shows that ran for close to a decade.

But more importantly: why does other shows doing X matter for this show anyway? Not every show has to do the same thing. It's not a requirement of any comedy show to "touch menial, everyday subjects in their own original way" (even though you could VERY MUCH argue that this show ABSOLUTELY DOES THAT, too). That's your own, arbitrary definition. Nothing more.

I mean that whenever a man is portrayed bad, it is always in comparison with a woman or because of his attitude to a woman.

Like, say, the Wrecking Crew? You think they were "bad" only because Jen is a woman? If Jen had been a man and nothing else about that situation was different, would they come across as any less "bad"? What about the stage magician and his ilk? What did gender have to do with their sleazy self-satisfaction?

This seems like a very conveniently phrased overgeneralization to me.

My problem is that they don't show us empowered women in a good light on their own. It always has to come through the comparison with "a parade of underwhelming men".

Like the whole deal with Titania and her trademark? Did Jen prevail there only because she was up vs. an "underwhelming man"? Or are you just conveniently ignoring all the times where your argument doesn't work?

Feminism should be about doing justice to women, not revenge against men.

Right. I don't want to misunderstand this, so could you just list for us the times where Jen has taken "revenge against men" in this show, please. Just so I know.

[Endus]

That's completely subjective. As is calling Jen "incompetent", which is a pretty harsh term to use for someone who's won most cases we've seen on the show.

I'd definitely say "inexperienced", instead. They made it clear she'd been an assistant DA and the case against GLK&H was her first case as the lead prosecutor. But she had a solid argument in that case and she'd have won if it hadn't been mistrialed out, as they said clearly. She got Blonsky's parole accepted, too. Of the cases we've seen, she's literally 2/2.

There's also legal shows where the lawyer being incompetent is what makes it funny. Say, Harvey Birdman, Attorney at Law. Competence is in no way a requirement for something being funny. That's purely subjective.

I'm wondering where they think, in the show, that Jen was ever stated to be a real big up-and-comer genius super lawyer. Because I sure don't remember that ever being stated. She literally only got the job offer for GLK&H because she's a very visible face for the superhero law division, to the extent that Holliway requires her to be She-Hulk while in the office or representing the firm, other than when she's forced out of it like at the prison Blonsky's in. The explicit point is that he doesn't particularly care about her legal skills, he's primarily interested in her face.

[RobertoCarlos]

Mhmm, kay, I could swear that Jennifer herself called it a "cool lawyer show" in the very first episode. The only people I heard calling this mess a sitcom are those in this thread. Also, aren't sitcoms usually ... uh... funny?
I know who I am talking to here, so I know you will defend this show no matter what it does, but sometimes I wish you folks would at least think about criticisms for 10 seconds before denying it all.



That is different. I am talking of the inherent logic of the MCU universe. This world has super heroes so they are part of the logic of the world. They are part of the rules. But I do not see "lawyers being unprofessional idiots" as part of the world's logic. Matt Murdock in No Way Home was an excellent lawyer, despite given a crazy case of defending Spider-Man. He also was not a judgemental dick to either Peter or Happy.



That simply is not what the MCU has shown us to this day. Inspite of the fact that there are superheros and aliens and all of that in the world, it is our world with all the inherent logic of it. Take the Sokovia Accords. Super Heroes are a fact and politics react to this reality.

If you allow a writer the leeeway of just making up their own rules for the shared world of the franchise then you get garbage like the new SW Triology, where the writer didn't care about the lore.

But I assume you wouldn't care. I am actually convinced that you hated the MCU until now (if you have even seen any of it) and only She-Hulk has redeemed it for you.

Not to mention a sitcom is normally fixed recurring characters and is performed in front of a live audience to give the jokes and performances a live theater vibe. None of which she Hulk does. But yeah seems defending this show you need to resort to lame stuff like "it's suppose to be bad! Thats the genre durr"

[Garymorilix]

While the series is not top tier, my biggest problem with it is about the superpowered people.

It feels wrong for the MCU.
It's like we went from semi-grounded to comic book instantly with zero explanation.

Where the fuck did Mr Immortal and Titania get their powers and why is everyone so cool about it?

Back in the day the only confirmed supes were the ones that were introduced in movies.
Now we get Titania who is basically a hulk with no form and an Immortal guy that openly dies in front of people for centuries?
And these people were not contacted to assist during the whole Thanos thing?

Like usually Marvel tries to explain why certain beings/things couldn't help with a previous movie but here these super powered figures are just treated as regular folks.
But are we going to get random people with powers with zero explanation from now on?
It makes no sense how this isn't addressed at all.

[RobertoCarlos]

While the series is not top tier, my biggest problem with it is about the superpowered people.

It feels wrong for the MCU.
It's like we went from semi-grounded to comic book instantly with zero explanation.

Where the fuck did Mr Immortal and Titania get their powers and why is everyone so cool about it?

Back in the day the only confirmed supes were the ones that were introduced in movies.
Now we get Titania who is basically a hulk with no form and an Immortal guy that openly dies in front of people for centuries?
And these people were not contacted to assist during the whole Thanos thing?

Like usually Marvel tries to explain why certain beings/things couldn't help with a previous movie but here these super powered figures are just treated as regular folks.
But are we going to get random people with powers with zero explanation from now on?
It makes no sense how this isn't addressed at all.

Nah marvel don't need to keep explaining why every new character didn't help with Thanos. The excuse they came up with in eternals was omega lame. They didn't help because they didn't exist yet. Move on

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

I'd definitely say "inexperienced", instead. They made it clear she'd been an assistant DA and the case against GLK&H was her first case as the lead prosecutor. But she had a solid argument in that case and she'd have won if it hadn't been mistrialed out, as they said clearly. She got Blonsky's parole accepted, too. Of the cases we've seen, she's literally 2/2.

Plus, while she was not representing herself, she did come up with the solution to winning her copyright case.

I'm wondering where they think, in the show, that Jen was ever stated to be a real big up-and-comer genius super lawyer. Because I sure don't remember that ever being stated. She literally only got the job offer for GLK&H because she's a very visible face for the superhero law division, to the extent that Holliway requires her to be She-Hulk while in the office or representing the firm, other than when she's forced out of it like at the prison Blonsky's in. The explicit point is that he doesn't particularly care about her legal skills, he's primarily interested in her face.

I would say it's a little of both... but yeah...he's more interested in She-Hulk than Jen Walters. He is impressed by her legal skills... but he wouldn't have offered the job as the head of the Super-Hero department if it weren't for her being She-Hulk. There's perhaps an alternate universe where Titania doesn't bust into the courtroom and Jen actually wins that case and he offers her a different job as a junior associate or something along those lines.

[Endus]

Not to mention a sitcom is normally fixed recurring characters and is performed in front of a live audience to give the jokes and performances a live theater vibe.

Uhh, no.

First, there are plenty of core cast in She-Hulk.

Second, plenty of sitcoms don't get filmed in front of a live audience, especially these days. They're not even filmed in a studio where that would even be feasible. Plus, there's animated sitcoms, where that idea doesn't even make sense as a concept. Even the use of a laugh track isn't an expectation with sitcoms.

You're making things up that haven't ever been true. The "live studio audience" had a heyday, but was never a requirement or expectation from a sitcom; hell, the idea of sitcoms originated on radio, not television.