Sex and the City

Films are typically designed to inspire and help people reflect, and serve as warnings. Having just seen my first actual "Sex in the City" episode, I can't really say that I found it too entertaining, but it was professionally done enough.

The whole New York upper mobile sex scene seems like a mish mash of crime drama and soap opera without the crime and without the sex. It's a show designed to help men and women (mostly women) find satisfaction in a singles mating hub like New York.

To be honest its an look into an alien environment that seems wholly boring and unattractive all at once. And yet the gloss given to it makes the pop-psychology themes relayed in this show somewhat palatable. That is you can not like it, but still watch it because it has a professionalism that keeps the visuals ... eh, not interesting, but rather "non-boring" (if that's a term). Even so, the story is not that interesting.

Watching my second episode as I write this review, so far the show seems to be focused on psychological power through sexual conquest, and what titillates a man about women to give women insight into how men seek and exercise power through sex.

To this extent, this viewer thinks the show interesting for what it is, but otherwise it's not material that's interesting to me.

Police shows are about formulating and exploring criminal plots and possibilities thereof. Family sitcoms explore familial issues; relationships between parents, kids, friends and neighbors. Other situational comedies explore (usually urban) issues among singles, and "Sex in the City" is a kind of light-drama with comedic overtones minus the laugh track. So it is that "Sex and the City" targets the sexually active single who may be seeking more than just one night stands.

I guess the thing that really gets me about this show is that there's really nothing new here, unless you happen to have not paid attention in biology or some basic natural science about animals. Because if you've done that, then there is absolutely nothing here that should surprise anyone save the naïve and those wanting to be naïve for the sake of personal thrills. That, and the cast could have been a bit more diverse. I mean, where's the young sexy Inuit girl from Alaska, or Chinese single immigrant female seeking passion, or the Latina who wants all kinds of sex? Well, New York commercial film making circles have their prejudices, and token Anglos do not a series make.

If you've never seen it, have read my previous tirades, prattle and other musings, and want my advice, maybe see the first couple episodes out of curiosity, but otherwise pass it up.

Watch at your own risk.

The Sex and the City Pilot "Sex and the City" is probably the best pilot I have ever seen. It is was interesting, had a great rhythm, I loved the way she interacted with the audience, and it followed the first three articles featured in the book so very well.

The girls looks a little older in the pilot than the series, which is odd because it was pilot and is filmed long before episode two.

I thought that this episode was Sarah Jessica-Parker's best hairstyle in the series. It fit her face perfectly.

I wasn't a fan of Charlotte wearing glasses, and her hair in the pilot, they were trying to hard to make her look the same age as the other girls.

"Why are there so many great unmarried women, and no great unmarried men?" asks thirty-something Carrie Bradshaw (Sarah Jessica Parker), directly addressing the camera. That is one of the several questions she, as a newspaper columnist, tries to answer in the 94 episodes of one of the most fascinating TV shows of the '90s.

Her doubt stems from an encounter with a British woman (Sarah Wynter) who was inexplicably dumped by a New Yorker despite having looked at a house with him, which actually mean something in London according to her. Of course, Carrie readily informs her (and us), the same rules don't apply in New York, where romance appears to be dead. To prove her point, she interviews some of her acquaintances, dividing them in three categories: Toxic Bachelors (all the male interviewees except one), Hopeless Romantics (the guy who was left out earlier) and Unmarried Women (Carrie's best friends). It is with the latter that the protagonist subsequently has a cup of coffee, allowing the audience to know these ladies a little better: Miranda Hobbes (Cynthia Nixon) is a cynical lawyer who has lost nearly all faith in the male gender; Charlotte York (Kristin Davis), an art gallerist, shares Carrie's belief that true love does exist; and Samantha Jones (Kim Cattrall), a PR woman, is arguably the "worst" of the group, as she sleeps with a different man every night and claims women should be able to have sex like men, i.e. without any feelings involved. Carrie sets out to test this theory, eventually running into a handsome stranger known only as Mr. Big (Chris Noth)...

Based on the eponymous book by Candace Bushnell, the show also owes a lot to Jane Austen (the sharp female wit) and Woody Allen (the reflection on love in the Big Apple), combining the two aspects in a practically flawless exercise in smart comedy. If a complaint has to be made, it would be that the straight-to-camera asides (used in early episodes) come off as a little distracting from the main narrative flow, which is marvelous: dealing with a familiar yet interesting topic through the eyes of four wonderful "heroines" (all perfectly defined in less than five minutes - very remarkable), it generates 23 minutes of solid, heartfelt laughs.

The cast is quite simply astounding, especially the more pessimistic, and therefore funnier, Miranda and Samantha, with Nixon's cold intellectual ideally counterbalanced by Cattrall's feisty man-eater. Astonishingly, though, considering the latter's foul mouth in the remainder of the series, it is a bit of a surprise to find out that the pilot is the show's least profane episode, the F-word being spoken only twice: once by Nixon as the girls discuss The Last Seduction (one of the reasons they believe emotionless sex is possible), and once by the irresistibly charming Noth (the program's best male cast-member) in the last scene, which acts as the beginning of the serial's juiciest storyline. Absolutely fabulous.

I hate the name. Sex and the city? sounded so cheesy and not attractive at all, and all I could think of is rich, beautiful NYC girl talking about shoes, bags or well, sex. But I was beyond surprised after I finish watching the first episode. It was sharp, stylish and accompanied by great acting. I like the first episode, it was done well. Sarah Jessica Parker might not be the hottest TV female star of the 90's, but she surely steal every scene she is in. I think the series reputation as 'chick flick' might be damaged on the eyes of male viewers, though its not as great as football games or X-files but for a romance and comedy genre series? It sure has class!

We're introduced to the four main protagonists for the first time here and it's a competent beginning. We catch a glimpse of each of the girls' different personalities and ideas about love and relationships. While I get that Miranda is supposed to be the 'feminist' of the group, she's such a ball buster that it's hard to believe any guy would bother to take any interest in her at all. She treats Skipper like dirt and he still pursues her. Not believable. Her abrasive personality and clear disdain of men is a complete turn off. And it's not like she's so beautiful that her looks make up for her prickly nature. A bone of contention: the 'English girl' at the beginning of the episode is supposed to be from London, however, she is clearly Australian with her accent. Not sure why they couldn't have made her from Sydney, or simply cast an actual British actress. The jazz that accompanies this episode is a perfect complement to the seductive themes of sex, lust and attraction. It's a pity it's not woven throughout the entire series. It feels like it could have been another character, like New York. Loved the freeze frame on Carrie at the end. Coupled with the soundtrack it felt very film noir.