Sex And The City vs. Star Trek

With motion pictures pending for each iconic fracchise, it struck me that some discussion of "Star Trek" and "Sex and the City" was in order. Dare we compare? I do! You can read my analysis in the first few messages of this discussion.

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Mark Zajac on May 9, 2008 at 6:48pm: My work can be solitary. I often spend long hours at the computer, on my own. At times, it has been a great comfort to switch on the television and experience vicarious friendship. In this regard, neither "Star Trek" nor "Sex and the City" has ever let me down.

Live long and prosper, baby.

[:-)] Mark

P.S.

Here is my favorite Carrie Bradshaw rehtorical: "What about the za-za-zou?"; ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by leela42 on May 9, 2008 at 6:55pm: I can honestly say I've never thought about any of these points before, although I too love both shows. I'm thinking about them now...brain slowly churning...nothing articulate emerging...will have to get back to you on this, hehe!; ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Mark Zajac on May 9, 2008 at 6:58pm: What struck me first was that both shows are really about steadfast friendships. Then I started to notice more similarities. The exercise amused me because the two shows are so different at face value.

It took me a while to think of all this stuff so, do take your time but then I will be curious to hear your views.

[:-)] Mark; ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by leela42 on May 9, 2008 at 7:07pm: I had often thought about the importance of friendship, loyalty and idealism in the Star Trek franchise. As you say, friendship and loyalty are just as obviously central to SitC (although I'd say cynicism is equally matched with idealism there). You're right, the genres vary so widely I don't think I ever would have thought to juxtapose the two. Once done, though, a world of interesting possibilities opens up! I'll definitely report back.; ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Mark Zajac on May 9, 2008 at 7:36pm: Correct! Idealism and cynicism are distinguishing traits of the two plus, "Sex and the City" had a healthy dose of hedonism as well.

[:-)] Mark; ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Whatchawatchin on May 9, 2008 at 7:55pm: The words "profound" and "Sex in the City" do not go together. :-P

This an enjoyable concept, though. Nicely done. Who represent the "red shirts" in SitC, though? The guys that Samantha eats for lunch?; ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Mark Zajac on May 9, 2008 at 8:00pm: Skipper? Remember him? He got sort-of red-shirted by Miranda.

[:-)] Mark

P.S.

Yeah, it was not "profound" but that was partly the fun of this exercise: can deconstruction give meaning to something that is shallow at face value?

P.P.S.

Thanks for Felix Ungar by the way. That showed some careful reflection.; ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Whatchawatchin on May 9, 2008 at 8:03pm: I just read back through. I really didn't mean it to be offensive. I always liked that character..lol.; ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Mark Zajac on May 9, 2008 at 8:06pm: No, no. I was sincere in my thanks. You showed some real grasp of my character.

[:-)] Mark; ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by mercurio3 on May 16, 2008 at 6:21pm: lol. I've never watched an episode of Star Trek, but if is the male version of sex in the city set in the future, i still dont want to watch it. lol. =); ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Don of the Dead on May 17, 2008 at 8:55am: I hate both. so I vote Star Wars.; ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by pterosaur on May 17, 2008 at 9:52am: If I had to choose, I'd go with SATC. It was a really well written show even though it was girlier than a teenage slumber party (without the massacre). As a writer, I have to give credit to the writers of SATC. And I never got the whole Star Trek phenomena.

As for comparing the two, you can't. Apples and oranges. Although, they both have human actors playing parts in front of a camera.; ▶ Reply to This