Is it impossible to like Sex and the City now?

Burnouts3s3

New member
Jan 20, 2012
746
0
0
So, I decided to watch "Sex and the City" or at the very least, watch the first season, a smattering of episodes in-between and the two movies, all of my own free will. I don't necessarily like the franchise, not because of the displays of femininity but because most of the time, major events are glossed over due to Carrie's narration (I think the 30-minute format really hurts the show).

But, it seems to me that this franchise has aged badly (please don't make fun of the cast. It's not about them, I think they're all still very beautiful). No, I'm talking about how this show handled (or rather mishandled) the changing cultural scene of New York.

The show began in 1998, when the economy was still good and it was refreshing to see women in positions of power being able to talk openly about sex. Fast forward to season 5 when the World Trade Centers fell, the series took out a couple of shots of the towers and had the girls flirt with returning sailors.

But, by the time the movies came out, the scene in New York had changed entirely. With the stock market crash and government bail-out, it seemed that Carrie, Charlotte, Samantha and Miranda looked less like women in power and more like the 1 percent the Occupy movement was so ready to condemn. (I know lip service is paid to the fact that Carrie, a writer, is the poorest of the group, but that also doesn't work since due to the size of her apartment, she's a writer who's rather well off and could easily pay her rent by selling one of her many shoes).

That and coupled with the rather crass sense of humor (Samantha's dog humping pillows, Miranda's pubic hair, Charlotte drinking water from Mexico and pooping her pants, and a very odd scene of Liza Minnelli covering a Beyonce song), is it possible that the show's failure to show women dealing with the ever changing world that it lost favor with its audience.

(To be fair, I think the spin-off series, the Carrie Diaries, which shows a teenage Carrie in High School, works better because of a longer format, and the matching of the shallow, consumcer-centric scene of being a teenager and the consumer-centric scene of living in the 80's.)

Did we outgrow Sex and the City?
 

Ubiquitous Duck

New member
Jan 16, 2014
472
0
0
I don't really know if you will find the right sort of audience here for a Sex and the City programme mass-review.

NOT TO STEREOTYPE US, but it's a long-shot!
 

TheIceQueen

New member
Sep 15, 2013
420
0
0
Ubiquitous Duck said:
I don't really know if you will find the right sort of audience here for a Sex and the City programme mass-review.

NOT TO STEREOTYPE US, but it's a long-shot!
Going to agree with Mr. Duck here. I can't really see many fans of SatC in here. I myself am not a fan either.
 

Genocidicles

New member
Sep 13, 2012
1,747
0
0
Was it ever possible to like Sex and the City?

It seems like the female equivalent of shit like 'Two and a Half Men'.
 

Johnny Novgorod

Bebop Man
Legacy
Apr 10, 2020
17,135
1,264
118
Country
Argentina
Hey I kinda liked the show. I thought it was porn at first (I was 10 when it came out!) but kept watching despite being proved otherwise (somewhat) because I liked the dynamism between each matching pair of characters, and the dialogue was usually funny, and the show always had something interesting or relevant for them to do. At least I got the feeling characters drove the action rather than the other way around.

[HEADING=3]Now about those fucking movies[/HEADING]


I haven't seen the first movie, but I saw the second and I loathed it. It's bile, airheaded, materialistic garbage probably spawned out of the cast and crew wanting another go at a reunion. It has nothing interesting for the characters to say or do, and flies them across the world for no better reason than dressing them up in quasi Arabian garb and striking poses in the desert. The social commentary and cultural clash is silly, juvenile, mishandled and pointless.

The whole premise is eye-rolling: the four characters are flown on a private jet, with a private bar in it, to Abu Dhabi, where they get a private limo (each!), driven to four private $22,000-a-night suites with their own private bar (they drink a LOT in the movie), which they access through their private elevator, accompanied by their four private manservants who do the cooking and the shopping for them. They sit out most of the movie lounging around the hotel, braving outside just a couple of times to an incredibly fake bazaar, by the way.

