And Just Like That in the Media

[Snazzy Daisy]

Kristin Davis' 'And Just Like That...' Storyline Prompted Sweet Notes From Moms Of Non-Binary Kids

 

[buttersister]

Kristin should sue that plastic surgeon. Or name the surgeon—put that practice out of business pronto.

[WendyCR72]

1 hour ago, TaurusRose said:

 The reason I have a problem with this is because it's all so one-sided.  I'm particularly sensitive to people being hung out to dry on the strength of someone's word with nothing to support it.

Except one of the women was backed by the UCLA Rape Crisis Center, confirming the woman did go there. The woman's boss and friend also back her. So, this is not necessarily true. 

Did Chris Noth rape all five women? I don't know. Unsure if we ever will. But the fact that he called these events "consensual" says something happened.

But I will stop here so as not to enter a topic that really has nothing to do with the show...

[CeeBeeGee]

Beverly Johnson is on record as having attested to Noth's bizarre, misogynistic behavior toward her in the '90s--she obtained a restraining order against him--so I don't find it difficult to believe the latest charges.

[qtpye]

35 minutes ago, CeeBeeGee said:

Beverly Johnson is on record as having attested to Noth's bizarre, misogynistic behavior toward her in the '90s--she obtained a restraining order against him--so I don't find it difficult to believe the latest charges.

I never knew this. What did he do? 

It must have been pretty bad.

[TakomaSnark]

4 hours ago, qtpye said:

I never knew this. What did he do? 

It must have been pretty bad.

The original source (in the 1990s) was the National Enquirer, which is likely why it was ignored.

Here's a more contemporary update:

Chris Noth’s ex Beverly Johnson once claimed he threatened to ‘kill’ her

[RedHawk]

The recaps that I've read tend to be somewhat critical of the show, so it's not a hit with critics either. Then I thought this morning, has there ever been a show that was revived in this way, with the same characters but some years older? I recall that in interviews before the show premiered tMPK said this is not a Sex and the City "reboot" so looks like the biggest mistake was trying to use these same well-known characters to tell "new" stories.

[funnygirl]

1 hour ago, RedHawk said:

The recaps that I've read tend to be somewhat critical of the show, so it's not a hit with critics either. Then I thought this morning, has there ever been a show that was revived in this way, with the same characters but some years older? I recall that in interviews before the show premiered tMPK said this is not a Sex and the City "reboot" so looks like the biggest mistake was trying to use these same well-known characters to tell "new" stories.

I thought Fuller House did a good job. It wasn't necessarily a reboot, more like an extension of Full House since it was the same characters, same family, just everyone is older. Not so different than AJLT since they are using the same characters and they're older. Except the Fuller House tptb have more integrity for their characters and the original show than MPK. 

MPK was trying to have his cake and eat it too. Bring back the characters and built in fanbase of Sex And The City but change nearly everything to make it a new show. Why not just use all new characters and tell a new story instead of taking a big dump on the beloved and pop culture favorite SATC of the past? Oh, that's right, money and ego. No one asked for everything we loved about Sex And The City to be demolished. But congratulations to MPK, SJP, Cynthia, and Kristen for succeeding in that. 

[ifionlyknew]

MPK has created four shows, not counting AJLT.  Two I had never heard of and didn't last long. One was the Comeback with Lisa Kudrow which critics loved but didn't get a lot of viewers. I liked it but it it wasn't your typical comedy.  So many things were cringeworthy but they were meant to be.  The other show was Two Broke Girls which did not get good reviews. It did well enough in the ratings to last six season but I think that had more to do with it being part of the Monday night comedy block.

The most successful thing MPK was part of was SATC.  A show with characters he did not create. If he had created AJLT and used the stories him and his writers created and had all new characters I doubt a pilot would have even been filmed.  

28 minutes ago, funnygirl said:

. No one asked for everything we loved about Sex And The City to be demolished. But congratulations to MPK, SJP, Cynthia, and Kristen for succeeding in that. 

You know I always like when someone does a really shitty movie or TV show and afterwards they say yeah I really screwed up with that one.  Somehow I doubt we will ever hear any of them say that about AJLT.

