Rewatching Sex and the City and Carrie is Stunning

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Her looks are fine, but the character was horrible.

I'll say the character was nuanced. Flawed but relatable and often endearing which made it a great show, especially for those of us single at the time. Any married smugs watching the show can opt right out.

SJP is like scarlett o'hara. You just need to replace the Irish features with Jewish- same result. Not conventional but certainly arresting:

"Scarlet O'Hara was not beautiful, but men seldom realized it when caught by her charm as the Tarleton twins were. In her face were too sharply blended the delicate features of her mother, a Coast aristocrat of French descent, and the heavy ones of her florid Irish father. But it was an arresting face, pointed of chin, square of jaw. Her eyes were pale green without a touch of hazel, starred with bristly black lashes and slightly tilted at the ends. Above them, her thick black brows slanted upward, cutting a startling oblique line in her magnolia-white skin-that skin so prized by Southern women and so carefully guarded with bonnets, veils and mittens against hot Georgia suns.”

I feel like this entire paragraph is pure sarcasm from Mitchell. She calls her not beautiful but then goes on to a laundry list of features that would objectively make anyone gorgeous: magnolia white skin, pale green eyes with black lashes and black eyebrows, square jaw etc. I challenge you to find a woman IRL with these features who isn't beautiful.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Her body is gorgeous, and her hair is beautiful and unique. Her face is decidedly ugly, really hideous. However, overall, I would say she's attractive on the whole. I would not want to look her, though, due to the face.

Charlotte was the one I always thought was the most beautiful. Her hair was so glossy and thick, and her face was beautiful. Her body was...fine.

I would prefer to have an OK body and a beautiful face with straight, glossy hair, like Charlotte, rather than a beautiful body and an ugly face, like Carrie. And this was a debate girls in my dorm had when SATC was airing.

I do think that many men would prioritize the gorgeous, tiny body and find this enough to make the woman "hot." However, I also remember that most guys I knew said Charlotte was the most attractive when we watched SATC in college.

She has a nice body but her legs are X shaped.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Good lord, there was a long thread on this topic at one point.

I can't believe there is a new thread on this, reiterating exactly the same tired points.

Yeah, the "Carrie is not good looking enough for her dating life" thread droned on endlessly.

I will repeat what I said on that thread. A killer body and great charisma will make a woman attractive to plenty. A cooler, calmer, more boring beauty like Natasha or Charlotte will probably appeal to the rest.

Yea except people like Big are money obsessed and would never actually marry someone like Carrie who brings charisma but low income and expensive taste. He would’ve just lead her on forever

Huh? She was a local minor celebrity, had a weekly column, and a successful book deal by the time they got together in the finale. You're acting like she was just a waffle house waitress or something.

Sorry how much do you think a weekly column would have paid well. And there were story lines on the show about how little money she had/paid. Also Sex and the City was based on Candace Bushnell’s column that was later made into an anthology. Carrie Bradshaw was based on CB (initially in the column so her parents didn’t know they were reading about her sex life). Big is based on her relationship with Ron Galotti (who she did not end up with) The earlier seasons were better because they were more realistic and different but over time as Darren Starr took more creative control the show it started getting predictable and cliched. The marriage to Big is a huge part of that and the distance from the source material is why the reboot is donkey doo.

25 years ago? Depending on outlet and syndication, such a columnist could be making $200,000-500,000 a year. Plus speaking fees and book advances.

No one making that much would have trouble buying an apartment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Good lord, there was a long thread on this topic at one point.

I can't believe there is a new thread on this, reiterating exactly the same tired points.

Yeah, the "Carrie is not good looking enough for her dating life" thread droned on endlessly.

I will repeat what I said on that thread. A killer body and great charisma will make a woman attractive to plenty. A cooler, calmer, more boring beauty like Natasha or Charlotte will probably appeal to the rest.

Yea except people like Big are money obsessed and would never actually marry someone like Carrie who brings charisma but low income and expensive taste. He would’ve just lead her on forever

Huh? She was a local minor celebrity, had a weekly column, and a successful book deal by the time they got together in the finale. You're acting like she was just a waffle house waitress or something.

Sorry how much do you think a weekly column would have paid well. And there were story lines on the show about how little money she had/paid. Also Sex and the City was based on Candace Bushnell’s column that was later made into an anthology. Carrie Bradshaw was based on CB (initially in the column so her parents didn’t know they were reading about her sex life). Big is based on her relationship with Ron Galotti (who she did not end up with) The earlier seasons were better because they were more realistic and different but over time as Darren Starr took more creative control the show it started getting predictable and cliched. The marriage to Big is a huge part of that and the distance from the source material is why the reboot is donkey doo.

