Discussions
What is so special about Sex and the city?
Posted by dosox • 9/28/08 • Subscribe to this Discussion [RSS] • Report This Topic
Topics: sex
I've been hearing it for a long time. What is so special about Sex and the city?
User Comments
-
Not a thing that I could ever come up with. -
It was a funny, well written & well acted show.
Some people like it some don't, you know ... just like every other TV show. -
It's a show that I could only stand to watch for a minute.
That makes it special. -
It's hot to have people watch you. -
I see.. I'm blind when it comes to tv shows.
I get well wit news, sports n music channels -
My wife was addicted to that show. I never got what the big fascination was. -
U gotta tell ur wife Relax honey.. hehe :-)
-
I have NO idea. The show gives me a major headache. I don't find the show very realistic. A guy I know is addicted to the show, and he made my friends and I sit down and watch the entire second season.
It was torture.-
If that happened to me I'd be saying "A guy I knew is addicted to the show". Also you're completely right about it not being realistic. Friends, A show where six 30-somethings who seemed to spend more time drinking coffee than working was more realistic than this show.
-
-
I really don't understand why people liked the show or why a movie was even made.
One thing that bothered me was that the women were ummmmmmm, Whats the word? Slutty. But not in a good way. They had the same sex appeal as a group of 60 year old ladies in Atlantic City trolling for young beefcakes to waste their money on.
I hate these type of women in real life and I really really really really don't understand why any man my age would find them hot.-
I don't either, I'm a female but my life consists of anything BUT being able to shop around for designer shoes, sip expensive coffees, and be involved in pointless realtionships (sorry, my opinion)
Now if they were teenagers, it might be believable, I have never seen women in their middle ages act like that, not on my block. -
Actually... I spend a lot of time sipping coffee in coffee shops, hanging out with friends, going out on the town, and hitting up all sorts of stores, thrift to more expensive, depending on my finances... and writing... and "wasting" time in "pointless relationships
".
SATC is NOT a perfect show... and there are many arguments to made against it, but I thouroughly enjoyed every episode, whether I agreed with everything they said or not. -
I've seen plenty of people act like this in the entertainment buisness. Not so much on the actors/athletes parts, They've actually been nice, humble and down to earth except for a couple big egos. The ones who are the worst are people involved in production and the talents posse (Family, Girlfriends, Friends). Their lives are made up of doing nothing but thinking they can push people around as they flaunt about how much money they spent, who they've met and where they've been.
It's kinda sad though because in the end without these "things" these people are really disconnected from the real world.
Let's just put it like this, Without the shoes, clothes, drugs, drinks, money and so on these Sex in the City women's characters would be an empty shell. The only way they could make a good movie out of an empty shell is if they threw them into some Simple Life reality tv show situation. Other than that they would be of no use when it comes to entertainment. -
-
-
Well, I love SATC and sorry to link drop but I made a review about what I think about this movie here: I entitled it Beyond the Glamor, It's all Women. earthlyexplorations.blogspot.com/2008/05/satc-movie-beyond-glamour-its-all-...-
I'm gonna need to have to read that then.
Ok now that I read that I sorta get it. It seems like the appeal is that it's pretty much a womens fashion/lifestyle/drama channel wrapped up in a tv show for you?
Meh, I still don't get it, Guess I never will understand why people make 20 year old brats and their +20 counterparts into idols when their heads are so inflated with glitter and egos. -
It's just a comedy show, like I don't get Family Guy but I'm guessing lots of people do and enjoy it ... but I wouldn't go on about how lame it was or have such angry feelings about it ... lol, that's kinda odd!
But some of the strong reactions here to a TV show is kinda funny! -
agreed... with you drowseymonkey... as far as TV goes, and COMEDY, SATC was quite good. It brought up a lot of issues about sexism that has never been thrown out to the mainstream population. twenty years from now we'll look back at the show itself and be astounded at how sexist it was... we already are... but we musn't forget that the idea of Strong, Intelligent, FUNNY Female sexuality is still not entirely appreciated, or allowed, by mainstream society. They broke a lot of ground in that show... imo. Very willing to point out its flaws, but not interested in people who dismiss it as stupid and shallow.
