Watched Sex and the City for the first time in a while

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So I would absolutely agree it has aged horribly but I would love to hear from others WHY -- why did it age so horribly?

My thoughts include
- Gay male stereotypes, cringe
- Lack of BIPOC, wince
- Obsession with affluence in a very pre-2001 way
- The obsession with men, dating, sexual experiences, etc is just embarrassing.

I can’t put my finger on it but there are a lot of things that make the series really dated. I’m 35 so I watched some of the middle and later of the series on DVD in 2002-ish, and then watched the TBS edit when I was in college. Even in 2004 or 2005 or whenever that was, the early episodes from the late 90s were very dated.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So I would absolutely agree it has aged horribly but I would love to hear from others WHY -- why did it age so horribly?

My thoughts include
- Gay male stereotypes, cringe
- Lack of BIPOC, wince
- Obsession with affluence in a very pre-2001 way
- The obsession with men, dating, sexual experiences, etc is just embarrassing.

I can’t put my finger on it but there are a lot of things that make the series really dated. I’m 35 so I watched some of the middle and later of the series on DVD in 2002-ish, and then watched the TBS edit when I was in college. Even in 2004 or 2005 or whenever that was, the early episodes from the late 90s were very dated.

The technology makes it feel really dated, but not far enough back to be fun and retro (liked Mixedish). The depiction of females talking about and liking sex was so frank and fresh at the time but its such a charicature now when you watch it back. Samantha's character doesn't seem liberated, she seems kind of desperate to make sex her defining characteristic. Plenty of women sleep with whomever they want now but they don't let it define them, especially since she was the older one- like, B, you have more to do than constantly chase a random bang

I also thought the depiction of sex with them literally coming within 2 seconds of penetration to be insanely cheesy- it was the opposite of liberating and frank in that way.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So I would absolutely agree it has aged horribly but I would love to hear from others WHY -- why did it age so horribly?

My thoughts include
- Gay male stereotypes, cringe
- Lack of BIPOC, wince
- Obsession with affluence in a very pre-2001 way
- The obsession with men, dating, sexual experiences, etc is just embarrassing.

I can’t put my finger on it but there are a lot of things that make the series really dated. I’m 35 so I watched some of the middle and later of the series on DVD in 2002-ish, and then watched the TBS edit when I was in college. Even in 2004 or 2005 or whenever that was, the early episodes from the late 90s were very dated.

The technology makes it feel really dated, but not far enough back to be fun and retro (liked Mixedish). The depiction of females talking about and liking sex was so frank and fresh at the time but its such a charicature now when you watch it back. Samantha's character doesn't seem liberated, she seems kind of desperate to make sex her defining characteristic. Plenty of women sleep with whomever they want now but they don't let it define them, especially since she was the older one- like, B, you have more to do than constantly chase a random bang

I also thought the depiction of sex with them literally coming within 2 seconds of penetration to be insanely cheesy- it was the opposite of liberating and frank in that way.

PP back- what I will say is that I did love the constant ode to NYC- it was fantasy in that sense with the clothes and the going out and all that stuff that still is fun escapism. But the characters being "the mean one", " the rich one", etc... that was definitely something that worked at the time but doesn't really now as much.

[Anonymous]

I feel like there were two SATC fan camps:

"this is entertaining" and "carrie wannabes"

I was in college when it wrapped up, and we got together to host Sopranos watch parties, and would watch SATC when it was on (as an afterthought). So we were the former. Of the later camp, those I know today are all on "quaranteams" and nonsense like that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm now 48 and so was definitely the target demographic for this show in SITC was at its prime.

I didn't watch it in my 20's because I find it kind of depressing -- these women going from one failed relationship and hook-up to another. I had kind of tried that myself at one point, and just didn't like it. So watching the show was not entertaining for me.

I kind of agree -- they never seemed that liberated, in the sense that they had a lot of sex, but it never seemed to make them happy. Their relationships were usually a mess, they seemed to define themselves by their connection to a man, and they had a lot of "stuff" but never really seemed to enjoy it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So I would absolutely agree it has aged horribly but I would love to hear from others WHY -- why did it age so horribly?

My thoughts include
- Gay male stereotypes, cringe
- Lack of BIPOC, wince
- Obsession with affluence in a very pre-2001 way
- The obsession with men, dating, sexual experiences, etc is just embarrassing.

I can’t put my finger on it but there are a lot of things that make the series really dated. I’m 35 so I watched some of the middle and later of the series on DVD in 2002-ish, and then watched the TBS edit when I was in college. Even in 2004 or 2005 or whenever that was, the early episodes from the late 90s were very dated.

+1
I can't put my finger on it either, but it is dated and, to me, I think it is b/c it use to relatable or at least something I could see myself/my friends doing the same thing or living vicariously through the some of the characters and their traits.

Maybe b/c now I'm older, established, have a family, no longer "looking", content, etc. the series just seems so meh. Almost foolish.