Edited January 18, 2022 by ifionlyknew

[Harvey]

2 hours ago, RedHawk said:

Then I thought this morning, has there ever been a show that was revived in this way, with the same characters but some years older?

Will & Grace. It was great. Lasted 3 seasons.

[Aulty]

3 hours ago, RedHawk said:

MPK said this is not a Sex and the City "reboot" so looks like the biggest mistake was trying to use these same well-known characters to tell "new" stories.

Back in the day, SATC was grounbreaking for how they talked about sex and relationships. MPK and his writers probably think they are still all that, but AJLT missed its spot by at least half a decade.
The stories this show tells aren't groundbreaking anymore, they've alrealy been told, and often told better, in other shows and by better writers over the past 5-10 years. And by the Golden Girls.

[Ms Blue Jay]

4 hours ago, Harvey said:

Will & Grace. It was great. Lasted 3 seasons.

I agree!!!!!!  Well, they ruined Karen, but other than that I agree!

Actually come to think of it, I liked the Mad About You reboot too.  Only 1 season.  Although, some of us did not like Mabel, Paul and Jamie's daughter.  Oh well, nothing is perfect.  And both WAG and MAY look like the Sopranos compared to this shit.

18 hours ago, TaurusRose said:

 I've seen too many liars, people who jump on bandwagons, and people looking for easy paydays to check my suspicious nature and critical thinking at the door. 

Not sure what easy payday any of these women have coming to them.

Edited January 18, 2022 by Ms Blue Jay

[T Summer]

5 hours ago, ifionlyknew said:

The most successful thing MPK was part of was SATC.  A show with characters he did not create. If he had created AJLT and used the stories him and his writers created and had all new characters I doubt a pilot would have even been filmed.  

This point can't be made enough and I've stated similar, but kudos to you IFIONLYKNEW.

Everyone keeps decrying  having the 3 remaining ladies of SATC  do things  that are totally out  of character, as well as  the focus being  on  characters and issues on the periphery BEFORE getting around to telling compelling stories about what Carrie, Miranda and Charlotte's lives are like now. The reason the writers and producers are inserting these stories  and issues from  their own lives into this SATC afterward is that no development company or network  would give them money to get that BS made! They know that the SATC audience is devoted and will keep coming back and giving them more chances.

 

[RedHawk]

And yet MPK and especially SJP talked and still talk about showing women in their 50s, how their lives are still full and interesting, depicting aging in real ways, "mature women's stories that aren't being told", etc. Maybe MPK thinks he's doing that. Also, many of us may be wanting more drama and "real" stories where he seems to be stuck somewhere between drama and comedy and hasn't found the sweet spot in the middle that SATC (which I thought was mostly a comedy with occasional drama) was able to hit.

Interviews say that he started with the dark stuff (Big's death) and we're supposed to be moving toward lighter, funnier episodes. Hmmm, not seeing it, or I guess I have a different sense of humor than these writer. I get that some viewers think the barfing scene was funny but it didn't seem to be played for comedy. 

Edited January 18, 2022 by RedHawk

[Jillybean]

Lighter? Funnier? I find the show depressing AF. The three heroines all seem so miserable. Look, I'm in my 50s and I don't know anyone my age who is this unhappy, let alone experiencing a full-blown existential crisis.

Edited January 19, 2022 by Jillybean

[T Summer]

1 hour ago, RedHawk said:

 I guess I have a different sense of humor than these writer. I get that some viewers think the barfing scene was funny but it didn't seem to be played for comedy. 

Right? We 're just past an episode with 3 peeing scenes and they give us synchronized barfing? This is the type of humor writers with little to no ability resort to. We think we're going to see something revolutionary,  50something women and  the  challenges unique to their current stage of  life...  shown in a  mostly lighthearted way.

Instead we get stories   MPK , the writers and producers   take right from their own lives, heavy handed attempts at highlighting  diversity, wokeness and their other pet causes  and bodily function humor.

[BrindaWalsh]

On 1/10/2022 at 12:36 AM, RealHousewife said:

Wow! Don't critics normally give lower scores than us?

I think these days it is very hard to be critical of "the woke" no matter how valid the criticism or feedback.  

However even if I didn't know the SATC characters, there is still more than enough wrong with this.