-
agreed freeatlast, I find it funny how people equate the characters to children, lol. Ah well, says more about them than the show, as you say. The show seems to bring out such anger with those who didn't like it, which I find humourous.
-
Why not have a feeling about something though? I've run into plenty of people who don't like Family Guy and it's as simple as "It's just a collection of dumb cultural, retro and in-joke refrences, It's nothing too complex and it shouldn't be taken as that."
The thing that bothers me is when people take shows like Sex in the City like as if it were some unique exploration into what it's like to be four women in the city. It's not. It's like a Garfield comic, A dozen jokes repeated every month with different frames.
Friends on the other hand was in every way a more groundbreaking show than Sex in the City, It wasn't limited to just three women crying about how their jobs or relationships. You also had three men crying about their jobs and/or relationships. -
DM: definitely... and I don't think this is the place to start picking a fight about latent sexism... though it is always a temptation for me.
-
@zombie - That's rich. Friends was more groundbreaking? LOL...okay.
Anyway, you obviously didn't watch the show so how can you really give input? It would be like me trying to say ER sucked. I've never seen it but it's very popular and won lots of awards ... I saw about 15 minutes of it and thought it was a bore. But that doesn't mean it wasn't a very entertaining show for many.
@freeatlast - I agree, and I've just decided you rock, lol. -
freeatlast, The only thing that it had going for it was that it had the freedom to be as raunchy as it wanted to be. If it was a soap opera with the same topics it wouldn't of gotten as much attention as it did in the mainstream.
-
The intent of SATC was not to go too far into the Male reaction to relationships. It was groundbreaking in that it brought to light many sexual questions and discussions and practices that few people were able, willing or quite ready to talk about. Sure, there is sexism in SATC, but it was groundbreaking, in that it attempted to dig deeper into the evolution of 4 women... not just keep passing the same Friend's cast around between everyone... which I found to be a little incestious.
-
What's wrong with "raunchy"? that is code for sex and sexuality being a dirty thing in my formerly conservative world. Sex and sexuality is NOT dirty. And it was not any more soap-operatic than Any other sitcom or drama on TV. It was much more comedy than drama, btw. It allowed women to discuss, own, and LAUGH at their sexuality... and definitely attempted to encourage women to be sexual without shame... or fear of being called "raunchy".
-
DM, While I may of not seen the complete boxset like some of you may of I still made the attempt to watch it multiple times. The point I gave up was a couple years in when they were in Atlantic City.
I normally find HBO and Showtime to have the very best when it comes to making shows. If it weren't for them Six Feet Under, Curb Your Enthusiasm, The Wire, Weeds, Oz, Sopranos, Entourage, Dexter and my favorite Penn & Teller's Bullshit would of never met the day of light with the same quality. I really can't think of any show that they have aired in the last 10 years that I didn't like except for Sex in the City.
I'm sorry but it isn't anything special. It's dirty yes but I still find that very cheap and not on the level of ANY of the shows I listed above. -
SATC preceded all the shows you listed above. And they quit before it got absolutely pathetic... though any series that goes over 4 or 5 seasons is pathetic imo.
And the only show that is written by and about women. Maybe someday they'll have a show written and DIRECTED by and about women.... maybe they do now... but didn't before. Plenty of flaws with it, but though I like many of the shows you mentioned, they have as many flaws, if not more, than SATC... which once again... Preceded them. They didn't exactly make SATC for the male audience, much as they didn't exactly make many of the shows you listed for a mainly female audience.
The only show I've been able to watch all the way through other than SATC, was SFU.... which is far superior to any other show, imo. -
@ zombie - Well, first ... your not their demographic.