I agree with you there. The early seasons presented these women as real and flawed, someone you could easily imagine knowing. By season 4 or 5, Carrie (and everyone else except perhaps Miranda) because lacquered over, more like a package than an actual person.

[Anonymous]

I like her unique look. It is refreshing considering how many women now have that same Instagram face, it is annoying and sad.

I thought she had real breasts but I stand corrected, they were very good implants back then apparently.

She has a great sense of fashion and it made me start wearing clothes that reflect me too and are flattering, it really made an impression on me when I was young.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Good lord, there was a long thread on this topic at one point.

I can't believe there is a new thread on this, reiterating exactly the same tired points.

Yeah, the "Carrie is not good looking enough for her dating life" thread droned on endlessly.

I will repeat what I said on that thread. A killer body and great charisma will make a woman attractive to plenty. A cooler, calmer, more boring beauty like Natasha or Charlotte will probably appeal to the rest.

Yea except people like Big are money obsessed and would never actually marry someone like Carrie who brings charisma but low income and expensive taste. He would’ve just lead her on forever

Huh? She was a local minor celebrity, had a weekly column, and a successful book deal by the time they got together in the finale. You're acting like she was just a waffle house waitress or something.

Sorry how much do you think a weekly column would have paid well. And there were story lines on the show about how little money she had/paid. Also Sex and the City was based on Candace Bushnell’s column that was later made into an anthology. Carrie Bradshaw was based on CB (initially in the column so her parents didn’t know they were reading about her sex life). Big is based on her relationship with Ron Galotti (who she did not end up with) The earlier seasons were better because they were more realistic and different but over time as Darren Starr took more creative control the show it started getting predictable and cliched. The marriage to Big is a huge part of that and the distance from the source material is why the reboot is donkey doo.

25 years ago? Depending on outlet and syndication, such a columnist could be making $200,000-500,000 a year. Plus speaking fees and book advances.

No one making that much would have trouble buying an apartment.

Successful girl bosses often spend money like water and rack up huge credit card debt. Carrie was super pretentious and had a shopping addiction, right? To buy a nice apartment you need lots of cash savings for a down payment, good debt-to-Income (DTI) ratio, and a history of loans. Carrie presumably never had an auto loan or a starter house, so her credit history was shaky for a million dollar Manhattan apartment loan (or whatever the sum was back then). Not implausible at all she needed help.

And it wouldn't be out of the ordinary for someone like Carrie to have undergrad and/or master's writing program (ex. Columbia MS) student loan debt as a Gen Xer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Good lord, there was a long thread on this topic at one point.

I can't believe there is a new thread on this, reiterating exactly the same tired points.

Yeah, the "Carrie is not good looking enough for her dating life" thread droned on endlessly.

I will repeat what I said on that thread. A killer body and great charisma will make a woman attractive to plenty. A cooler, calmer, more boring beauty like Natasha or Charlotte will probably appeal to the rest.

Yea except people like Big are money obsessed and would never actually marry someone like Carrie who brings charisma but low income and expensive taste. He would’ve just lead her on forever

Huh? She was a local minor celebrity, had a weekly column, and a successful book deal by the time they got together in the finale. You're acting like she was just a waffle house waitress or something.

Sorry how much do you think a weekly column would have paid well. And there were story lines on the show about how little money she had/paid. Also Sex and the City was based on Candace Bushnell’s column that was later made into an anthology. Carrie Bradshaw was based on CB (initially in the column so her parents didn’t know they were reading about her sex life). Big is based on her relationship with Ron Galotti (who she did not end up with) The earlier seasons were better because they were more realistic and different but over time as Darren Starr took more creative control the show it started getting predictable and cliched. The marriage to Big is a huge part of that and the distance from the source material is why the reboot is donkey doo.

25 years ago? Depending on outlet and syndication, such a columnist could be making $200,000-500,000 a year. Plus speaking fees and book advances.

No. 25 years ago writer for the NY Star or whatever fictional NY Post adjacent name would only make like $48,000 but would tons of invitations to cool parties.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Good lord, there was a long thread on this topic at one point.

I can't believe there is a new thread on this, reiterating exactly the same tired points.

Yeah, the "Carrie is not good looking enough for her dating life" thread droned on endlessly.

I will repeat what I said on that thread. A killer body and great charisma will make a woman attractive to plenty. A cooler, calmer, more boring beauty like Natasha or Charlotte will probably appeal to the rest.