[Anonymous]

The first season was fun and light hearted. It’s later on when it went deeper into the characters’ lives that it got annoying.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm glad the pandemic hasn't affected one thing, the annual thread on how annoying Carrie Bradshaw was

Carrie Bradshaw is a loser
https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/782267.page

Is it just me or was Carrie Bradshaw the most annoying character from the 90s?
https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/567698.page

'

Rewatching Sex and the City
https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/843691.page

SATC first movie is on E! and CARRIE IS SO ANNOYING
https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/862362.page

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So I would absolutely agree it has aged horribly but I would love to hear from others WHY -- why did it age so horribly?

My thoughts include
- Gay male stereotypes, cringe
- Lack of BIPOC, wince
- Obsession with affluence in a very pre-2001 way
- The obsession with men, dating, sexual experiences, etc is just embarrassing.

I can’t put my finger on it but there are a lot of things that make the series really dated. I’m 35 so I watched some of the middle and later of the series on DVD in 2002-ish, and then watched the TBS edit when I was in college. Even in 2004 or 2005 or whenever that was, the early episodes from the late 90s were very dated.

+1
I can't put my finger on it either, but it is dated and, to me, I think it is b/c it use to relatable or at least something I could see myself/my friends doing the same thing or living vicariously through the some of the characters and their traits.

Maybe b/c now I'm older, established, have a family, no longer "looking", content, etc. the series just seems so meh. Almost foolish.

I think it's also showing the city as a playground for the rich that has not aged well. That was presented as desirable in the show, but now -- as people leave cities due to high costs -- it has become a negative. Cities are rich people places became gross and depressing.

I think there's been a backlash to high heels.

Also, as a 20-something, I didn't understand how much the having kids things -- when, with home, how many -- would become, for better and for worse, a great strain and great sorter of my female relationships by 35-40, and this is not realistically demonstrated in the show at all. I think a lot of us who watched the show at 20, and didn't think much about the characters being 40, are now 40 ourselves, and realize the show is about 40 yr olds acting like they're 20. That's yikes for me.

[Anonymous]

Samantha's obsession with sex always grossed me out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm now 48 and so was definitely the target demographic for this show in SITC was at its prime.

I didn't watch it in my 20's because I find it kind of depressing -- these women going from one failed relationship and hook-up to another. I had kind of tried that myself at one point, and just didn't like it. So watching the show was not entertaining for me.

I kind of agree -- they never seemed that liberated, in the sense that they had a lot of sex, but it never seemed to make them happy. Their relationships were usually a mess, they seemed to define themselves by their connection to a man, and they had a lot of "stuff" but never really seemed to enjoy it.

Yeah I think this is a lot of it. They act all fancy free about being independent but then all they do is obsess over men. Also agree that watching Samantha is so cringey - she doesn't come off as sexually free but actually super desperate and gross. Charlotte and Miranda are both just caricatures (innocent wannabe Ralph Lauren housewife; bitchy corporate lawyer with a soft side). I may be in the minority but I actually find Carrie less annoying than the others - at least I can relate to some of her sentiments.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So I would absolutely agree it has aged horribly but I would love to hear from others WHY -- why did it age so horribly?

My thoughts include
- Gay male stereotypes, cringe
- Lack of BIPOC, wince
- Obsession with affluence in a very pre-2001 way
- The obsession with men, dating, sexual experiences, etc is just embarrassing.

I can’t put my finger on it but there are a lot of things that make the series really dated. I’m 35 so I watched some of the middle and later of the series on DVD in 2002-ish, and then watched the TBS edit when I was in college. Even in 2004 or 2005 or whenever that was, the early episodes from the late 90s were very dated.

+1
I can't put my finger on it either, but it is dated and, to me, I think it is b/c it use to relatable or at least something I could see myself/my friends doing the same thing or living vicariously through the some of the characters and their traits.

Maybe b/c now I'm older, established, have a family, no longer "looking", content, etc. the series just seems so meh. Almost foolish.

I think it's also showing the city as a playground for the rich that has not aged well. That was presented as desirable in the show, but now -- as people leave cities due to high costs -- it has become a negative. Cities are rich people places became gross and depressing.

I think there's been a backlash to high heels.

Also, as a 20-something, I didn't understand how much the having kids things -- when, with home, how many -- would become, for better and for worse, a great strain and great sorter of my female relationships by 35-40, and this is not realistically demonstrated in the show at all. I think a lot of us who watched the show at 20, and didn't think much about the characters being 40, are now 40 ourselves, and realize the show is about 40 yr olds acting like they're 20. That's yikes for me.

The last sentence is 100% true. It seemed sort of fascinating when we were 23 - now that we're the age they are supposed to be (around 40?), they just seem pathetic.

[Anonymous]

I have a great appreciation 20 yrs later of what a terrible friend Carrie was! She was painted as such a "girls' girl," but now with more life experience under my belt, I can see her as a terrible friend.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Samantha's obsession with sex always grossed me out.

Me too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Miranda is the worst.

I didn't think Miranda was so bad. She had bad moments, but I never thought she was a bad person.

In fact, I never really thought that about anyone except Carrie. And I could have forgiven that in Carrie if the storyline hadn't turned into a fairytale with her and Big. People do dumb and stupid things they regret. They don't usually "evolve" to marriage.

Samantha was brutally honest, and Charlotte finally gained a little perspective.