 

[Ms Blue Jay]

15 hours ago, T Summer said:

Right? We 're just past an episode with 3 peeing scenes and they give us synchronized barfing? This is the type of humor writers with little to no ability resort to. We think we're going to see something revolutionary,  50something women and  the  challenges unique to their current stage of  life...  shown in a  mostly lighthearted way.

Instead we get stories   MPK , the writers and producers   take right from their own lives, heavy handed attempts at highlighting  diversity, wokeness and their other pet causes  and bodily function humor.

LOL it's like you're reading my mind.

Here are my most annoying/hated/gratuitous cliches that directors always use to pretend that their project is "shocking" or "gritty" (let's take violence and nudity out of it, too easy, and EVERYONE does it).  I agree that it's incredibly lazy writing.  How do we know?  Because so many modern projects do it.  There used to be rules against this stuff in the olden days (got I sound so old right now).  Writers used to actually have to write conflict.

#1 with a bullet:  Vomit (obviously)
Woman sitting on a toilet 
Masturbation
Car crash

If I'm correct, we're going to get a car crash in the next few episodes.  That's the only spot on my Bingo card that I'm missing.  We came really close last episode!  Anyone remember Reese Witherspoon projectile vomiting green vomit everywhere on "Big Little Lies"?  Ahhhhh, memories.  Oh, and BLL was based on a book that didn't have a car crash but THE DIRECTORS FORCED ONE IN ANYWAY!

Edited January 19, 2022 by Ms Blue Jay

[Yeah No]

1 hour ago, BrindaWalsh said:

I think these days it is very hard to be critical of "the woke" no matter how valid the criticism or feedback.  

That's true, I've thought that too.  The critics are falling all over themselves to out-woke each other.  They're all afraid that if they don't compliment the show they'll be accused of being against the woke agenda the writers are pushing.

Some of those reviews were painful to read.  You could feel the writer digging way down deep to pull a compliment out of their ass.

[Yeah No]

22 hours ago, CeeBeeGee said:

Beverly Johnson is on record as having attested to Noth's bizarre, misogynistic behavior toward her in the '90s--she obtained a restraining order against him--so I don't find it difficult to believe the latest charges.

Beverly Johnson has a lot of credibility, plus this was first reported almost 30 years ago so I'm ready to vote Chris Noth a "dirt bag" now.  It amazes me (or maybe more accurately doesn't amaze me) how this was pushed under the rug and only reported by the Enquirer in the 90's, and so-called "serious" newspapers would ignore it.

[ifionlyknew]

12 hours ago, BrindaWalsh said:

I think these days it is very hard to be critical of "the woke" no matter how valid the criticism or feedback.  

 

10 hours ago, Yeah No said:

That's true, I've thought that too.  The critics are falling all over themselves to out-woke each other.  They're all afraid that if they don't compliment the show they'll be accused of being against the woke agenda the writers are pushing.

Yes.  I understand representation is important and there are issues that need showcased more but if you are not doing any of that well I don't think you are helping.    It is OK to not like something that is "woke" if you don't like the way they are telling the story.  Normally I would applaud the effort but this particular effort has just been so bad.  

I don't like Che. And it's not because they are non binary. It's because I don't like their behavior.  See how easy that was reviewers?

[Jillybean]

I don't know...the tomato-meter isn't perfect, but it's hardly reflecting a love-fest from the critics.  The audience number looks about right.

[Jillybean]

Vulture has questions about Che Diaz.

[RedHawk]

14 hours ago, Jillybean said:

Lighter? Funnier? I find the show depressing AF. The three heroines all seem so miserable. Look, I'm in my 50s and I don't know anyone my age who is this unhappy, let alone experiencing a full-blown existential crisis.

 

14 hours ago, T Summer said:

Right? We 're just past an episode with 3 peeing scenes and they give us synchronized barfing? This is the type of humor writers with little to no ability resort to. We think we're going to see something revolutionary,  50something women and  the  challenges unique to their current stage of  life...  shown in a  mostly lighthearted way.

Instead we get stories   MPK , the writers and producers   take right from their own lives, heavy handed attempts at highlighting  diversity, wokeness and their other pet causes  and bodily function humor.

