as you all probably know, there are few things i enjoy more than ranting about things i have limited information about. it makes the rant far more belligerent and ill-advised, two concepts upon which i believe humor might just be based.
anyway, today my subject of choice is the new series set to air on NBC called "lipstick jungle" (preview video behind the cut at the end of the post). it is based on a book by the author of "sex and the city," which, as we all know, is tv legend, in a way. to understand where i am going with this, you must first understand my feelings on "sex and the city."
SATC, in my opinion, was an extraordinarily offensive television show. it is, however, tolerable to me for only 3 reasons.
1) it is a classic. much like a time-honored racist, sexist story we still read/show to our children (disney's peter pan, for example), it will continue to be adored and accepted by many even after the advancement of women makes shows of its variety a small blip in our feminist history (am i being wishful?)
2) despite the deplorability of some of the characters (more later) the choice of actors and their performances were phenomenal.
3) for the love of bloody hell, i cannot tear my eyes away when it's on!!!!
b) the breasts. the naked breasts.
c) for a show about straight ladies, it could not have been any GAYER.
d) the poorly-written dialogue they give the carrie character is super funny, between cringes.
e) sometimes... it just speaks to me.
look, i love that show as much as the next girl, i'll admit it. the problem is, that love came only after i could get over the fact that, at least the carrie character, is totally demeaning and insulting to intelligent women everywhere and that the show's stylists were simply never going to stop putting her in belly shirts, no matter what the mandates of fashion prescribe.
as we all sit in anticipation of the "sex and the city" movie, we are offered "lipstick jungle" to chew on for the time being. here is my problem: i can already tell this is gong to suck. first of all, it's on network television, which means NO BOOBIES. lame. secondly, at least from the ads, there does not appear to really be a "quirky" carrie-like character. for all her bad dialogue and penchant for falling in love with her abusers, carrie was the heart and soul of that show. if not for her neurotic asides, then for her kooky hats and bags. by god, without her it would have just been a soap opera about a pointy-nosed prude/ho with daddy issues, an inexplicably misanthropic closeted lesbian with bad hair, and an older broad with a bangin' body who would do it with just about anyone... wait, that show still sounds good! that's my point, i guess. the characters were probably well-written in the first place (i dunno, i never read the book. this is the part where i don't know what i'm talking about), but also, you can really tell how much the actors brought to the table. the casting choices for carrie, charlotte, miranda, and samantha were fucking awesome. i honestly feel like so much has changed in the industry (for the worse) since that show began, that, if it were to be casted today, there might be much less-interesting types of women in those roles, and that would be sad.
i am sick and tired of watching shows on tv about women where the women look exactly the same. it is boring. the other night i was watching "law and order: svu" aka my reason for owning a tv, and there were not one but TWO female actors in the episode with very obvious, hideous plastic surgery (not as part of the plot). wtf? are kids now going to grow up thinking that's simply what women all look like? essentially, white ladies who look like they have been repeatedly dried-out and then re-hydrated like a cinnamon-bread raisin? this is terrifying. i know tv is all about entertainment, but i don't think it's too much to ask to see some real people on there. not even reality shows have real people on them except for "the biggest loser" and those people are dying to change. not that there is anything wrong with being thin and white, but good heavens, give us options! and no more frightfaced, botoxed bitches!
oh, and by "options" i don't mean the one that looks kinda asian-y on "lipstick jungle." back to my point, i am dreading this show. it looks like such a boring mess with boring clothes and formulaic story lines about giving good blow jobs. and, seriously, brooke shields? obviously the simple solution is not to watch, but a combination of morbid curiosity and a real passion for self-inflicted punishment will certainly lead me to check it out. i read an article in one of the gossip magazines about how this is only one of THREE new shows coming out soon with a similar theme: wealthy "power" women shopping at saks and looking for love in the big city. i don't know how much more of this i can handle. when are they going to make a show about women like me? middle-class fuck-ups who hunt thrift racks by day, haunt gay bars by night, and give great blow jobs to dildos.
WHEN? you know you'd watch.
Yeah, Sex in the City was lame/awesome. If you want a good TV fashion fix, try Ugly Betty. The clothing is amazing. If you look at the direction men's fashion is taking this year, it is such a mirror to the outfits that Marc wore all last season. Oh, and Betty is supposed to be frumpy, but all the clothes she wears are actually designer, and she usually looks pretty awesome. oh, and the show is super faggy. seriously, like as faggy as network TV gets.
Posted by: Gaycondo | January 31, 2008 at 08:06 PM
good point. i always forget to watch that show because it's on channel seven and on thursday nights, but i think i'm going to get the dvds. the little brother is adorable!
Posted by: amanda-faye | February 05, 2008 at 04:35 AM