|
|
Post by waywyrd on Dec 10, 2021 19:27:21 GMT
Very not happy with the end of episode one, nor with the way they had Miranda acting with the professor. Miranda's not an idiot and I just do NOT see her character babbling on like a fool.
This show definitely doesn't have the feel of the original and I'm not sure where they're going with it, but I'll keep watching since I loved the original. Samantha is definitely missed.
I don't know what Kristin Davis did to her face - cheek fillers? - but it looks very odd.
|
|
|
|
Post by Critical on Dec 10, 2021 19:41:42 GMT
Very not happy with the end of episode one, nor with the way they had Miranda acting with the professor. Miranda's not an idiot and I just do NOT see her character babbling on like a fool. This show definitely doesn't have the feel of the original and I'm not sure where they're going with it, but I'll keep watching since I loved the original. Samantha is definitely missed. I don't know what Kristin Davis did to her face - cheek fillers? - but it looks very odd. I think it's fillers  Maybe some Botox too. She's giving Meg Ryan vibes from when MR had that bad work done.
I was reading a review of the first few episodes earlier and the writers talked about how NOT LIKE the characters these characters are behaving. When was Carrie ever prudish talking about sex? Then all of a sudden on that podcast, she's a Victorian grandmother? Please.
Miranda and the professor was just ridiculous. No, she's not an idiot. What was that about? It all feels like a very hamfisted way of bringing POC into the SATC world. I love Sara Ramirez. I hope they give them more to do.
Charlotte's always been emotional, but that was just stupid. One of the best Charlotte moments ever was in the first movie when Big tries to approach Carrie after he's dumped her at the wedding and Charlotte puts her hand up to block him and says, "NO!" Where's THAT Charlotte?
It's as if, all of a sudden, they don't know how to write for these women, just because they're older. They've turned these vibrant, intelligent SEXY women into over-emotional, babbling prudes. It's just weird.
Maybe that's what happens when you remove Samantha who, for me, was always the best character on the show. The boldest, the sexiest, definitely the funniest AND the one who most knew who she was and what she wanted. .
I also thought Carrie firing Samantha as her publicist was a weak reason for her to just blow off her friendships with all three of the women. IMO, it would have made more sense to kill her off.
The actor playing Brady was on Life in Pieces, a show I still miss. I was so excited when I saw he'd been cast. I knew he'd be perfect.
|
|
|
|
Post by waywyrd on Dec 11, 2021 15:27:49 GMT
I agree with everything you said, Critical . It feels like the writers don't even like these characters and didn't watch the original series. Carrie, who wrote a column about sex, is now all embarrassed to talk about it? Come on. Miranda, an educated woman who's spent 50+ years in a massive city with all colors and flavors of people - and dated Blair Underwood in the original series - now doesn't know how to talk to black folks. Give me a break. Charlotte's uncontrollable wailing was over the top, even for her character. UGH. |
|
|
|
Post by MFWalkoff on Dec 11, 2021 16:14:12 GMT
Agreed with the above. The first episodes treat the women as if the current environment was brand new to them, like they were stuck in a freezer since the last movie. The writers don't give the characters any credit for having been a PART of this environment all along. It shouldn't be catching them off-guard like it seems to... Carrie is a writer for gawd sakes, and Miranda is a lawyer who made the decision to go into public advocacy. Ironically, the one who leads the most sheltered life, Charlotte, is the one they've decided is most comfortable in today's world. It's like they've flipped the old show upside down. But, I still like seeing all the characters again so much, I'll keep watching no matter how much it makes me rant.  |
|
|
|
Post by Amy Lee on Dec 11, 2021 19:19:37 GMT
I don't know what Kristin Davis did to her face - cheek fillers? - but it looks very odd. I don't follow Kristin's career, so i don't know how active she's been outside of SATC. I genuinely think it's a combo of aging and not being well versed in getting work done. On a superficial note, Steve and Stanny looked the best. In fact, Steve looked hot. Like, damn type stuff. |
|
|
|
Post by cavendish on Dec 13, 2021 11:13:52 GMT
I was really disappointed in this. It had so much potential. And made such a mess out of it. Have they never heard of subtlety? The way everything was telegraphed in huge flashing neon letters. Most of the scenes I found cringeworthy . I honestly fast forwarded through a lot. They took these intelligent and sophisticated women of the world. And turned then into simpering.unbearably awkward klutzes who don’t know how to Manage ordinary social situations.
