Lily Collins ‘did not expect’ the huge cultural backlash to ‘Emily in Paris’

Britain's Prince Harry leans over to speak with his father Prince Charles in accompanying him to attend a coral reef health and resilience meeting with speeches and a reception with delegates at Fishmongers Hall in London, Wednesday, Feb. 14, 2018. The ev

I only sat down and watched the first season of Emily in Paris this fall, after seeing a million negative headlines about it for a year. I didn’t really understand why people had such strong opinions for or against what was a ditzy, frothy little escapist show. Yes, it was too white and yes, there are parts of Emily which are very “ugly American.” But I thought EIP was, like, 85% cute. It was a comfortable, unchallenging little binge-watch. Lily Collins stars as Emily, and she’s a producer on the show. She heard allll of the criticism and she’s tried to use her power as the star/producer to improve it, by hiring diverse talent in front of the camera and behind the camera. The show brought in more writers and the stories will be a bit more realistic. Lily covers the new issue of Glamour and she chats about all of the EIP hate and a lot more:

She made the mistake of saying Emily is probably 22: “I made the silliest mistake [with] that. And I’ve had to pay for that one. I’ve openly admitted, ‘I clearly got that one wrong.’”

On EIP getting Golden Globe nominated while ‘I May Destroy You’ was snubbed: “It was definitely an interesting time for the world when those Golden Globe nominations came out. Honestly, my focus and my concern [at the time] was more on the subject matter at hand and change that needed to be made, as opposed to how I fit into all of that with the show. Yeah, it was definitely a lot.”

It was just supposed to be a cute comedy: “We never represented it as anything other than what it was going to be. And we didn’t know the world would be in the state that it was in when it came out. People said they were laughing and smiling for the first time in a long time, that it reminded them of what fun felt like and that we were able to offer some escapism and romanticism and travel. I was so proud of that. I did not expect it to all of a sudden be something that people were upset [about].”

Lily knows she f–ked up: “And we do poke fun at America too. Emily is just as willing to mention things about where she’s from, and they joke about her as much as things are joked about her coworkers or the way of life there. And so when it was little nitpicky things about deep dish, or that I messed up from the age, I laughed about that. I messed up, I’m so sorry. I know that in this industry, having been in it, having grown up in it, you know that not everyone’s going to love what you do all the time.”

Lily brought in more diverse voices: “I was really passionate about including [more] women, people of color, and also sexual orientation, to really show more of what the world is, and be a part of the Emily family…If there’s ever an opportunity to be better, do better, and have more representation and inclusion, you should run with it. There were certain conversations that we became a part of [such as the Golden Globes]…and while I don’t think I expected to be thrown into it in the way in which we were, I felt like it was definitely an opportunity to be able to do better in season two. It was definitely difficult to go through in a sense, but nowhere near as difficult as what the overall conversation was. And that was what was most important.”

She hopes people keep enjoying it: “I really hope people laugh and smile and get to have the same feelings of escapism and fun that they did the first season. I hope viewers find more of themselves in different characters, and feel seen and represented in the show. And I hope that we get a season three, because I really hope we get to come back and do this again.”

[From Glamour]

There’s part of me that’s like “wow, I genuinely feel a little bit sorry for her” and another part of me like “lol, that white woman got taught a much-needed lesson.” It can be both! She’s allowed to make her dumb/cute little comedy show and it doesn’t *need* to be perfectly representative of all French or ex-pat experiences. She’s also a white woman with enormous privilege who admitted that she could do better and the show could do better, and she probably wouldn’t have come to that realization without the huge cultural backlash. I respect the fact that she has publicly apologized several times now and that she’s trying to show people the changes she’s made. I hope EIP gets a third season too!




Cover courtesy of Glamour, other photos credit Carole Bethuel/Netflix

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

72 Responses to “Lily Collins ‘did not expect’ the huge cultural backlash to ‘Emily in Paris’”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Léna says:

    I’ll admit I found the first season really silly, but enjoyed it (as a French person the clichés were… clichés but harmless). I really enjoyed the second season.

