Sex and the City: And Just Like That

[Deleted User]

What is it going to be called - "Grannies in the hood"? , "Golden Girls on the Upper East Side"?

Mr. Big will now be Mr. Viagra?

https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-55616551

Shelga

Like many women, I loved the show. The movies were dire, especially the second one, it was an embarrassment to women everywhere.

Fully expect this to be awful, especially with no Samantha, who was the best character by far. I applaud Kim Cattrall for knowing when enough is enough. If they kill her off I’ll be mad, but I don’t know how else they’re going to explain her absence.

JP Liz V1

Without Samantha who really was the sex in the city I can't see it working, Carrie became very annoying

[Deleted User]

JP Liz V1 wrote: »

Without Samantha who really was the sex in the city I can't see it working, Carrie became very annoying

It was a very close call between her and the ginger pox

S.M.B.

glasso wrote: »

What is it going to be called - "Grannies in the hood"? , "Golden Girls on the Upper East Side"?

And Just Like That?

Be right back

Shelga wrote: »

Like many women, I loved the show. The movies were dire, especially the second one, it was an embarrassment to women everywhere.

Fully expect this to be awful, especially with no Samantha, who was the best character by far. I applaud Kim Cattrall for knowing when enough is enough. If they kill her off I’ll be mad, but I don’t know how else they’re going to explain her absence.

Didn't the character Samantha have breast cancer? She was definitely the best one in it.

johnmck

Good sweet baby...
A new generation of women who think its alright to ride the cock carousel well into their 30s and then freak out when there's no "good" men left for them to settle down with

[Deleted User]

Be right back wrote: »

Didn't the character Samantha have breast cancer? She was definitely the best one in it.

Kim Cattrall and SJP can't stand the sight of each other - well documented and admitted by both parties.

Cattrall is also 9 or 10 years older than the rest of them from a wiki check.

Probably has something to do with her not being in it also.

eviltwin

johnmck wrote: »

Good sweet baby...
A new generation of women who think its alright to ride the cock carousel well into their 30s and then freak out when there's no "good" men left for them to settle down with

Ah look the obligatory man who can’t get laid has arrived.

I’m not sure that a new series will work. It was very of its time and even watching old episodes it seems very dated. The fun of the show for me was when they were all single, it lost its edge once they settled down. And yes, without Samantha it will be a lesser show.

[Deleted User]

pinkypinky

Totally agree with Eviltwin.

This, like so many reboot ideas, should never have left the drawing board.

rightmove

eviltwin wrote: »

Ah look the obligatory man who can’t get laid has arrived.

johnmck - [if] this is an offer you CAN refuse, ..birds of a feather an all

johnmck

eviltwin wrote: »

Ah look the obligatory man who can’t get laid has arrived.

I’m not sure that a new series will work. It was very of its time and even watching old episodes it seems very dated. The fun of the show for me was when they were all single, it lost its edge once they settled down. And yes, without Samantha it will be a lesser show.

I get laid plenty and often, thank you very much darling

EltonJohn69

They should call it “Skunks in the city”

jaxxx

johnmck wrote: »

I get laid plenty and often, thank you very much darling

Love dolls don't count.

beerguts

johnmck wrote: »

I get laid plenty and often, thank you very much darling

She struck a nerve didn't she.

Hangdogroad

JP Liz V1 wrote: »

Without Samantha who really was the sex in the city I can't see it working, Carrie became very annoying

She was always annoying.

johnmck

beerguts wrote: »

She struck a nerve didn't she.

She hit my S2-S4 nerve root

johnmck

jaxxx wrote: »

Love dolls don't count.

Either do strapons

Zardoz

Half of the budget will be spent on makeup, they will need more foundation than the Empire State Building.

Sleepy

In the hands of a good writer, there could be an interesting way to do this: Sex and the City was very much set in the pre-crash era and the characters always lived way outside the means of any normal person (and only one of them had a real job).

The financial crash and rise of social media would have utterly crushed the career prospects of Carrie and Samantha, as a lawyer Miranda would probably still be doing okay and Charlotte (and later Carrrie)'s "career path" of marrying rich men is always a rather precarious one so there could be a good story arc for this in showing these pinnacles of grotesque consumerism (probably utterly failing to) cope with life on realistic income levels.

I can't see them ever doing this, of course and have no doubt that the vulgarity will only be escalated as the cast and producers will be offered lucrative product placement deals by "prestige" brands who peddle their unethically produced fast fashion to the gullible simpletons who mistake the series for a lifestyle guide rather than the rather frivolous comedy it was.

iguana

Sleepy wrote: »

In the hands of a good writer, there could be an interesting way to do this: Sex and the City was very much set in the pre-crash era and the characters always lived way outside the means of any normal person (and only one of them had a real job).