I think Critical got it right. These probably largely male writers or producers or whoever completely has no clue how to write about the strange, frightening, oddly embarrassing creatures from a tribe called middle aged and (if it’s even possible!). Older woman. The best they can come up with is that they are dragged out of a closet where they were locked once they reached 30-31 and no longer had anything to live for, since they no longer were young things whom men would want. The writers seem not to have been able to imagine women talking about their work rather than the ‘work’ they’ve had done or knowing about the world and are able to operate in it.
Why else subject them to ridicule?. Even Carrie who supposedly wanted a simple and comforting place for the funeral. Ends up with this super cool super sensitive lesbian couple who have this irreproachably pure elegant but nonetheless sterile seeming) room and Carrie herself. Is dressed with the utmost of taste — possibly preparing for the hunt for her next soul mate. This irony is delivered more subtlely and without making a spectacle of Carrie. — perhaps because Sarah j parker is a producer as well as a character.
I kept hoping it would get better but when Miranda brightlyasked the bartender for a hard drink I just gave up. It’s as if they’re really out to show womens lives as a series of inane missteps, and humiliations, and endless opportunities to make a fool of yourself. Which they are not.
|
|
|
|
Post by acookertv on Dec 13, 2021 11:51:43 GMT
I've watched the first two episodes. I can only see myself coming back for more if I'm in a lazy mood wanting to watch TV instead of read and cannot find anything else to watch. I'm more likely to watch an episode of Greys Anatomy than I am to continue with this, and that's saying something!
I think my biggest issue with it is that the writing morphed the characters away from who they were into who the actresses are. Charlotte is not too far off - but it comes across to me like Cynthia Nixon said she'd only come back if she could do certain things, and SJP thought that was a good idea and decided to follow suit. Character development matters, and they've forgotten who the characters are.
|
|
|
|
Post by cavendish on Dec 14, 2021 18:11:36 GMT
Good point about Cynthia Nixon. I can completely believe that she wanted a super pc character and was behind the whole exaggerated white privilege kowtowing. Maybe partly— depending on when the series was scripted and shot it reflected some of the oddities of the last New York election cycle. There was — and perhaps will be again — a huge wave of white liberal guilt combined with the whole”okay boomer/” gen Z rage fest plus COVID inversion that left politics here in a very peculiar posture.
I can believe that some of the distortions of tone and character stemmed from that
|
|
|
|
Post by MFWalkoff on Dec 16, 2021 16:06:07 GMT
This week's episode was more of the same, with a slight tilt toward the pacing of the old show in some scenes. The funniest and truest moment for me was Carrie finding a mysterious phone number in one of Big's suit pockets and calling it, not realizing that it was their own landline number. |
|
|
|
Post by momrek06 on Dec 16, 2021 16:54:12 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Amy Lee on Dec 16, 2021 18:23:37 GMT
Karen, you probably saw the second movie. It was an atrocious abomination of a film.
|
|
|
|
Post by momrek06 on Dec 16, 2021 19:51:02 GMT
Karen, you probably saw the second movie. It was an atrocious abomination of a film. Amy Lee, I believe I did. This was years ago and it was on TV not at a theater. I have no clue why I hung in there. It was like you said atrocious abomination of a film!!! |
|
|
|
Post by acookertv on Dec 16, 2021 20:18:55 GMT
I wasn't a fan of either movie. IMO, they did the show with focus on the characters and telling great stories. They did the movies with a focus on the hype and celebrating the superficial things people liked about the show, and the storytelling suffered. And as I said above, I think they are doing the reboot with a focus on the statements SJP and Cynthia Nixon insisted on making in order to do it - also at the expense of story telling.