Somewhere (maybe in a different thread) a poster listed the ages of the show's writers and I think the problem is that the oldest ones were in their 40s. (Can't find the post, so maybe a writer or two are in their 50s.) In general, having a mid-life crisis in one's 40s is a somewhat common, as is getting past all that by the time you're in your mid 50s. So maybe there is no one to make the case in the writer's room for the difference that 10 years can make, especially for women. Otherwise, I can't account for these writers writing about women in their 50s and being so wrong.

I guess the problem is they actually are writing about women in their 40s but they have to say it's women in their 50s because the women playing these characters are clearly not in their 40s. 

Edited January 19, 2022 by RedHawk

[ifionlyknew]

19 minutes ago, RedHawk said:

Otherwise, I can't account for these writers writing about women in their 50s and being so wrong.

I guess the problem is they actually are writing about women in their 40s but they have to say it's women in their 50s because the women playing these characters are clearly not in their 40s. 

But the actresses are in their 50s. And these aren't just fresh off the turnip truck actresses. These are well established actresses who are also producers on this show.  Not one of them read this garbage and said maybe this isn't reflective of what most women in their 50s experience?

I'm becoming more convinced with each episode that everyone on the cast and crew simply just wanted to get paid.  It doesn't seem like the carry over writers from SATC or SJP, CN or KD really had anything they wanted to say with regards to the original characters.

[Jillybean]

Cynthia Nixon Says It Was 'Lucky' They Could Cut Chris Noth's 'And Just Like That' Scenes

Quote

While the series has faced unexpected casting challenges and has premiered to mixed (yet increasingly positive) reviews, there’s still hope among many that Carrie and the gang will return for another season of And Just Like That. But according to Nixon, it is not up to her. 

“Even though I’m an executive producer and I got to direct an episode, I am not a writer. And so, that is one of the great privileges of being a writer, that it’s not my job to figure it out, thank god,” Nixon says. “You know, it’s my job to say that doesn’t seem right for my character. But in terms of the amazing writers, we have [been] dreaming things up. They know much better than I do.” 

Then she has failed miserably at her job. Literally nothing they have done seems right for her character. CN has completely lost sight of Miranda in her quest to tell her own story. 

As for "hope among many," I wonder if that includes anyone not a part of the cast and crew.

CN also said "...I think we are very proud of our show.”

Edited January 21, 2022 by Jillybean

[Sweet-tea]

On 1/17/2022 at 11:56 PM, CeeBeeGee said:

Beverly Johnson is on record as having attested to Noth's bizarre, misogynistic behavior toward her in the '90s--she obtained a restraining order against him--so I don't find it difficult to believe the latest charges.

Poor Beverly. Wasn’t she also one of the women drugged and sexually assaulted by Bill Cosby? I think she actually got away before much happened because she realized he’d drugged her. I saw her talk about it in an interview. 

I don’t want to believe this about Chris Noth. I enjoyed him on L&O and as Mr. Big on SATC. Sigh. 

It seems like the Miranda storyline is more about Cynthia’s personal experience than it is faithful to the character of Miranda. And that’s a shame. 

Edited January 21, 2022 by Sweet-tea

[SlovakPrincess]

On 1/19/2022 at 10:45 AM, Jillybean said:

Vulture has questions about Che Diaz.

 

This part of the article is the funniest:

"Are we supposed to like Che?
I guess? The show has all the characters talk about them as a “comedy prophet,” but the comedy on its face is like Nanette sent through Google Translate a few times, and their actions with Miranda imply they freely fuck around with whoever — especially privileged cis women, given the fan attention Che gets at the school fundraiser. That’s all well and good, but as a general rule, maybe don’t fuck around with your co-worker’s married friends?"

[Jillybean]

Don't Hate Us Over These Burning Questions We Have About And Just Like That...

I agree with every word of this.

[BrindaWalsh]

There has been a lot of criticism of this show and these same issues keep coming up over and over again, in the media and it seems like with each interview I read they only kind of sort of answer the questions. 

For example, when asked "why are you butchering the Steve character" we simply get "we love steve, and the actor has hearing issues."  Okay, but that wasn't the question.  When people ask "what are you doing with Miranda, this isn't our character" they answer by reiterating the story they are telling, but again, that's not the question. 