And the character arcs, wow. Miranda doesn't get any. She's a support character. Samantha's plot thread starts off with her fearing old age, then moves on to fear of menopause, then that gets wrapped up 2 scenes later and that's that. Charlotte fears her hubby's wandering eye and they way her character gets wrapped up is by getting drunk and stop giving two fucks about it. Wasn't that easy. And then Carrie. My god. Nothing of what she does changes her or helps restore balance to her life. Mr. Big just saves the day at the end by being understanding. Boom, the end. What a fucking joke.

Anyway, the series: I liked it because first paragraph. Never really noticed or cared for a particular switch in its tone or content because of the 2001 attack. I dunno, did Woody Allen movies change all that much after the attack? I get your point, it just didn't crop up as much in the show. Maybe I was too outraged by the movies to care.
 

Ratty

New member
Jan 21, 2014
848
0
0
I liked it when I saw it as a young teen OP, but I can't stand it now. Basically for the reasons you discussed. When you get past the then-novel premise the show could be renamed "Rich People Problems: The series."

To say nothing of how hard they flushed the character development of the entire series in the first movie (never watched any after that) so they could make lazy drama.
 

Thaluikhain

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 4, 2020
14,982
794
118
Eh, back in the day it was interesting because it was about sex, I guess. Nowdays, lots of shows are, so not so much.

But, yeah, they always were rather well off and didn't seem to do any work, and that can be a bit of a problem nowdays. Still lots of shows based around that premise, though.
 

Ubiquitous Duck

New member
Jan 16, 2014
472
0
0
GrinningCat said:
Ubiquitous Duck said:
I don't really know if you will find the right sort of audience here for a Sex and the City programme mass-review.

NOT TO STEREOTYPE US, but it's a long-shot!
Going to agree with Mr. Duck here. I can't really see many fans of SatC in here. I myself am not a fan either.
If I could 'like' posts, I would've done that instead.

But I just liked the addressing of me as 'Mr. Duck'. Made me lol for some reason.

That's it. That's my post. You're welcome.
 

bartholen_v1legacy

A dyslexic man walks into a bra.
Jan 24, 2009
3,056
0
0
Johnny Novgorod said:
Hear hear! Here's 10 minutes of more reasons why the movies represent everything wrong with the western glamour culture
OT:
Andrew Siribohdi said:
Did we outgrow Sex and the City?
I haven't seen the series, but I have seen the movies and have a general understanding of what the show is like. I more think the world outgrew Sex and the City and its worldview. Especially during times of climate change and after the stock market crash (whose repercussions have gone on for so long that I'm almost accepting it as the status quo now), the blatant glamorization of conspicuous consumption really sticks out more than it did in the late 90s. The happy-go-lucky feeling which I've understood permeated the show just doesn't fit in a post-9-11-stock market crash-Katrina-Arab Spring-climate change world. The events of the Arab Spring cast especially the second movie (where they go to Abu Dhabi) in a dubious light.

Sex and the City 2 is one of the most morally bankrupt, philosophically repugnant and vile movies ever created. When I saw a little of it a second time, I genuinely thought it had to be a joke. Its central message is that not having thousands of dollars to spend at your leisure is terrible, and no matter how hard your problems are (as if these immoral uncanney-valley-level reachingly surgeried husks could have any), buying expensive things always makes it better. Believe it or not, Carrie's culminating moment at the end is actually the fact that her husband (who must be running a drug cartel judging by the amount of wealth he has) buys her a diamond ring, like she asked him to at the beginning.

Sure there's lots more to talk about, like how both men and women are depicted in the worst light possible, shameless objectification of both sexes, the incredibly dubious cultural, racial and class politics and lack of any kind of plot, character development or a single likable character, but to go into it full-on would require a series of novels.
 