|
|
|
|
Post by Kao on Dec 17, 2021 16:46:02 GMT
I have to admit to liking the third episode a lot better (especially Che's comic routine about coming out to her Puerto Rican/Irish parents and Carrie's confrontation with Big's ex-wife who rightfully snapped on her because wth, Carrie?) but Miranda.....gurl.  On the other hand, she spoke to her professor as a real live human being instead of othering her this week so tiny steps? I've been seeing a lot of comments about "wokeness" and "overly PC" in relation to this show and I'm just shaking my head because it's very transparent. 1. It makes sense for these women in NYC to have friends in different groups. It did not make sense for this group of friends to have NO non-white friends as they appeared in the original show. As native NYCers will tell you, if your social group is only one group it's because you prefer it that way! 2. A lot of it is codespeak for "I see people on one of my favorite shows that don't look like me/share my background, and this makes me feel extremely uncomfortable." |
|
|
|
Post by libgirl2 on Dec 17, 2021 17:11:14 GMT
Karen, you probably saw the second movie. It was an atrocious abomination of a film. I was fine with the first one, but yes, that second one sucked and I loved that show! |
|
|
|
Post by Amy Lee on Dec 17, 2021 17:14:22 GMT
Karen, you probably saw the second movie. It was an atrocious abomination of a film. I was fine with the first one, but yes, that second one sucked and I loved that show! Oh, I want my money back and I don't recall paying to see it, bad. 😂 |
|
|
|
Post by libgirl2 on Dec 17, 2021 17:51:34 GMT
I was fine with the first one, but yes, that second one sucked and I loved that show! Oh, I want my money back and I don't recall paying to see it, bad. 😂 Lol! I think I waited for the DVD to come out, though I did see the first one in the theater. |
|
|
|
Post by acookertv on Dec 17, 2021 18:37:30 GMT
I have to admit to liking the third episode a lot better (especially Che's comic routine about coming out to her Puerto Rican/Irish parents and Carrie's confrontation with Big's ex-wife who rightfully snapped on her because wth, Carrie?) but Miranda.....gurl. On the other hand, she spoke to her professor as a real live human being instead of othering her this week so tiny steps? I've been seeing a lot of comments about "wokeness" and "overly PC" in relation to this show and I'm just shaking my head because it's very transparent. 1. It makes sense for these women in NYC to have friends in different groups. It did not make sense for this group of friends to have NO non-white friends as they appeared in the original show. As native NYCers will tell you, if your social group is only one group it's because you prefer it that way! 2. A lot of it is codespeak for "I see people on one of my favorite shows that don't look like me/share my background, and this makes me feel extremely uncomfortable At the risk of being accused of being someone who can't handle people who don't look like me on tv, I'll respond to this. I think it makes perfect sense for them to have a diverse group of friends, and it should be shown that not every parent at the school or employee at their jobs looks the same. Fixing that is a great touch from the first series. But it's the way they are going about doing it that I think is overly PC. Casting a show set in NYC with a diverse cast is common sense. Begging for attention and applause for doing so with storylines that bring put the focus there is another thing. I think they could have effectively shown how the Trump years impacted Miranda and made her walk away from the corporate world, diversified the cast, and not written speeches into multiple scenes to make sure everyone knew what they were doing. To me, that goes from fixing a wrong to pandering. |
|
|
|
Post by libgirl2 on Dec 17, 2021 19:31:42 GMT
I have to admit to liking the third episode a lot better (especially Che's comic routine about coming out to her Puerto Rican/Irish parents and Carrie's confrontation with Big's ex-wife who rightfully snapped on her because wth, Carrie?) but Miranda.....gurl. On the other hand, she spoke to her professor as a real live human being instead of othering her this week so tiny steps? I've been seeing a lot of comments about "wokeness" and "overly PC" in relation to this show and I'm just shaking my head because it's very transparent. 1. It makes sense for these women in NYC to have friends in different groups. It did not make sense for this group of friends to have NO non-white friends as they appeared in the original show. As native NYCers will tell you, if your social group is only one group it's because you prefer it that way! 2. A lot of it is codespeak for "I see people on one of my favorite shows that don't look like me/share my background, and this makes me feel extremely uncomfortable At the risk of being accused of being someone who can't handle people who don't look like me on tv, I'll respond to this. I think it makes perfect sense for them to have a diverse group of friends, and it should be shown that not every parent at the school or employee at their jobs looks the same. Fixing that is a great touch from the first series. But it's the way they are going about doing it that I think is overly PC. Casting a show set in NYC with a diverse cast is common sense. Begging for attention and applause for doing so with storylines that bring put the focus there is another thing. I think they could have effectively shown how the Trump years impacted Miranda and made her walk away from the corporate world, diversified the cast, and not written speeches into multiple scenes to make sure everyone knew what they were doing. To me, that goes from fixing a wrong to pandering. I understand what you are saying. Doctor Who moved forward a few years back with a female Doctor. I was like okay, while the Doctor has always been a man, as a long time fan, I was going to give it a try, the actress was amazing in things I have seen her in. Doctor Who had already introduced LGBTQ characters in the previous seasons and we did have Madame Vastra the prehistoric lizard and her wife Jenny... but I felt the new writer pandered to the point of predictability. Instead of proving any kind of point, it grew quite weary at least for me. |
|
|
|
Post by acookertv on Dec 17, 2021 19:36:31 GMT
Exactly! As a woman, I love seeing women cast in roles they would not traditionally get, and doing things that show we can be strong, powerful, and complex. But if a script, for example, makes the president of the United States a woman and then spends large parts of the script talking about how it's a woman, or showing her conflicted between her kid's play and a national security emergency in ways they never show a man, I don't feel empowered - I feel demeaned.
