In Defense of “And Just Like That…” — Part One: The Elusive Samantha Jones
I’ve been an avid audience for the Sex and the City series since 2000 and enjoy watching Sarah Jessica Parker, Cynthia Nixon, Kristin Davis and Kim Cattrall play Carrie, Miranda, Charlotte and Samantha, respectively.
I followed the saga as to why Sex and the City 3 never happened, from Kim Cattrall’s pointed (understatement) comments towards Sarah Jessica Parker, to the thoughtful, logical explanations and perspectives that came from writers and cast alike during a 2018 podcast called “Origins With James Andrew Miller.”
That podcast (“SATC Episode Three: 1, 2 and Out”) has the clearest overview of the entire situation.
Cattrall is the only one of the main actresses that does not participate, but the program is very fair in covering her perspective using her public comments. Cattrall’s co-workers (especially writer Amy Harris and actor Willie Garson) come across more confused over her choices than anything else.
Artistically speaking, I understand the criticisms leveled at Sex and the City 2, and agree with some, but not all, of them. My issue is that I was uncomfortable with where writer-director Michael Patrick King took the character of Samantha Jones in the final act.
I understand choices need to be made for comedy, and Kim Cattrall was wonderful at playing Samantha’s more over the top antics, but the idea of Samantha losing her cool and ragefully gyrating in front of a bunch of religious men in Abu Dhabi veered too close to turning the character into a clown.
Confiscated hormone pills or no, it was a moment that sacrificed character to get a laugh, albeit an uncomfortable one. Even though Cynthia Nixon’s Miranda voices how disrespectful Samantha’s actions were (as if commenting for the viewer), it remains the toughest moment to sit through again any time I revisit the film.
It’s also, frankly, the toughest moment to sit through again across six seasons of television and two movies. It’s such a glaring standout for complicated reasons that it would not surprise me if the scene contributed to why Kim Cattrall did not want to return for the third movie.
Having made it abundantly clear, especially in a 2017 television interview with Piers Morgan, that she was “releasing” Samantha and would never play her again, there was no point in approaching Cattrall for any future project.
The issue of “the missing Samantha Jones” is where I will start in terms of addressing criticisms I’ve read on social media with respect to the latest iteration of Sex and the City for HBOMax, smartly rebranded as And Just Like That…
Spoilers follow.
In the first episode of And Just Like That…, Carrie and Miranda discuss Samantha’s absence. Apparently, Carrie had a discussion with Samantha that Samantha’s PR services for Carrie as an author no longer made much sense since the publishing industry has changed so drastically.
It seems Samantha indicated she understood, but then stopped taking Carrie’s calls, as well as Miranda’s and Charlotte’s, and moved to London. In episode two, Samantha doesn’t turn up for the funeral of “Mr. Big” (Carrie’s longtime on-again, off-again boyfriend and eventual husband), and instead sends a gift that serves as a prominent story beat.
I was less disturbed by the idea that Samantha may have fled the scene because of employment or money issues with Carrie than the idea of her moving to London. A minor sub-plot of the first film was how much Samantha hated being away from New York. So, right away, we have a character continuity issue.
However, I also understand it would make little sense that Samantha is still in New York and the other women never run into her.
Other arguments I’ve seen on social media:
#1: as a character, Samantha would never let money get in the way of a friendship. She’d never “ghost” Carrie and the girls;
#2: There is no way Samantha wouldn’t fly back to be at Carrie’s side during her time of need; and
#3: This rift makes no sense and they should have killed Samantha instead of Big.
Let’s start with #2 — easiest to address. It’s really hard to have a character on a television series show up for another character when the actress famous for playing her no longer wants to act the role.
If they had re-cast, chances are the re-cast would be distracting and there would be even more ire (i.e., “The new Samantha is no Kim Cattrall!”). The sub-argument people make is, “Fine! Then don’t do the show at all! It’s nothing without ‘Samantha’!’”
Well, the other actresses and the creator felt there were more stories to tell. Were they supposed to avoid doing that at all costs just because Kim Cattrall didn’t want to come back? Seems unreasonable.
Moving on to #3 — my understanding is the one aspect of the third film that has been retained for And Just Like That… is Big’s death. This plot point was reported three years ago in the “Origins” podcast I referenced.
Michael Patrick King’s idea was intended to be a springboard for exploring how Carrie would reconnect to herself after the death of the love of her life. Who is she now that Big’s gone? After all, the final line of the original series, as King is reminding everyone in press interviews, includes this: “the most exciting, challenging and significant relationship of all is the one you have with yourself.”