And second ... LOL@dirty. What are you an 80 year old man?
Sopranos was "clean" ???? I liked that show too but it was horribly violent and extremely sexist. But I guess you're more comfortable with all those old sexist stereotypes. You don't mind watching all that violence toward women. Got it. Carry on. -
h*ll yeah DM: I get SOOOO tired of hearing people complain about dirty sex on tv, who have no problem with blood and guts series or people humiliating themselves on reality tv.
-
Freeatlast - Damn, Now my view on this is making me sound like a prude, Which isn't the case. I don't know, I just don't think it deserves as much acclaim as it got. Sex is the easiest thing to sell, Even to the point that you don't need to have the youngest actresses being in said roles. I guess maybe that is one thing they did do right.
Meh, I'll just settle back to not liking this show rather than hating it. Anyway, Good talk.
-
It had the word "sex" in the title, but it wasn't a porn show, LOL!!!
Anyway, it's all in reruns now...gone to that show heaven in syndication. -
"You don't mind watching all that violence toward women. Got it. Carry on"
Hey now, Men don't watch violence against women. Well I don't anyway, I always turn the channel right away anytime I pass by Lifetime with their "Woman gets raped and brings the suspect to justice" movies.
Anyway, By sex I didn't mean the act but just the theme. Really one thing that pissed most guys off was how little sex it had in it. Biggest complain I've heard from guys is too much yapping.
Maybe it is a thing about the sexes, Who knows. Maybe if they did a Sex in the City for guys that wasn't about homosexuals this time I'd like it. If that was the case then it would be banned before the first season ended.
Thats another thing I didn't like about Sex in the City, They made so many of the guys on that show seem like such dumbasses. Oh well, All part of that whole it not being made for my type of people I guess.
-
-
I'd say that it sucks...except then Drowsey'd probably accuse me of being "cranky" again....-
I think people are forgetting that shows by and about women were, and are, sorely lacking, in intelligence and actual existence, before SATC. The audience was women... especially young and professional women. There are SO many shows by and about men, that for so many men to come in and suggest it "sucks" is irrelevant... yet definitely shows how it taps into the gender gap regarding female sexuality.
-
Wow--you figured out from my comment that I think all shows about women suck and that I'm a big fan of all shows about men. I had no idea.
Do you honestly think that there are no legitimate reasons not to like Sex and the City? That this show is so great and intelligent that no one could possibly think it sucks without having issues with female sexuality?
Whatever. -
Thats women for you, They'll tell you what you meant even though you didn't say anything.
-
yep, you're just cranky again tonight grover
-
drjay: at no point have I suggested that I don't have problems with SATC. I could talk about the problems with SATC until I'm blue in the face. I Also believe that there are many things to admire about SATC and am very willing to argue in its favor. I liked the show. My response to you was more in response to the general tone of the discussion at the time, and an attempt to respond to the tone of the comments being made... and your's was the most recent in a long line of men ripping on it. If it was taken too much to heart, that is unfortunate. I stand by my opinions.
I will do my best to not oversimplify. I hope you can too. -
I may have been overly hasty in getting pissed off at your comment as, looking back at it, I see that you were referring to "so many men"--indicating, presumably, others on the thread, in regard to some of whom, your remark was quite pertinent--rather than just to me, which was how I took it. You were, however, implying that, because I am male, my comment, saying nothing other than I'm not a fan of the show, means my problems with the show can't be the same ones that make you blue in the face, but must instead be those of other males in this thread--problems with female sexuality. In that sense, you were completely wrong, particularly considering that, in regard to a number of ignorant, sexist remarks made on this thread, I agree with you. To be honest, I haven't seen enough of the show to get much of a sense of how it portrays sexuality. Perhaps, based on that, I shouldn't be saying it sucks or otherwise. Then, I didn't think a one line comment about a TV show in a thread on BC--essentially, part of a running joke between me and Drowsey Monkey, who got it--carried enough weight that I'd be challenged about it, much less that anyone would assume my reasons were sexist, out of the myriad of possible things someone (including your blue-in-the-face self) might find fault with in regard to this show). As for what I don't like about what I've seen, for now, let's just say that if the characters were men, I sincerely doubt I'd like it any more.
