SEX AND THE CITY Revival Set at HBO Max — Page 3

Sarah Jessica Parker Reunites with Sex and the City Costars on Revival Table Read | PEOPLE.com

He had been privately suffering from pancreatic cancer for a number of years, what a heartbreaking loss. The picture he posted on June 11 about being back with the girls for the new series was incredible, I would never have known from that photo that he was so sick. He adopted his son as a single parent which is such a beautiful thing and I am so sad for that young man.

My heart goes out to all who loved him.

That's really interesting news, I watched all movies. let saw how is new one Baby Photoshoot.

Since the upgrade to the website, this Off-Topic board seems to get even less traffic than before, so I rarely post over here, but, yes, I've been watching it.

Is it cringey? Sure, but so was the original series, at times.

Is it too "woke?" Yes and no. That's where most of the cringe comes from, but I think it's a fair representation of how Gen X'ers and older sometimes have trouble navigating topics such as gender identity and racial sensitivity. It's kind of awkward, but I get it.

Is the absence of Samantha a problem? I don't have an issue with it, at all, and they've been able to work her into the scripts in a couple of interesting ways. I think it mirrors the tone of the first SATC movie, which I've always enjoyed. It's more serious, but I'm fine with that, and there's still levity, just not the full-on Samantha comedy of the original series.

Do I still love it? Abso-f*cking-lutely!

To me, what's most impressive is how effortlessly SJP, Cynthia Nixon, and Kristin Davis have slipped back into their characters. Credit the writing, which, while being somewhat more serious than SATC, still "sounds" right.

I've seen a lot of negative reactions online, and I think they might be coming from the younger fans, meaning those who weren't weren't adults and didn't watch when it first aired, but I don't know for sure if that's the case. As a 51-year-old, most of it works really well for me.

I mean, the way Carrie tells it, it sounds really simple, but we don't know Samantha's side of the story, so it can be argued that it's more complicated than it seems. I just accepted it and moved on. That being said, the way that they've written her into the plot in a couple of episodes so far is more interesting and effective than how they wrote her out.

Updated On: 12/31/21 at 08:49 PM

I didn't buy it. It's the same as the Mary & Rhoda tv movie. Are we, the audience, suppose to believe, that two characters as close as they were, would have a falling out and not speak to each other for decades? I would say, Carrie and Samantha had (have) the same relationship/friendship portrayed in the series as Mary Richards and Rhoda Morganstern did in theirs. Granted I haven't seen it, but the Stanford exit (so far) is just as unbelievable, due to the history of his friendship with Carrie.

Again, I haven't seen it, but in this case, we are talking about FOUR long term friendships. The way it is written, didn't Miranda and Charlotte cut their ties with Samantha also? You would think I would have something better to do on NYE than talk about tv characters! Taffy and Miles, have a Happy New Year.

I am definitely trying to appreciate the show for what it is and meet it where its at. That being said, it has moved from being sitcom with dramatic elements to what I consider a drama. There are some episodes where I didn't even laugh. If I did, it is usually at Anthony who is getting the best quips.

This is where I feel Cattral's absence is glaring. Samantha was the most grounded of the characters. The most light hearted and least neurotic. She really created more balance. She was more joyful that the other characters. I had no choice but to buy into the reason for her leaving (ghosting), but as a huge fan it doesn't make sense.

I think a franchise with a hardcore fan base is a very delicate balance. You see this all the time with Marvel fans, Star Wars fans and other sci-fi. When writers and actors have built a universe, fans who know the show inside out get very prickly when already established rules, norms and personalities are violated. It becomes very personal and can look negligent.

I see a lot of people talking about how Samantha said it wasn't her style to judge when Carrie confessed to sleeping with a married Big. She was very supportive. She also spoon fed Carrie when she was depressed. To have her ghost Carrie because she dropped her as PR is a long leap. It also cheapens the legacy of a character everyone loves and has invested in. Samantha doesn't need the meager money from the PR of a writer who isn't very prolific. I understand fan reactions.

I also feel they did that with Stanford. He was Carrie's best friend and they made him do really crummy things that are antithetical to the Carrie. He may have divorced Anthony and walked away, but he would never ghost Carrie after she just lost her husband. I think they could have bought time but just writing him out on a temporary movie until they figured out a fix. This angers fans.

Overall, I am fine with the storylines. They mirror the things people in their developmental age bracket are experiencing. As we all know, you can't party downtown forever.

The voiceovers are missed and the city as a character is missed too.

I also wish rather than adding new characters maybe they showed us more rather than tell us. Show us more of Steve and Miranda. Show us more of their children's lives.

I think Seema is the new character I like the most. I feel she could be a transitional character for Samantha.

Che bugs the crap out of me. Not sure why.

This show is wild.