Nobody has said anything like "if you go back through the series you get glimpses of Miranda and her dissatisfaction, for example, this, this and that happened and we're building on that idea.  Additionally, it was not uncommon that during the pandemic, a lot of people realized that their lives had landed somewhere they were unhappy with and they had drifted from their spouse.  Combine those things together, we have Miranda where she is now."  We're not getting that probably because they didn't plot the stories that way and that's why the criticism is that this is without understanding of the characters that developed over the years.  

Which leads me to believe that when the show hears the criticism, they simply bottle it into a "they aren't aware enough to get it, so let me repeat it again."  Or "they are uncomfortable because we are pushing boundries and don't get it so let's repeat it again."  Or "the show had a lot of problems, and it needed fixing" (Why?  To my knowledge nobody has tried to do an Archie Bunker reboot, and it simply lives in the timeframe in which it existed with all of its highly inappropriate and offensiveness and we all move on).  

Maybe it's not common of shows to fix their errors, or admit their errors, but I don't get how they can just disregard all of this valid questioning.  

[ifionlyknew]

19 minutes ago, BrindaWalsh said:

Which leads me to believe that when the show hears the criticism, they simply bottle it into a "they aren't aware enough to get it, so let me repeat it again."  Or "they are uncomfortable because we are pushing boundries and don't get it so let's repeat it again." 

I do think these writers and especially MPK think they know better than the audience.  I would like to remind them if not for the audience there would not be this reboot.  It's because SATC was so beloved they were given the opportunity to write more story for these women.  And they have failed epically.  

I used to watch soap operas.  And when a storyline wasn't working they would change course.  Now of course there were times they didn't and viewers had to suffer through some garbage but eventually the storyline would end and it was never referred to again.  I understand this season was completed before it aired so they couldn't change the direction of the storylines but if there is to be a second season (which I doubt there will be) and they ignore the valid criticism thrown their way then they are just being deliberate assholes to the viewers. 

[Ms Blue Jay]

I like to think - I LIKE to think - but I have zero evidence - that the writers know that they have fucked this up majorly by now.  They must.  They must.  They must!!!!!  Wishful and probably deluded thinking, I know.

[Bookish Jen]

23 minutes ago, Ms Blue Jay said:

I like to think - I LIKE to think - but I have zero evidence - that the writers know that they have fucked this up majorly by now.  They must.  They must.  They must!!!!!  Wishful and probably deluded thinking, I know.

I'm hoping they are self-aware enough to know that they have created a complete shit show. But are they?

[ifionlyknew]

34 minutes ago, Ms Blue Jay said:

I like to think - I LIKE to think - but I have zero evidence - that the writers know that they have fucked this up majorly by now.  They must.  They must.  They must!!!!!  Wishful and probably deluded thinking, I know.

 

10 minutes ago, Bookish Jen said:

I'm hoping they are self-aware enough to know that they have created a complete shit show. But are they?

I would have a tiny little respect for them if they said yep we fucked up.  But every interview I read they are either defending what they have wrote or saying a bunch of word salad. 

I do wonder if they will be trusted to write for any other shows. 

[Ms Blue Jay]

https://www.latimes.com/entertainment-arts/tv/story/2022-01-20/and-just-like-that-hbo-max-sarita-choudhury-seema-samantha

The flak against ‘And Just Like That’ ‘shocked’ Sarita Choudhury. But she welcomes it

(Sarita plays Seema)

Quote

The show has gotten some pretty tough criticism, much of it centered on the four new characters who are people of color. What’s your reaction to that?

I’m so excited by it all. I know that sounds weird. I feel there’s something very alive going on in the conversation. I’m shocked by some of the criticism only because it’s really hard to add four new characters and do a good job. You’re naturally going to fail somewhere. And I was impressed by how the show gave us all full lives. When you’re added to a show, it’s usually just to help progress the protagonist, but in this show, I don’t feel like I’m ever doing that.

 

Edited January 21, 2022 by Ms Blue Jay

[BrindaWalsh]

Behind the paywall to me, but is the LA Times implying that the backlash is BECAUSE they are people of color?  

I've seen plenty of backlash against very white Miranda.  Very white Carrie.  And very white Charlotte.  

