“The SATC ladies will make $1 million per episode for the HBO Max revival” links

B8019_201005_24_0081

Cynthia Nixon, Sarah Jessica Parker & Kristin Davis are getting paid $1 million per episode for their ten-episode Sex and the City revival on HBO Max. So… they’re each getting $10 million for it. Which seems pretty reasonable? [Pajiba]
Chrissy Teigen has lavender hair now & she sort of pulls it off? [RCFA]
I have no memory of Robert Pattinson & Betty White becoming friends at the People’s Choice Awards in 2012. [Go Fug Yourself]
Rachel Maddow is really mad at Donald Trump. [Towleroad]
Ellen DeGeneres talks about her bout of coronavirus. [Just Jared]
Daniel Craig’s final 007 outing will never be released! [Dlisted]
Spike Lee’s children are this year’s Golden Globes ambassadors. [LaineyGossip]
GOP d–kwads keep saying it’s a time for unity. It’s not. [Jezebel]
I love all the wholesome sea shanty Tik Toks. [Buzzfeed]
The trailer for Barb and Star Go To Vista Del Mar. [OMG Blog]

Sarah Jessica Parker leaves 'The Today Show' in New York

Related stories

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

48 Responses to ““The SATC ladies will make $1 million per episode for the HBO Max revival” links”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Natters5 says:

    In the past Kim Catrall had issues not only with how poorly written the movies were but how SJP garnered the lion’s share of the money from SATC. This was a ploy to dig it into her that she missed out on an equal share of the SATC $$$. I still admire Kim, she knows when not to beat a dead horse and won’t put her name on just anything unlike SJP who would literally do anything for a paycheck.

    • Neon says:

      Well said. Thing is, they were probably on their knees offering well over $10m (she already got that for the 2nd film) for her to do the film and probably couldn’t get a cinema release, well before COVID hit, approved without Sam/Kim signing on.

      $arah Je$$ica comes across as a $-grabbing fake. She is so dated with her fashionista schtick (not to mention she looks just awful these days trying to be so cutting edge) and her mean-girl underhandedness with trying to take a colleague down through media leaks is finally catching up with her. Oh, and her shoe line looks awful. I had secondhand embarrassment for her when she did that huge pink dress with mismatched shoes story, outside her NYC house. She looked idiotic but all her yes-people were probably praising her for her edginess / avant garde fashionista-ism.

      And why did Kristin Davis and Cynthia Nixon just put up with that? Kim was absolutely right to be unhappy about remuneration. It’s not just money, is it? Equal/fair pay means you’re recognising contribution.

      • Natters5 says:

        I also don’t like how she had her minions bad mouth Kim Catrall and do her dirty work for her. All because they want the SATC $$.

      • Killfanora says:

        Aaaand, without Kim Catrall Sex and the City is just The City. It’ll tank.

  2. BayTampaBay says:

    Jane Austen and Jilly Cooper having a love child and calling it Bridgerton is a wonderful idea.

    A SATC re-boot, no mater who stars in it, is a very bad idea. Did not a SATC re-boot about Carrie’s early years in NYC fail to ignite and catch fire?

    • Wiglet Watcher says:

      I forgot about the young Carrie! Yeah, this latest grab for money will be more of the same which is dull without Samantha. She was the dynamic character. I’m passing.

  3. Mirage says:

    They will get 1 million each and SJP will presumably get paid extra if she’s a producer?

    • BayTampaBay says:

      The three stars will get a million each PER EPISODE!

      • Mirage says:

        It’s a lot of money. I wish Kim Cattrall was getting that payout!

      • Tiffany says:

        But producer credits is a larger payday.

      • Neon says:

        @Mirage, Kim’s got something infinitely more valuable: self-respect and being true to oneself.

        Plus I bet pissing $arah Je$$ica and Michael Patrick King off by saying no to #3 was worth $10m in itself for her!

        Shoulda paid her (and the other two, who seem to be pushovers) fair pay from the early days. Can’t believe she got $3.2m compared with the others’ 350K per episode!

  4. Lillyfromlilooet says:

    I’m sure Cynthia and Kristin will appreciate the paycheck. That’s all I got.

  5. minx says:

    It’s such a blatant cash grab. Nobody needs to see more SATC, there are no more stories to tell.

    • BayTampaBay says:

      These are no longer scrappy young women on their way up in the big city. This will be about three middle-aged wealthy whinny white women in NYC.

      What is the story to be told?

      • minx says:

        Exactly.

      • Lanie says:

        Yup. This is gonna be Karens in the City. Many times with the way they spoke to service people and underlings, they were 90% of the way there back in the 90s.

      • Amy Too says:

        I watched the SATC movies 1 and 2 over the last couple of days. One of the main problems seems to be that these characters have not been allowed to actually mature or develop in any way. So it’s extremely jarring to see a 50 year old SJP basically playing a 32 year old Carrie. They are still mentally, emotionally, intellectually, socially, sartorially, and relationship-ly the exact same people that they were at the start of the series. Carrie, especially. Her character has not matured in any way. Her circumstances change, but she herself doesn’t change at all.