-
-
I really really liked SATC... for more reasons than I can describe here... but mainly because it Attempted to deal with female sexuality in a frank and funny way that previously had not been attempted on TV.
However, I LOVED Six Feet Under.-
omg...six feet under rocked! We obviously have similar taste in tv. For me it's the writing ... both were very well written.
And yes drjay ... you are cranky .... again
-
-
I think most men watched it to (hopefully) see Kim Cattrall naked .. nobody else on that show could act.-
really? I think kim was the weaker of the 4 actresses.
-
Mirand, Cynthia Nixon, was Quite good, if not the best as far as acting went. How much of it did you watch PLr?
-
I pretty much watched every show ever made ... maybe last 2 seasons on reruns. I have yet to see the movie, but will probably do that once it comes to MovieCentral... why?
Kim Cattrall was the best looking one from the start, off of the Police Academy movie fame. I liked Kristin Davis over Cynthia Nixon, but probably because I've known of her since the Larry Sanders Show and Seinfeld days. I never liked Sarah Jessica Parker - ever. But, like Seinfeld .. the show was mostly about characters around her - she was annoying at times. Her movie career tanked, although I don't know how this SATC movie helped or added to that thought. -
I love sarah ...ever see Honeymoon in Vegas? Funny movie. I probably wouldn't have watched it had she not been in it. But seeing Kim naked wasn't really what made me watch, LOL!
-
haha .. Honeymoon in Vegas almost ruined Nicolas Cage's career (I was worried he was going to ruin my family name!) and I think that James Caan saved that movie.
-
But seeing Kim naked wasn't really what made me watch, LOL!
You mean - you aren't a guy behind that doll?
j/k -
Really? I loved Cage in that movie ... one of the few of his I can watch. Cracked me up.
Umm...yeah, I'm all woman, baby
-
-
Well, as a person of the female persuasion who loves shoes, I found the dialogue and situations trite and the "fashion" hideous. It never caught my interest and seemed like an over-hyped soap opera to me. I don't begrudge other people liking it, but it was never my cup of tea. The reason I most dislike it is that the CW replaced Reaper with reruns of this show. -
I think I saw all or most of the first season on HBO. I dropped cable shortly thereafter and never looked back. (SATC had nothing to do with that decision.) Never having had any interest in fashion, I was interested at first because of the setting. I'd just moved from NYC and was feeling homesick. I was in the same age group, but not the same economic class. Shows like that are "aspirational", but only attractive if you aspire to the lifestyle they portray. I could not relate. None of my local stations carries the syndi version...or at least not in a time period when I would watch it.
Saw the movie on DVD last weekend. It was funny in spots. Did like the way Carrie's friends rallied around her. IMHO, the nudity was gratuitous. The ending was weak. It's a fairytale with a happily-ever-after ending. Not my favorite genre. -
Escapism, it's nice to fantasise and have a bit of a laugh. -
SATC and Family Guy love them both
-
absolutely nothing! i really really dislike that show -
Just an ordinary s..ex drama. Quite funny...
-
Having lived across the bay from Manhattan when I was a little girl, I am fascinated with this place. Every time I watched the show, I would get to walk the New York City streets with the girls. After a while, I became rather fond of the foursome and then wanted to know what was going to happen next. It is a show about a great city, friendships, fun fashion, attitudes of the modern day woman and it was very well written. I give it the *Flying Fickle Finger of Fate Award*
P.S. The most important thing was Carrie and Big's romance. -
Great comedy... It addressed a lot of issues and put them in a funny context so that people can deal with them easier.
This show has also helped quite a few of gen x'ers explore their own identities.
Add Your Comment
Login to leave a message.