The backlash isn't because the character is new and a person of color.  It's because the storylines feel so forced.  Ironically Seema, who primarily has been used to prop up the protagonist, is the one that I care most about, probably because we're getting to know her as opposed to be told "you must like this character because she represents something different for the show!" 

[Jillybean]

The Fug Girls have been recapping the show weekly. Episode 8 Recap. 

[Ms Blue Jay]

19 minutes ago, BrindaWalsh said:

Behind the paywall to me, but is the LA Times implying that the backlash is BECAUSE they are people of color?  

I've seen plenty of backlash against very white Miranda.  Very white Carrie.  And very white Charlotte.  

The backlash isn't because the character is new and a person of color.  It's because the storylines feel so forced.  Ironically Seema, who primarily has been used to prop up the protagonist, is the one that I care most about, probably because we're getting to know her as opposed to be told "you must like this character because she represents something different for the show!" 

I read the whole thing.  I'm pretty sure that the paragraph I shared here was the only part about the backlash.  The rest was about Sarita as a person, not related to the backlash.

I agree with you in that I don't mind the new characters per se (although, Che...........) but my main criticism is how this is not SATC and the characters are acting like aliens (mostly Miranda).  So, not sure why LA Times decided to play it that way.  Sounds like blaming the critics for the faults of the show, kind of using a bullshit ad hominem attack on the critics, to prop the show up.

Audience:  This show is terrible!
LA Times:  People who criticize the show are racist.
Audience:  .........What?!

Edited January 21, 2022 by Ms Blue Jay

[RealHousewife]

A lot of the people criticizing the show are POC themselves. And yes Miranda is the one who sucks the most. 

[ifionlyknew]

It was really shitty for the LA Times writer to frame the criticism as viewers don't like new characters who are POC. Is that writer even a viewer?  Just by reading this board I can see we have valid criticisms and they have nothing to do with the new characters being black and brown.   

[NotMySekrit2Tell]

On 1/18/2022 at 10:13 AM, RedHawk said:

Then I thought this morning, has there ever been a show that was revived in this way, with the same characters but some years older?

Twin Peaks: The Return is another one. It was polarizing, but a lot of fans did love it or at least find it fascinating, and it got much better critical reviews than AJLT.

But that's a case that can't really be compared to anything else. David Lynch was allowed to do whatever he wanted, and it really was like a long feature film that played an hour at a time for 17 weeks.

[monagatuna]

1 hour ago, ifionlyknew said:

It was really shitty for the LA Times writer to frame the criticism as viewers don't like new characters who are POC. Is that writer even a viewer?  Just by reading this board I can see we have valid criticisms and they have nothing to do with the new characters being black and brown.   

I agree. I actually love the new characters and wouldn't mind seeing a lot more of them. They shoehorned these lovely people into awkward, clunky storylines and left them to do what they could with bad writing. Just because we can see through their stupid hamfisted MO doesn't mean we don't like the characters or their culture.

[Yeah No]

On 1/19/2022 at 10:57 AM, RedHawk said:

 

Somewhere (maybe in a different thread) a poster listed the ages of the show's writers and I think the problem is that the oldest ones were in their 40s. (Can't find the post, so maybe a writer or two are in their 50s.) In general, having a mid-life crisis in one's 40s is a somewhat common, as is getting past all that by the time you're in your mid 50s. So maybe there is no one to make the case in the writer's room for the difference that 10 years can make, especially for women. Otherwise, I can't account for these writers writing about women in their 50s and being so wrong.

I guess the problem is they actually are writing about women in their 40s but they have to say it's women in their 50s because the women playing these characters are clearly not in their 40s. 

Elisa Zuritsky and Julie Rottenberg, who wrote and produced for SATC are both in their 50s and writing for this series as well.  However, other than MPK, the rest of the writers are under 50, including one that is 29, who wrote the most recent episode (and it shows, IMO).

I have already posted my theory that perhaps their take on things was voted down in favor of the writers who are using this show to spread their woke agenda.