The financial crash and rise of social media would have utterly crushed the career prospects of Carrie and Samantha, as a lawyer Miranda would probably still be doing okay and Charlotte (and later Carrrie)'s "career path" of marrying rich men is always a rather precarious one so there could be a good story arc for this in showing these pinnacles of grotesque consumerism (probably utterly failing to) cope with life on realistic income levels.

When I first read about the second movie, I read this was the story route they'd be taking. Mr Big was supposed to have been hit hard by the recession and he and Carrie would be scaling back. As would some of the others to certain degrees. I was pretty interested to see that but ended up watching them going to the middle east for free on some sort of ultra-first class flight and staying in a hotel where they were each given massive suites and 24 hour personal servants.

Sleepy

That was quite the u-turn. Always loved Mark Kermode's evisceration of the second film:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uHeQeHstrsc

Shelga

Sleepy wrote: »

That was quite the u-turn. Always loved Mark Kermode's evisceration of the second film:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uHeQeHstrsc

Haha, I still watch that clip when I want a laugh sometimes :pac:

What annoys me (from listening to that podcast Origins, where they interviewed most of the cast members apart from Kim Cattrall) is that SJP et al seem to think we're crying out for more stories about them. I'm really not, and I was a huge fan of the show.

They forfeited the right to enthusiasm about any other original SATC content with those two godawful movies. There's no reason to think this show is going to be anything other than brutal, and further taint the legacy of the series.

Maybe there are some people who are constantly ask them when they are making more stuff, but anyone I know who enjoyed the show HATED the movies. The materialism and vapid selfishness on display in the second one in particular just makes me cringe to this day. Mark Kermode says it better and more hilariously than I ever could!

Monokne

I thought the first movie was superfluous but ok. The second was horrific though.

iguana

I liked how the second movie started with the wedding of the two recurring gay characters from the series. Even though both those men had utter disdain for each other in the series. But come the movie it’s time for a big gay wedding with a big Liza Minnelli number, so they just shove them both together as them both being gay is enough!

Agent Coulson

John Corbett has signed on to return as Aidan.

qwerty13

Shelga wrote: »

Haha, I still watch that clip when I want a laugh sometimes :pac:

What annoys me (from listening to that podcast Origins, where they interviewed most of the cast members apart from Kim Cattrall) is that SJP et al seem to think we're crying out for more stories about them. I'm really not, and I was a huge fan of the show.

They forfeited the right to enthusiasm about any other original SATC content with those two godawful movies. There's no reason to think this show is going to be anything other than brutal, and further taint the legacy of the series.

Maybe there are some people who are constantly ask them when they are making more stuff, but anyone I know who enjoyed the show HATED the movies. The materialism and vapid selfishness on display in the second one in particular just makes me cringe to this day. Mark Kermode says it better and more hilariously than I ever could!

To be fair, the tv show had well gone down the route of materialism and vapid selfishness by the end! I used to love it, it actually had something to say when it started out. Sure, they were all good time girls, but it was fun. However, their worship of money, ridiculous clothes, and grasping for a lifestyle funded by rich guys just became so tedious by the end.

I went to see the first film, and I felt that it had multiplied by 10 how entitled they all were by the end of the tv show. I didn’t watch the second film, and even reruns of the tv show have lost any appeal to me.

Hamachi

qwerty13 wrote: »

To be fair, the tv show had well gone down the route of materialism and vapid selfishness by the end! I used to love it, it actually had something to say when it started out. Sure, they were all good time girls, but it was fun. However, their worship of money, ridiculous clothes, and grasping for a lifestyle funded by rich guys just became so tedious by the end.

I went to see the first film, and I felt that it had multiplied by 10 how entitled they all were by the end of the tv show. I didn’t watch the second film, and even reruns of the tv show have lost any appeal to me.

I’m a guy who was a student at the time the TV series aired. I saw much of it because I had female housemates throughout college. I probably shouldn’t admit this, but I thought it was fairly entertaining. Vapid and materialistic for sure, but many of the scenarios were pretty funny. Kim Cattrall also had natural comic timing. It was interesting to get an insight into the lives of single people in their 30s in large metropolitan cities.

My wife recently made me watch the second movie on Netflix. I couldn’t get over how much the caliber of the plot lines had deteriorated. Kim Cattrall’s character had become a total caricature of herself. The red haired lady, who was sarcastic and an intellectually sharp lawyer, was transformed into a ditzy bimbo. Sarah Jessica Parker’s character was even more annoying than I remembered from the original run.

The movie totally undermined the legacy of a series that was punctuated by some witty dialogue and somewhat captured the zeitgeist of the early years of the new millennium. They should just leave well enough alone, realizing that society has moved on and theirs is a story that no longer needs to be told.

JP Liz V1

Well did not expect that death

Be right back

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118298941#Comment_118298941

Nor did I. Good character in it.