Yea except people like Big are money obsessed and would never actually marry someone like Carrie who brings charisma but low income and expensive taste. He would’ve just lead her on forever

Huh? She was a local minor celebrity, had a weekly column, and a successful book deal by the time they got together in the finale. You're acting like she was just a waffle house waitress or something.

Sorry how much do you think a weekly column would have paid well. And there were story lines on the show about how little money she had/paid. Also Sex and the City was based on Candace Bushnell’s column that was later made into an anthology. Carrie Bradshaw was based on CB (initially in the column so her parents didn’t know they were reading about her sex life). Big is based on her relationship with Ron Galotti (who she did not end up with) The earlier seasons were better because they were more realistic and different but over time as Darren Starr took more creative control the show it started getting predictable and cliched. The marriage to Big is a huge part of that and the distance from the source material is why the reboot is donkey doo.

25 years ago? Depending on outlet and syndication, such a columnist could be making $200,000-500,000 a year. Plus speaking fees and book advances.

No. 25 years ago writer for the NY Star or whatever fictional NY Post adjacent name would only make like $48,000 but would tons of invitations to cool parties.

You have no idea what you’re talking about.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Good lord, there was a long thread on this topic at one point.

I can't believe there is a new thread on this, reiterating exactly the same tired points.

Yeah, the "Carrie is not good looking enough for her dating life" thread droned on endlessly.

I will repeat what I said on that thread. A killer body and great charisma will make a woman attractive to plenty. A cooler, calmer, more boring beauty like Natasha or Charlotte will probably appeal to the rest.

Yea except people like Big are money obsessed and would never actually marry someone like Carrie who brings charisma but low income and expensive taste. He would’ve just lead her on forever

Huh? She was a local minor celebrity, had a weekly column, and a successful book deal by the time they got together in the finale. You're acting like she was just a waffle house waitress or something.

Sorry how much do you think a weekly column would have paid well. And there were story lines on the show about how little money she had/paid. Also Sex and the City was based on Candace Bushnell’s column that was later made into an anthology. Carrie Bradshaw was based on CB (initially in the column so her parents didn’t know they were reading about her sex life). Big is based on her relationship with Ron Galotti (who she did not end up with) The earlier seasons were better because they were more realistic and different but over time as Darren Starr took more creative control the show it started getting predictable and cliched. The marriage to Big is a huge part of that and the distance from the source material is why the reboot is donkey doo.

25 years ago? Depending on outlet and syndication, such a columnist could be making $200,000-500,000 a year. Plus speaking fees and book advances.

No one making that much would have trouble buying an apartment.

Successful girl bosses often spend money like water and rack up huge credit card debt. Carrie was super pretentious and had a shopping addiction, right? To buy a nice apartment you need lots of cash savings for a down payment, good debt-to-Income (DTI) ratio, and a history of loans. Carrie presumably never had an auto loan or a starter house, so her credit history was shaky for a million dollar Manhattan apartment loan (or whatever the sum was back then). Not implausible at all she needed help.

And it wouldn't be out of the ordinary for someone like Carrie to have undergrad and/or master's writing program (ex. Columbia MS) student loan debt as a Gen Xer.

She actually didn't have credit card debt because when she goes to apply for a loan she says she just paid off her credit card, which is why she has such little cash on hand. She goes on to say the reason she doesn't qualify for a loan isn't low income but no assets like property.

She didn't have problem paying rent or the mortgage; she didn't have cash on hand for a down payment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Good lord, there was a long thread on this topic at one point.

I can't believe there is a new thread on this, reiterating exactly the same tired points.

Yeah, the "Carrie is not good looking enough for her dating life" thread droned on endlessly.

I will repeat what I said on that thread. A killer body and great charisma will make a woman attractive to plenty. A cooler, calmer, more boring beauty like Natasha or Charlotte will probably appeal to the rest.

Yea except people like Big are money obsessed and would never actually marry someone like Carrie who brings charisma but low income and expensive taste. He would’ve just lead her on forever

Huh? She was a local minor celebrity, had a weekly column, and a successful book deal by the time they got together in the finale. You're acting like she was just a waffle house waitress or something.

Sorry how much do you think a weekly column would have paid well. And there were story lines on the show about how little money she had/paid. Also Sex and the City was based on Candace Bushnell’s column that was later made into an anthology. Carrie Bradshaw was based on CB (initially in the column so her parents didn’t know they were reading about her sex life). Big is based on her relationship with Ron Galotti (who she did not end up with) The earlier seasons were better because they were more realistic and different but over time as Darren Starr took more creative control the show it started getting predictable and cliched. The marriage to Big is a huge part of that and the distance from the source material is why the reboot is donkey doo.