If Samantha dies instead of Big, revisiting that concept doesn’t work on the same level. The series would then become about all three women grieving Samantha in their own ways — which is certainly an interesting idea and could be a boon for these actresses, but is also inherently more dramatic and dark, making it potentially tough to mine for comedy and light.
If people are upset by the tone of the first two episodes and fearful the series won’t lighten up? Imagine what they’d be feeling in that situation.
The alternative of having both Samantha and Big die? That’s too much death and grief for this narrative, especially if you factor the unexpected passing of Willie Garson (more on that in Part 3).
All the mortality issues would make And Just Like That… less escapist and way more existential than anyone wants.
With respect to #1, Samantha couldn’t just traipse off to London without some form of conflict. There would need to be some explanation, especially for the segment of the audience that doesn’t follow the offscreen issues, as to why she never comes back, at any point, and never contacts her friends.
So, there was only one option left if King, Parker, Nixon and Davis wanted to tell more Carrie, Miranda and Charlotte stories: a rift between Samantha and the girls.
Does the reason for the rift work? Not really. Still, I don’t know what other reason would work, considering these four characters were set up as “unbreakable soul mates.” To most of the audience it’s like when The Beatles broke up!
Even so, I am 51, and friends I thought would be around for all of my days are not active in my life anymore. Because of that reality, it’s not hard for me to buy the idea that one of the friends might choose to separate.
I do think King let a little too much Kim Cattrall allusion into the script. Carrie’s line, “I thought I was more to her than an ATM” feels more ‘showrunner vs. Kim Cattrall’ than Carrie and Samantha. Those words felt wrong coming out of Carrie’s mouth, no matter how upset Carrie may be.
Could King have gotten away with saying “Samantha merely drifted apart from the other girls”? Possibly. Of the four women, Samantha would be the most likely to move on, but it’s still a tough sell considering the four were such a tight unit.
Bear in mind, we are only hearing what Carrie thinks is the reason Samantha left. Samantha won’t discuss it with her. So, that doesn’t mean Carrie is correct. She’s assuming Samantha is only mad about the firing. Was there anything else? Carrie doesn’t actually know.
What if the firing was the latest in a string of disappointments for Samantha? Samantha was always non-judgmental. What if Samantha got tired of Carrie not offering “judgment free” friendship in return and just hasn't said it?
One thing Kim Cattrall was always quick to point out in interviews over 20 years was that she was ten years older than the other actresses, and they all had children, where she did not.
What if Samantha, who is a few years older than the other characters, had a similar issue and decided she was losing common ground with friends who were married and had children?
That is an aspect of the real Cattrall situation that might fit better than what King chose, and a reality for Samantha’s character that’s a little easier to believe.
These suggestions would be predicated on whether Michael Patrick King actually considered subtext when making his decisions. Is it possible he’s laid groundwork for a “reveal” and that Carrie doesn’t have all the information because Samantha wouldn't talk? Or was the conversation between Carrie and Miranda regarding Samantha “cut and dry, end of story”?
His call, and obviously, time will tell.
As only four episodes out of ten have aired, it’s possible we’re going to get more bits and pieces of Samantha via text messages as the series progresses.
As for “ghosting” her friends and not returning for the funeral? Well, despite the reality that Cattrall would not return there is precedent that Samantha is not the easiest when it comes to discussing what she’s feeling.
In the fourth season of Sex and the City, a woman she has a brief relationship with calls Samantha out on her aversion to talking. Later that same season, she couldn’t connect to her emotions when Miranda’s mother died, and in the fifth season, doesn't talk to Carrie for a few days when she feels judged by Carrie after Carrie unknowingly walks in on her during one of her flings.
Samantha got better with her emotions, yes, but sometimes past patterns stick around.
I’ve seen a lot of snarky comments like “Kim Cattrall knew this show would be bad, so she stayed away.”
The fact is, this show would not exist if Kim Cattrall had wanted to return. Instead, we would have seen the release of Sex and the City 3 in 2018.
It seems fairly obvious that if we had seen that film, it would be much different than what we’re seeing now, since the cultural climate shifted in four years time and has had an impact on the writing choices.
While I agree that some of the writing on And Just Like That… could be stronger, there are plenty of dynamite scenes that have occured in the first four episodes. I don’t think the show is the desecration of the original series some are unreasonably framing it to be.
I wanted to see these characters again, with or without Samantha. I’m glad they’ve returned.
With much more to say, it’s clear splitting this into more than one entry was necessary. Next entry will deal with criticisms surrounding Mr. Big’s death, Miranda becoming “a Karen”, “woke-ness and cringey-ness” and the handling of Stanford Blatch’s character due to the passing of actor Willie Garson.
Links to Part Two and Part Three