|
|
|
|
Post by Critical on Dec 18, 2021 2:10:21 GMT
I have to admit to liking the third episode a lot better (especially Che's comic routine about coming out to her Puerto Rican/Irish parents and Carrie's confrontation with Big's ex-wife who rightfully snapped on her because wth, Carrie?) but Miranda.....gurl. On the other hand, she spoke to her professor as a real live human being instead of othering her this week so tiny steps? I've been seeing a lot of comments about "wokeness" and "overly PC" in relation to this show and I'm just shaking my head because it's very transparent. 1. It makes sense for these women in NYC to have friends in different groups. It did not make sense for this group of friends to have NO non-white friends as they appeared in the original show. As native NYCers will tell you, if your social group is only one group it's because you prefer it that way! 2. A lot of it is codespeak for "I see people on one of my favorite shows that don't look like me/share my background, and this makes me feel extremely uncomfortable." IMO, the inclusion of POC was necessary, but the way in which they've done it is SO ham-fisted. I read an article earlier and the writer, a woman of color, wondered why they couldn't just have a Black woman be a "normal" character....basically, a person who doesn't need to deliver a message of equality, like it's an ABC Afternoon Special or something.
I've been saying that they don't seem to know how to write for these women, but maybe this is just how they always wrote them. I can't decide. I haven't watched the original series in probably more than a decade, but I have a suspicion that it probably doesn't age well.
Of all the things that bother me, the way they've ruined Miranda bothers me the most. The way she reacted to Che was just so embarrassing. She's a grown a$$ woman, not a 12-year old girl. I haven't seen her in anything else in so long. Has Cynthia Nixon forgotten how to act?
I'm still watching, but in an "I can't turn away" way. They had SO much time to get this right and they just didn't. Episode 3 was better than the first two, but they have a long way to go before the show is actually good. I sort of wish they hadn't even bothered.
|
|
|
|
Post by Critical on Dec 18, 2021 4:22:47 GMT
Has anyone watched Adrienne, about the life, career and murder of actress/filmmaker, Adrienne Shelley? I was a fan, so I vivdly remember when she died. I saw Waitress in the theater and still cry when I watch it, not just because the movie makes me cry, but because she had so much talent and never got to see the success of that movie and then the Broadway musical. She never fulfilled all that promise. The doc was made by her husband and is pretty gutting to watch. Their daughter was only two when Adrienne was killed, so seeing her as a young woman is really hard. Still, I really recommend it. It's beautiful tribute to her spirit and her life. Also, if you haven't seen Waitress, watch it tonight! It's available on Hulu.
|
|
|
|
Post by acookertv on Dec 18, 2021 4:30:20 GMT
I have not watched it yet but it is definitely on my list to watch over the holiday break. I absolutely loved waitress and think I may watch it after Adrienne to pick myself back up.
|
|
|
|
Post by Critical on Dec 18, 2021 4:41:43 GMT
I have not watched it yet but it is definitely on my list to watch over the holiday break. I absolutely loved waitress and think I may watch it after Adrienne to pick myself back up. I'm going to watch it again too. I have it on DVD, but I rarely watch the DVDs I have. Streaming is easier. I had forgotten that Lulu (Jenna's daughter) was played by Adrienne's daughter Sophie in that last scene of the movie. Most of the cast members of Waitress are in the doc too. You can really see how much they loved and admired Adrienne. The stuff from Sundance (not six months after the died) was really emotional. |
|
|
|
Post by cavendish on Dec 18, 2021 7:22:35 GMT
It’s difficult to deal with content that has a political valence in most of the arts. One problem is that if you care enough about. Political content to make it a central issue you usually have a point of view that matters to you. So often the narrative is overwhelmed by the political idea and instead of a narrative becomes a platform for illustrating the abstract idea. This often ends up in a preachy and cliche acting out of a static moral. Narratives whether in dance opera or the novels needs to be deeply imagined and very specific telling of drama, an action whose shape is unique and unpredictable. At least good ones do. The characters can’t just represent points of view or ways of going right or wrong. They need to be handled with great tact.