  2. BusyLizzy says:

    I am French and most of the people I have discussed the show with agree : it’s ridiculous but harmless. It’s fun to watch and bitch about afterward. Sure, their vision of Paris is idealized and romanticized but it’s not supposed to be realistic.

    The one criticism I have is the lack of diversity. Paris is such a multicultural city, and it’s sadly not reflected in the show.

    • Mmc says:

      Maybe it’s because the French get to be portrayed as something other than a stereotype in other media.
      But in season 2 they had an Ukranian woman who was again portrayed as an ugly stereotype of an Eastern European. And we never get to be portrayed as something other than a stereotype. And that transcends fiction into real life discrimination Eastern Europeans constantly face. So maybe this one instance is harmless but in the grand scheme of things it’s not.

      • Arpeggi says:

        Yeah that was of extremely poor taste, I don’t get why they couldn’t realize that before filming it.

    • Emma says:

      Paris is a multicultural city. But, it’s also a political institution that upholds white privilege and French colonial legacies in many, many ways, and the fashion world is famously exclusionary. I agree the show should have done a better job in representing diversity.

  3. AmyB says:

    I will admit, I have not seen this show, so perhaps my opinion should be reserved for when/if I do. But can’t we have some simple/silly shows to escape into anymore? I don’t know? I am guessing – this came out during the pandemic, and it seemed tone deaf? And I can understand that. But does everything have to be so serious, addressing issues of the culture…? I don’t know. Sometimes, it’s nice to turn it all off for a bit and watch something light hearted.

    But, again, I haven’t seen this, so don’t come after me too hard LOL

    • smcollins says:

      I get what you’re saying, fluff is meant to be fun & a bit of mindless escapism, and not everything needs to be a commentary on society & culture BUT…. I also understand the need for diversity in the fun, mindless fluff (not implying you don’t, of course). Inclusiveness & diversity needs to be represented in all genres of entertainment, and not just as the main focus of a specific story or an act of tokenism, but just “there” as a natural part of the story. I hope I’m making sense, I feel like I’m not fully articulating my thoughts very well (coffee hasn’t completely kicked in yet).

      P.S. I haven’t watched the show, either, and I’m strictly going off what I’ve read about it.

      • Amy T says:

        Also haven’t seen it, and you both raise really good and important points. I think we – as a society – are (hopefully) working our way toward a more organic version of representation. By which I mean that stories we tell that might be centered around a particular type of character (eg: young White straight woman finding herself, middle-aged Black man taking the reins of successful family business) have something in them that reaches viewers whose realities are very different, whatever that might be. (Coffee has not kicked in here, either!)

      • AmyB says:

        So the main criticism was the lack of diversity? Say similar to the original SATC? Just trying to better understand. I can appreciate that, for sure.

      • osito says:

        I watched this YouTube commentary review ( of the show before seeing any of the show itself, and I think it reflects where people were *at the time*, which is really important to note. Relatedly, I think it’s also important to note that while the show might have its issues, it represented much larger issues in the entertainment industry for a lot of people.

        I think time might have softened some of the recollections about what was happening in the world when EiP premiered, so it’s not really just a conversation about why we can’t just have fluff. We can, and we do. Netflix was just pumping out all kinds of fluff and happened to really miss the mark with this one. Just take a look at their catalogue from last year: Virgin River, Sweet Magnolias, that incredibly-soppy-but-somehow-really-cute movie with Josh Duhamel and Leslie Bibb; BRIDGERTON (a bit later, but still, fluuuufffffff). I think EiP would have been an easily ignored and sailed into an unchallenging season 2, but then the *nominations* came and exposed the Hollywood Foreign Press Association for the deeply problematic organization that Celebitches have always known it to be. It wasn’t about Lily Collins (I’m with most people, and I like her a lot when I see her in things), or that things weren’t reflective of Covid-lockdown realities, or that it didn’t pay attention to or reference the worldwide civil and human rights protests, or that it demanded too much of a suspension of belief that a plucky American fresh out of college could land such a hugely important, fabulous job. It was the recognition that this show could be lauded when it wasn’t *that* good in the first place, and then the dawning realization (again, for non-Celebitches) that H-wood Awards shows are *gasp* rigged!