        A series or a movie about real, actual 50+ year old women acting like 50+ year old women with 50+ years of life experience and 30+ years of friendship would be a really great and interesting thing to watch. I don’t have a problem with seeing middle aged or older women on the screen. I think there should be more roles for older women and more stories written about them. But with the SATC movies, it’s like they’ve cast a 50+ year old actress to play a 32 year character and that’s what makes it so jarring and distracting. People comment on how they look “so old” in the movies, especially the second one, and it’s not because they “look old” for 50+ year old women, it’s that they “look old” for the 30-something year old women they’re still playing.

      • Prof Trelawney says:

        Amy too, v thoughtful, so agree w you. They were more mature at the end of the series than they were in the movies, and watching continued growth could have been a real contribution, something we don’t see enough of, instead of clinging to the past, to youth, etc.

    • Mabs A'Mabbin says:

      I bet people would flock to a movie about SATC Greed Kills Friendships…A True Biography of Women and Middle Age.

      • MyOpinion says:

        @ Mabs A’Mabbin, we don’t have to pay to see that, SJP already swooped in on Kim Cattrall lost her brother and SJP posted a comment about it online, to show that she “cared”, and Kim let her have it, as she should.
        I have HBO Max, and they sent me an alert and I just rolled my eyes, we are not interested in hearing or seeing more about this story as they have certainly killed a dead horse. I have no idea why anyone would think that someone would watch this.
        As for a true perspective of women that have had long lasting friendships for decades and how that has balanced and supported each other as their lives change, that would be interesting!

  6. Miranda says:

    Is it weird that one of the major reasons I’ve always hated SATC is because that spoiled white lady porn resulted in the real-life resident(s) of Carrie’s apartment having to shoo obnoxious fans (including SJP herself!) off their steps ever since? I mean, as a New Yorker, I get annoyed when a tourist asks for directions to the Friends apartment or the restaurant from Seinfeld (which at least exist. I’m also asked about any number of places for which the directions would begin “first you catch a flight to L.A…”). If those people were actually knocking on my door, I’d probably rig up some boiling oil to douse them with.

    • chimes@midnight says:

      Is it weird that I actually enjoy Hocus Pocus less now because of SJP’s shenanigans? Here I am, bopping along, waiting for the AMUCK! AMUCK! AMUCK! scene and then I remember that SJP is awful. :-(

  7. Mabs A'Mabbin says:

    Daniel Craig’s final 007 outing will never be released!

    😭🤣😭🤣😭🤣😭🤣

    • Mia4s says:

      That’s how they will solve the problem of casting a new Bond! They will never release his last movie and therefore won’t ever have to cast someone new! Problem solved! 😂

  8. Lory says:

    KARENS IN THE CITY! Ha!

  9. Mia says:

    I hope Samantha found friends that don’t slut shame her

    Lmao “Karens in the City”

  10. NYStateofMind says:

    They’re going to have to pay the photoshop people double.

  11. Valerie says:

    When I think of people who need to make more money, Sarah Jessica Parker comes to mind. /s

  12. Mignionette says:

    SJP displaying all the behaviors of a Narc during the publicizing of this reboot.

    She just can’t help but having a dig at KC. KC is still living rent free in her head 20+ years later.

    That is power.

  13. chitowngal says:

    WHY?

  14. Sunnyvale says:

    Wow does SJP have something on hbo bosses?!! Who green lighted this s*** or better yet thought it was worth paying 1mil per episode?!! It’ll be a massive flop and will bury them(hbo) or at least affect their reputation as they’re in stuf competition to get views/subscribers from Disney,Netflix..etc

    • MyOpinion says:

      @ Sunnyvale, what happened was, is that SJP went into their offices and made a pitch that her loyal fans were dying for a follow up and her fans must be listened to! That’s how this was made, or she has a contract with HBO and stipulated that she would not commit to a contract unless it included a SATC update, which stifled the contract, think about it!

  15. Talia says:

    It makes you realise how awful SJP must be to work with if Kim couldn’t bear to put up with her long enough to film 10 episodes even in exchange for $10 million.

    I went back and tried to watch episodes recently and the character of Carrie is just awful. I know SJP was asked about Carrie not being a very nice person in an interview and apparently thought there was nothing wrong with her which suggests to me that the character and the actress have a lot in common.

    In real life, I think Samantha and Miranda would have dropped Carrie as the whining emotional leech she was fairly early on while Charlotte (who was far more of a people pleaser and inclined towards rose coloured glasses) might have kept on acting like a doormat for longer but probably would have wised up to the fact Carrie didn’t do reciprocal friendships as she (Charlotte) developed more of a backbone as she got older.

