A 'Sex & the City' reboot without Samantha Jones - it's like a 'How I met your Mother' reboot without Robin or rebooting 'Friends' without Chandler (the thought makes my eyes roll and cry and itch). Can do but no good. But this piece is not only about SATC; it's about reboots. I'm not saying that reboots are a bad thing. 'One day at a time' and 'Gilmore Girls' are two examples on the top of my mind that were quite successful. But rebooting SATC without 1/4 main characters seems like pushing luck. I get that it is very easy money - but what about legacy? What about the risk to reward ratio? Is a reboot worth risking the legacy the show created in the first apace? Or is money so blinding - even for millionaire actors - that nothing else matters?
Or - perhaps - maybe the 3/4 actors are confident the reboot will be good? Or maybe, with Samantha Jones they would have made much more money, and without Samantha Jones - they will still make more money than not rebooting at all? Ah the permutations of life.
No comments:
Post a Comment