25 years ago? Depending on outlet and syndication, such a columnist could be making $200,000-500,000 a year. Plus speaking fees and book advances.

No. 25 years ago writer for the NY Star or whatever fictional NY Post adjacent name would only make like $48,000 but would tons of invitations to cool parties.

A fan site did the math and she was making closer to $75K 20 years ago which isn't bad.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:That character is a skank.

Tell me ... are you mad about all the brunches?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Good lord, there was a long thread on this topic at one point.

New year, new thread for SATC Rewatch/Carrie Bradshaw!

SATC Rewatch: Why does everyone hate Carrie? (2025)
https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/1257498.page

Rewatching Sex and the City (2024)
https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/843691.page

home sick watching SATC and wow (2022)
https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/1088855.page

Rewatching Sex and the City… (2021)
https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/1023576.page

I am rewatching Sex and the City, and oh dear (2021)
https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/961076.page

Rewatching Sex and the City (2019)
https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/843691.page

Watching Sex and the City (2017)
https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/646822.page

Carrie Bradshaw was not good looking enough for her dating life (2021)
https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/1022386.page

Carrie Bradshaw is a loser (2019)
https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/782267.page

Is it just me or was Carrie Bradshaw the most annoying character from the 90s? (2016)
https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/567698.page

Carrie Bradshaw a "whore" - do you agree? (2014)
https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/418606.page

Wow you need help.

She's not wrong. Must sting, a bit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Good lord, there was a long thread on this topic at one point.

I can't believe there is a new thread on this, reiterating exactly the same tired points.

Yeah, the "Carrie is not good looking enough for her dating life" thread droned on endlessly.

I will repeat what I said on that thread. A killer body and great charisma will make a woman attractive to plenty. A cooler, calmer, more boring beauty like Natasha or Charlotte will probably appeal to the rest.

Yea except people like Big are money obsessed and would never actually marry someone like Carrie who brings charisma but low income and expensive taste. He would’ve just lead her on forever

Huh? She was a local minor celebrity, had a weekly column, and a successful book deal by the time they got together in the finale. You're acting like she was just a waffle house waitress or something.

Sorry how much do you think a weekly column would have paid well. And there were story lines on the show about how little money she had/paid. Also Sex and the City was based on Candace Bushnell’s column that was later made into an anthology. Carrie Bradshaw was based on CB (initially in the column so her parents didn’t know they were reading about her sex life). Big is based on her relationship with Ron Galotti (who she did not end up with) The earlier seasons were better because they were more realistic and different but over time as Darren Starr took more creative control the show it started getting predictable and cliched. The marriage to Big is a huge part of that and the distance from the source material is why the reboot is donkey doo.

25 years ago? Depending on outlet and syndication, such a columnist could be making $200,000-500,000 a year. Plus speaking fees and book advances.

No one making that much would have trouble buying an apartment.

Successful girl bosses often spend money like water and rack up huge credit card debt. Carrie was super pretentious and had a shopping addiction, right? To buy a nice apartment you need lots of cash savings for a down payment, good debt-to-Income (DTI) ratio, and a history of loans. Carrie presumably never had an auto loan or a starter house, so her credit history was shaky for a million dollar Manhattan apartment loan (or whatever the sum was back then). Not implausible at all she needed help.

And it wouldn't be out of the ordinary for someone like Carrie to have undergrad and/or master's writing program (ex. Columbia MS) student loan debt as a Gen Xer.

She actually didn't have credit card debt because when she goes to apply for a loan she says she just paid off her credit card, which is why she has such little cash on hand. She goes on to say the reason she doesn't qualify for a loan isn't low income but no assets like property.

She didn't have problem paying rent or the mortgage; she didn't have cash on hand for a down payment.

In other words, she had been carrying credit card debt + she had no savings to show + no down payment + zero history of paying off a big loan (e.g. auto loan, auto lease, starter house mortgage).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That character is a skank.

Tell me ... are you mad about all the brunches?

Not mad.
It's a tv character and tv characters need to be exciting in some way. An IRL woman who slept around as much as she did would not be taken seriously.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:She looks great from the back.

And I agree the full head of curls when everyone else had flat ironed stick straight hair gave her more personality. But she does not have a pretty face.

come on we have eyes.

Says who? Not saying she does but who decides what's pretty or not?