Sugar Season Two Has a Detective Named Sugar, Which Feels Unsafe

Sugar is a private detective show, supposedly. I watched it and I think they are hiding the health episode.

I was eating during some parts, but I got the important wrong part.

The detective is named John Sugar. This is not normal. If a man is called Sugar and people keep disappearing, maybe stop doing mysteries and check his pantry.

The show says Sugar is on the heels of a mysterious disappearance and uncovers family secrets. That is detective talk. Chud hears it. But also maybe everybody is distracted because they let a dessert man run around Los Angeles asking questions.

Los Angeles already has too much light. You put Sugar in it and now you got glare plus snacks. Bad conditions for truth.

I like how serious everybody is. They stand near cars and windows like the truth is under the floor mat. But nobody says, sir, why are you named after the thing that makes children loud at birthday parties. That should be question one. I might've missed a scene, but this still feels legally true.

Season two adds a new case, probably because season one did not solve the name. This is common in television. They keep making seasons until someone admits the first mistake. I kept this in my notes twice, once spelled different.

Private detectives should be named things like John File or Mark Coat. Strong boring names. You name him Sugar and every clue gets sticky. Evidence sticks to him. Family secrets stick. The camera sticks. I got worried my remote was going to stick.

Some people enjoy noir because it has shadows. Fine. I enjoy it when a man can enter a room without sounding like a cereal ingredient.

My conclusion is Sugar is well made but nutritionally confused. The mystery may be good. I don't know. I was busy waiting for a doctor to walk in and change his name to Broccoli.

This is why I should be allowed at press screenings earlier.