Th first two episodes of the new sex and the city series fell into that trap. The story seemed full of cliches and telegraphed its points so loudly that I wanted to put my hands over my ears.
Also there’s this thing called the “authorial fallacy” where a work starts to manifest some feeling or perception that the author has rather than recreating and instilling it into characters or setting For example a novel about a characters. Boredom becomes itself boring. That also happened here when instead of telling a story about people who feel awkward or uncomfortable with POC, the story itself seems not to know how to handle these situations with the result that they seem not simply represented but actually embedded in the telling— so that in this instance rather than the story becoming boring it becomes very cringy and painf uncomfortable.
|
|
|
|
Post by libgirl2 on Dec 18, 2021 13:47:34 GMT
I have not watched it yet but it is definitely on my list to watch over the holiday break. I absolutely loved waitress and think I may watch it after Adrienne to pick myself back up. Waitress is a lovely movie! |
|
|
|
Post by MFWalkoff on Dec 18, 2021 19:06:51 GMT
Of all the things that bother me, the way they've ruined Miranda bothers me the most. The way she reacted to Che was just so embarrassing. She's a grown a$$ woman, not a 12-year old girl. I haven't seen her in anything else in so long. Has Cynthia Nixon forgotten how to act? She hasn't forgotten, but since SATC she's focused more of theater than film/tv. (She's won two Tony Awards). And then she took time off to run for governor in 2018. So maybe she could be a little rusty acting on film, but so much of film performance is also up to the director and editor. Her next big TV project is Julian Fellowes' The Gilded Age, which premieres on HBO in January. Trivia: Cynthia is only an Oscar away from going full EGOT. She has 2 Emmys, 2 Tonys, and a Grammy for a spoken word book. |
|
|
|
Post by libgirl2 on Dec 18, 2021 20:05:34 GMT
Of all the things that bother me, the way they've ruined Miranda bothers me the most. The way she reacted to Che was just so embarrassing. She's a grown a$$ woman, not a 12-year old girl. I haven't seen her in anything else in so long. Has Cynthia Nixon forgotten how to act? She hasn't forgotten, but since SATC she's focused more of theater than film/tv. (She's won two Tony Awards). And then she took time off to run for governor in 2018. So maybe she could be a little rusty acting on film, but so much of film performance is also up to the director and editor. Her next big TV project is Julian Fellowes' The Gilded Age, which premieres on HBO in January. Trivia: Cynthia is only an Oscar away from going full EGOT. She has 2 Emmys, 2 Tonys, and a Grammy for a spoken word book. I so want to see The Gilded Age! She is an awesome actress, I can see her getting an Oscar at some point. |
|
|
|
Post by Critical on Dec 19, 2021 5:19:03 GMT
Of all the things that bother me, the way they've ruined Miranda bothers me the most. The way she reacted to Che was just so embarrassing. She's a grown a$$ woman, not a 12-year old girl. I haven't seen her in anything else in so long. Has Cynthia Nixon forgotten how to act? She hasn't forgotten, but since SATC she's focused more of theater than film/tv. (She's won two Tony Awards). And then she took time off to run for governor in 2018. So maybe she could be a little rusty acting on film, but so much of film performance is also up to the director and editor. Her next big TV project is Julian Fellowes' The Gilded Age, which premieres on HBO in January. Trivia: Cynthia is only an Oscar away from going full EGOT. She has 2 Emmys, 2 Tonys, and a Grammy for a spoken word book. Maybe he's forgotten how to be Miranda. I admire her and was slightly joking about her not remembering how to act, but I find her - and most of this show - pretty cringey. It's just so much more over-the-top than Miranda ever was.
I watched part of the Colbert interview with Kristin and Cynthia and it sounds like episode 3 might have been Willie Garson's last. Apparently, there was a pretty big story for Stanford later in the season. I'm sad we'll never see it |
|
|
|
Post by acookertv on Dec 19, 2021 11:33:12 GMT
I remember when the movie Creed came out and people made such a big deal about the challenge of Stallone recreation g the role of Rocky after all these years. At the time I thought it was movie hype. But seeing the struggles with these characters, I understand now why it was a big deal with Creed. I don’t put all the blame on Cynthia Nixon. She’s playing a poorly written character and she did t write it. She may have pushed for some of the changes, but it’s not all on her.
|
|
Maybe some Botox too. She's giving Meg Ryan vibes from when MR had that bad work done. 
On the other hand, she spoke to her professor as a real live human being instead of othering her this week so tiny steps?