    I can’t see Carrie having any character development so this is going to be a 50+ woman acting like an immature early 20 something (which Carrie did in the show even though she was in her 30s) supported by her adoring followers. It is going to take some spectacularly good writing (and even better massaging of SJP’s ego to get the script approved) to get anything watchable.

    • Neon says:

      They were actually after Kim for a third film and the pay offer, I’m guessing, would have been higher than 10m as she’d already received that for second film and, pre-COVID, box office earnings projections would have been higher than revenue and profit for a streamed series.

    • Nic919 says:

      I hated Carrie even before the show ended. She basically dumped her friends to go to Paris with Baryshnikov and then Big, the gaslighting cheating asshole came back into her life when a well adjusted woman would have kept away from him the first time around. The fact they tried to sell the mess with Big as a healthy romance was messed up and showed no emotional growth. Samantha, miranda and the other one all had character arcs over the years, though I do agree with Kim that she had crap storylines toward the end. I had no interest in the movies, especially knowing that Big was back and couldn’t understand why they did a racist sequel. So really not interested in the new series because I doubt Carrie will have changed in 20 years.

      I would rather watch Golden Girls returns because that show has held up and is a much better show about women in their 50s and 60s.

      • Amy Too says:

        Not only was it SO racist and xenophobic and anti-Muslim and sexist and ageist, it was basically rich people travel/real estate/fashion p*rn during the middle of an economic recession. 2010. They must have been writing/filming this right when the economic crash led to the huge recession and they just decided to go with their insanely luxurious vacation-as-plot anyways. Yet the recession exists in this world and is acknowledged, so it’s not like this is pure fantasy. They say something about how they’re so over dealing with this depressing/boring economic crash so they NEED this luxury vacation to remind them what life is really supposed to be like. And by dealing with the recession, they must mean hearing about how it’s affecting other people because none of them are affected in the slightest. !!!!!

        And then the entire third act’s main conflict centers around whether or not they’ll make it to the airport in time to use their first class tickets or if they’ll be late and have to ride coach! The emotional stakes are seriously possibly having to travel coach instead of in their luxury airplane private pod-suite things. Oh, and whether Charlotte would have time to buy souvenirs or if she’d be forced to buy something from the airport gift shop, which would be so gross and tacky, apparently. How was anyone supposed to relate to that? Empathize or sympathize with the characters and their “plight”? Carrie had a brown manservant follow her around carrying her sandals and holding a parasol over her after she threw a fit and ditched her friends so she could have a sulky walk on the beach because the New Yorker didn’t lick her boots in their review of her book about “starter marriages.” In which she went through the marital vows one by one and trashed them. And which she thought she was qualified to write after being married for less than two years. She had this same manservant guy heating up milk for her at 3AM because she forgot to him he could go home for the night.

  16. Pix says:

    SATC without Samantha is trash. SJP recently bought and is renovating side-by-side brownstones in the West Village – I assume she really needs the money. Also, please do not bring back Patricia Fields or anyone influenced by her for wardrobe. I don’t think I could stand the tacky outfits. Ugh. I’m just so annoyed they’re bringing it back.

  17. Poisonella says:

    I don’t like the way they did Samantha’s character in the second movie. We’re supposed to think this successful PR person is tone deaf to the cultures of the foreign countries she’s doing business with? Was insulting. Also, I thought the sex at the end was kind of nasty too. They should do something new!

  18. KBeth says:

    I guess I’m naive because I’m stunned they’re being paid that much money for what will likely be crap.

  19. Mignionette says:

    This reboot will fall squarely into Karen territory if they’re not careful….

  20. MangoAngelesque says:

    SJP has just always seemed like she’s aching to make a designer coat out of a bunch of Dalmatian dogs. I never understood why people liked her or her Carrie character. So unbearably unpleasant.

  21. lucy2 says:

    I have no interest in this, but whatever. Is it weird that I don’t find the payout that insane? Many other actors have been paid that per episode, on various networks and platforms.
    It’s a small cast (3/4 of the original!), this was one of their more successful properties, and it’s not that out of line with what some other similar companies are paying.

    GOP calls for unity = them saying “do what we want”. What are they offering to unify? How are they trying to meet in the middle. They aren’t. They just want the scrutiny to go away and the money to come back.

  22. Galpal says:

    I have absolutely zero interest in this SATC thang. Especially, with what is going on, this seems so ridiculous and tone-deaf. I’m all for escapism, but this…..

  23. coolspray says:

    Big MEH to Chrissy’s lavender hair (wig). Lil Kim did it better.

  24. Hannah says:

    WTAF! $10 mil to watch 3 neurotic, privileged white ladies still behaving like they’re 30. No thanks

  25. youdontnomi says:

    Wig cap (its a stretchy pantyhose looking thing). You can just kind of wrap your hair around your head and secure the hair with bobby pins before you put on the wig cap. That all makes your hair flat so that the wig isn’t bumpy looking.