[Lethallyfab]

It is COMPLETELY disingenuous to act as if the audience’s critiques of the show were for including women of color rather than (a) feeling like said storylines were shoe-horned in as forced examples that reek of tokenism that they wrote to quell the criticism of the original series, and it just comes off as bad writing  and/or (b) that said forced storylines have come at the expense of developing the original characters and their plotlines.  

Honestly, if the writers are *this* obsessed with course-correcting the flack the original series got, I feel like it would’ve been better to just make an entirely new series with the new characters of Nya, Che (ugh!), LTW, and Seema, with Carrie and company only showing up as supporting players, rather than trying to serve two masters and satisfying none.

Except they didn’t do that and people are criticizing it, which is entirely valid.

 

[Irlandesa]

14 hours ago, SlovakPrincess said:

"Are we supposed to like Che?

Kristin Davis was on watch what happens live and was asked whether or not she thought Che was funny.  She kind of laughed and intended to deflect the question before saying she thought they were supposed to be more reflective funny than ha ha funny.

I took it to mean that even she didn't think Che was funny.

[NotMySekrit2Tell]

She should have said, "Theirs is not a humor one laughs at." In an English accent, if she could manage it.

[Ms Blue Jay]

https://www.vogue.com/article/the-mysterious-disappearance-of-miranda-hobbes

The Mysterious Disappearance of Miranda Hobbes

What in the name of Sleepless in Seattle has happened to Miranda Hobbes?

Edited January 22, 2022 by Ms Blue Jay

[ifionlyknew]

It's easier for the writers to blame the viewers than blame themselves.  

7 hours ago, Lethallyfab said:

 

Honestly, if the writers are *this* obsessed with course-correcting the flack the original series got, I feel like it would’ve been better to just make an entirely new series with the new characters of Nya, Che (ugh!), LTW, and Seema, with Carrie and company only showing up as supporting players, rather than trying to serve two masters and satisfying none.

Except they didn’t do that and people are criticizing it, which is entirely valid.

 

When the project was first announced I'm pretty sure i said on this very board I thought this would be the way to go.  But I thought they would make the new characters younger.  I can understand the actresses probably didn't want to be supporting cast. I still think it would have been better to use this show to spin off a new series. As much as I loved the original characters I just don't know if they can have any more of their stories told well.

[violet and green]

8 hours ago, ifionlyknew said:

As much as I loved the original characters I just don't know if they can have any more of their stories told well.

Sure they could. As many have suggested, Big could have died a year before the new series starts to give more leeway for story - he could still be in the series as some painful memories of his death, and their happy times together and/or or jump from his funeral scene to a year later, it's all doable. Carrie is less deeply in mourning, and starting to date again. There are a lot more stories to be told of a woman in her fifties dating, online dating, etc. Her book could be being written, and published, doing the tv talk show publicity as an older woman. There could be something disturbing in Big's will...

They could have Seema as a new friend... Really, her coming into the picture as Carrie's realtor works fine. They didn't need a slew of new characters as main cast to make up for the loss of Samantha; nothing makes up for the loss of Samantha.

It's not like people put on a pair of carpet slippers and stop living in their fifties. If they had more mature writers (I looked them up and as far as I can see there is not a single lead writer in their midfifties and older - two are 50 or 51; two are 41; and 1 is maybe 39?) they would have material up the whazoo to work with, because they would know their subject matter - not just be projecting their assumptions onto these characters. 

[RedHawk]

I think it was a New York Times reviewer who mentioned the “Rip van Winkle effect”, as if these ladies have been asleep for 20 years and just woke up. I keep wishing we had a little more information about what their lives were like during that time.

I realized that Carrie said she had only worn the Versace dress twice, once was sitting in her window eating popcorn. She didn’t even get to go out in it when she wore it in Paris, she sat in the hotel waiting all evening for Aleks, right? So, she’s married to Mr. Big, who left a few million to his favorite cultural institutions, and yet she never once wore the dress to a gala or a fundraiser or to sit in a box seat at the ballet or symphony?

I get it, it was a cute wrapup to have her wear it again at the end of the episode, but it’s also an example of the weird storytelling that ignores their decade-long marriage. It’s almost as if Big never showed up in Paris to get her. Instead she left Aleks and flew back on her own to her apartment in NYC and there she is 20 years later. The two movies were just dreams.

Edited January 22, 2022 by RedHawk