5 reasons why a reboot of “Sex and the City” will be a complete disaster

0

In 2004, Sex and the City stopped, which doesn’t seem to have been too long ago.

But anyone who remembers the series knows that since the series finale, things have changed drastically. Reruns remind viewers of certain controversial topics and repulsive scenes that, by today’s standards, will never make it to screen.

But there is enough Sex and the City love and nostalgia that rumors of a reboot continue.

Two feature-length movies were included in the series, as well as plans for a third that never came to fruition. HBO has now confirmed a reboot on their streaming network in the form of a limited series to air, though specifics are not yet known.

There are more than a few reasons, however, why the new Sex and the City just won’t work. Is it worthwhile?

The reboot of “Sex and the City” will not include all the characters.

At its heart, “Sex and the City” in New York City was about four best friends dealing with single life.

Over all life’s struggles, Carrie Bradshaw (Sarah Jessica Parker), Miranda Hobbs (Cynthia Nixon), Charlotte York (Kristin Davis) and Samantha Jones (Kim Cattrall) relied on each other for support and friendship.

But there will no longer be at least one of them in the revival, which would alter the entire nature of the story.

Cattrall had already promised to SATC that she was done. Her reluctance to participate is why the third film was never reportedly made. So a reboot would have to justify the absence of Samantha and would thus be insufficient.

The material is not revolutionary anymore.

There was no other series with powerful female characters that spoke freely about sex when Sex and the City premiered.

Yeah. But now? On all networks, the genre is oversaturated.

The way for many imitators has been paved by Carrie and her friends. However, it doesn’t feel innovative to revive the same themes – it feels predictable and stale.

More than two decades after the 1998 debut of the series, things are now different.

Are we really going to need another series on women, dating and sex when it’s all done before?

Sex and the City is not so famous in today’s world anymore.

Sarah Jessica Parker wants a movie called “Sex and the City 3″-” Charlotte may have finally moved to the suburbs.”

‘Sex and the City’ obviously dealt with problems with sex and dating.

Yet fashion was another major theme.

Carrie’s closet was particularly envied by the crowd, but all four women were obscenely wealthy and spent their money on suits, bags and Manolo Blahniks.

In the early 2000s, this sort of bland consumerism was popular.

Yeah. But now? With all the waste, some parts of the population are fed up.

Without high-end apparel, the show wouldn’t be the same. Who can picture Carrie at H&M browsing the clearance racks? But Carrie’s luxurious lifestyle may no longer suit the bill in a world where many women favor minimalism and frugality to consumerism.

The “Sex and the City” movies did not succeed.

The two “Sex and the City” films serve as cautionary tales about how bad things can go for the franchise, even though the writers have never tried a reboot.

The first received only criticism for being unnecessary and inappropriate.

The second film, however, was downright offensive, culminating in the moment when Carrie showed her exposed leg while wearing a burqa to hail a cab while the girls were visiting Abu Dhabi.

If the movies are any indication of how the reboot might play out, it’s best to just avoid it altogether.

Most television reboots don’t work

It’s common to want to reinvent and revive a classic series. Most of them, though, don’t do the original series justice. Gilmore Girls, Full House, Melrose Place, Arrested Development, 90210, Roseanne…. the list goes on.

There’s no reason to believe that Sex and the City would be any different. Maybe it’s better to leave the memories of this perfect series from the 2000s intact than to ruin them with another unnecessary reboot.

Share.

Leave A Reply