Artina89

New member
Oct 27, 2008
3,624
0
0
I caught a couple of episodes here and there when I was a teenager and it was at the height of its popularity and I must say I really didn't see the appeal then, so I wouldn't see the appeal now I am afraid, but what I have found is that a lot of TV shows tend to reflect the period that they were made in, so I wouldn't be surprised if it has aged fairly badly.
 

sanquin

New member
Jun 8, 2011
1,837
0
0
Even when it had just come out I saw it as a bunch of rich women being stereotypical rich asshole that 'have it oh so difficult'. Apparently that part of the show has only gotten worse. It's like they wanted to copy 'reality' shows like jersey shore or something.
 

mechalynx

Führer of the Sausage People
Mar 23, 2008
410
0
0
I remember actually liking the series up until the last season when Baryshnikov (can't remember chis character's name, can't be arsed to look it up) was added to the show. Now, Carrie always struck me as someone too dependent on men all the while she was supposed to be this shining beacon of female independence; that relationship finally ruined her and Big for me. But then she always was the weakest link. Heck every other characters, including the token fabulously gay pal, seemed deeper and more mature. Makes me wonder what Candance Bushnell was trying to say with Carrie as she's supposed to be the author's avatar.

To answer your question - it is, if you don't think too hard about it and avoid the movies.
 

BloatedGuppy

New member
Feb 3, 2010
9,572
0
0
Johnny Novgorod said:
Hey I kinda liked the show. I thought it was porn at first (I was 10 when it came out!) but kept watching despite being proved otherwise (somewhat) because I liked the dynamism between each matching pair of characters, and the dialogue was usually funny, and the show always had something interesting or relevant for them to do. At least I got the feeling characters drove the action rather than the other way around.

[HEADING=3]Now about those fucking movies[/HEADING]


I haven't seen the first movie, but I saw the second and I loathed it. It's bile, airheaded, materialistic garbage probably spawned out of the cast and crew wanting another go at a reunion. It has nothing interesting for the characters to say or do, and flies them across the world for no better reason than dressing them up in quasi Arabian garb and striking poses in the desert. The social commentary and cultural clash is silly, juvenile, mishandled and pointless.

The whole premise is eye-rolling: the four characters are flown on a private jet, with a private bar in it, to Abu Dhabi, where they get a private limo (each!), driven to four private $22,000-a-night suites with their own private bar (they drink a LOT in the movie), which they access through their private elevator, accompanied by their four private manservants who do the cooking and the shopping for them. They sit out most of the movie lounging around the hotel, braving outside just a couple of times to an incredibly fake bazaar, by the way.

And the character arcs, wow. Miranda doesn't get any. She's a support character. Samantha's plot thread starts off with her fearing old age, then moves on to fear of menopause, then that gets wrapped up 2 scenes later and that's that. Charlotte fears her hubby's wandering eye and they way her character gets wrapped up is by getting drunk and stop giving two fucks about it. Wasn't that easy. And then Carrie. My god. Nothing of what she does changes her or helps restore balance to her life. Mr. Big just saves the day at the end by being understanding. Boom, the end. What a fucking joke.

Anyway, the series: I liked it because first paragraph. Never really noticed or cared for a particular switch in its tone or content because of the 2001 attack. I dunno, did Woody Allen movies change all that much after the attack? I get your point, it just didn't crop up as much in the show. Maybe I was too outraged by the movies to care.
This about sums it up. The show was an above average relationship dramedy, made unique with its strong focus on a female POV. It's slightly aged out of relevance now due to the economic downturn, but you can catch a not dissimilar show on HBO called "Girls", with less sympathetic female characters leading only slightly less fabulous lives.

The movies, as Novgorod expresses, are utter trash, and I like to pretend they don't exist.
 

rbstewart7263

New member
Nov 2, 2010
1,246
0
0
Andrew Siribohdi said:
So, I decided to watch "Sex and the City" or at the very least, watch the first season, a smattering of episodes in-between and the two movies, all of my own free will. I don't necessarily like the franchise, not because of the displays of femininity but because most of the time, major events are glossed over due to Carrie's narration (I think the 30-minute format really hurts the show).

But, it seems to me that this franchise has aged badly (please don't make fun of the cast. It's not about them, I think they're all still very beautiful). No, I'm talking about how this show handled (or rather mishandled) the changing cultural scene of New York.

The show began in 1998, when the economy was still good and it was refreshing to see women in positions of power being able to talk openly about sex. Fast forward to season 5 when the World Trade Centers fell, the series took out a couple of shots of the towers and had the girls flirt with returning sailors.

But, by the time the movies came out, the scene in New York had changed entirely. With the stock market crash and government bail-out, it seemed that Carrie, Charlotte, Samantha and Miranda looked less like women in power and more like the 1 percent the Occupy movement was so ready to condemn. (I know lip service is paid to the fact that Carrie, a writer, is the poorest of the group, but that also doesn't work since due to the size of her apartment, she's a writer who's rather well off and could easily pay her rent by selling one of her many shoes).

That and coupled with the rather crass sense of humor (Samantha's dog humping pillows, Miranda's pubic hair, Charlotte drinking water from Mexico and pooping her pants, and a very odd scene of Liza Minnelli covering a Beyonce song), is it possible that the show's failure to show women dealing with the ever changing world that it lost favor with its audience.

(To be fair, I think the spin-off series, the Carrie Diaries, which shows a teenage Carrie in High School, works better because of a longer format, and the matching of the shallow, consumcer-centric scene of being a teenager and the consumer-centric scene of living in the 80's.)

Did we outgrow Sex and the City?
Never a big fan of the show but its world did seem quite separate from the rest of reality. It felt like one of those bogus shows where the characters are seemingly struggling even though they seem to work less and have more than an ideal amount of free time to do as they please. shrug
 

HoneyVision

New member
Jan 4, 2013
310
0
0
Well we can all sit here and ***** about how useless ALL TV shows are these days because, let's face it, Sex and the City is FAR from being the worst offender. At least it caters to its intended audience well and that's admirable enough I suppose.

The only problem I have with SATC is how badly it trivializes writing and journalism. In the TV series, Carrie just suddenly sits down whenever she feels like it and just starts 'typing' and all of a sudden she has a ready-to-go newspaper column article. AS IF writing is that straight forward, even for a small column. The amount of proof-reading, editing, thinking and planning involved is immense and straining, and this silly ***** just sits down and does it in fuck all time.

*EYE ROLL* *TOOTH SUCK*
 

Sean Hollyman

New member
Jun 24, 2011
5,175
0
0
Well back before I had internet in my house, that show was the only thing that uh... kept me going if you get what I mean.
 

sXeth

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 3, 2020
2,636
118
68
I've only ever wandered past the show channel flicking or waiting for the next show to come on, but I'd wager a guess that Reality TV (more specifically the "spoiled rich kid" variants, really took the wind out of its sails.

That whole plastic "first-world problems" lifestyle is a mildly humorous spectacle until you're exposed to all the gibbering monkeys who actually act like that in the real world.


The "struggling" but not that you'd know by their wardrobe/living conditions is an ongoing trope in various television, called "Friends Rent Control" over on tvtropes last I checked. Stemming from that show having "struggling" to outright unemployed people and street performers (or whatever Phoebe was) having their own fairly luxurious downtown new york apartments.
 

lee1287

New member
Apr 7, 2009
1,495
0
0
i Love SATC, the second film was terrible but the first was okay, though the series is much, much better.

The show wasn't about Money though, it barely paid service to money bar the Carrie and Aidan apartment thing, you Knew they were all well off because of the jobs (Lawyer, Art Curator/ trophy wife, PR and successful writer) and by how much they bloody brought.

You can't outgrow SATC, Even watching it back now it's still a good watch.


(Don't hate me) Aha