        That said, I applaud Lily Collins for trying again with this show. There was a lot of valid criticism in the vitriol, and changing things up a bit to be more inclusive and interesting and insightful is exactly what *should* happen when faced with that kind of criticism. I hope it’s still campy and light, but I hope it’s funnier and smarter, too.

      • Pilar says:

        We are of course allowed to have fluff. But why does fluff equal a very white show?
        Bridgeton is also fluff but manages to be fluff and diverse..

    • María says:

      I’ve seen both seasons. I think the main point about diversity in the first season was that a lot of the non-white characters were used as friends/secondary storylines, which is a point minorities raise often.

      I even thought about the Emily vs Mindy characters and trying to put myself in their shoes: Why is Lily Collins more suited to be the main character, and why should Ashley Park just be a supporting one? Is Lily more talented, is she more likable? Or is she just white?

      I’m not claiming to have the right answer, just something to think about.

    • MissMarirose says:

      Yes, fun and escapism is good and sometimes necessary. But diversity isn’t averse to that.
      As I understand it, that’s part of the problem with And Just Like That. SJP reacted to the same criticisms as EIP by ham-handedly inserting minorities and “woke” story lines that feel like a slog. That doesn’t mean diversifying shows is bad; it just means that the writers who do that suck at their jobs. Then that leads to white commenters (like yourself) thinking that escapism is only possible if pristine and lily white.

      • AmyB says:

        @MissMarirose Why would you say something like I think escapism is only possible if “pristine and lily white” Rather rude, and presumptuous. I said in my initial comment, I had not seen the series, and if the diversity issue was the main backlash, I can certainly understand and appreciate that. Way to be judgmental.

    • MsT_Shady says:

      Fluffy shows can also be multicultural. It’s not a zero-sum game.

  4. OzJennifer says:

    I thought it was harmless, silly, escapist fun. I enjoyed both seasons.

  5. Lucia says:

    Honestly? I don’t have a problem with anything she says here. I enjoyed the show a lot, flaws and all.

  6. María says:

    The thing about the Emily being 22 comment is that as women we’re constantly told that we’re less valuable as we age. So when the main star/producer of a show where the character is supposed to have a masters degree and a promotion coming up says that is just fucking annoying.

    We can be older and still be interesting characters, we don’t need to be 22.

    • Ainsley7 says:

      I think it was literally just Lily Colins having zero life experience in that area. I don’t think she had any real idea of what it would take for her Emily to be where she was professionally. I think Lily was basing her guess of Emily’s maturity level because she was correct about that. Maturity wise, Emily is only about 22 with the job of someone who would likely be in their 30’s or 40’s.

      • MsIam says:

        I agree @Ainsley7. The character of Emily is written as a naive bubblehead so it kind of makes sense that she would be very young and inexperienced. I noticed this year they have her age as 28 or 29 so I wonder if that will change the way the character is written throughout the series.

    • Natters says:

      I had fun watching this escapist show especially as someone who loves to travel and misses not being able to travel as much now due to world circumstances. However the age thing made me crazy as a woman who had to work hard and pay my dues before I got decent promotions and travel around the world to represent my company. That triggered me.

    • thinking says:

      I thought she said Emily was 22 because Emily was making the romantic mistakes of a 22 year old. Didn’t Emily sleep with a high schooler by accident? And the fact that she wants that chef who seems to be playing both women (who are best friends) seems like the mistake of a 22 year old.

      A 26-30 year old would see red flags with the chef and would be less likely to betray a best friend (I think…). It’s easier to cut a 22 year old slack for being kind of….dumb?


    • María says:

      Sure but if that’s the case just make her a fresh out of college girl and leave it a that, just a girl in her young twenties. But that’s not the case.

      Also, I’m sure that Lily Collins is well aware of the pressures in Hollywood to have young, attractive female characters, I don’t think she just happened to say a random number.

      • thinking says:

        To be honest, I actually thought she was fresh out of college. Some 22 year olds do have Master’s degrees, if she skipped a grade and fast-tracked her Bachelor’s. And she works in social media management which is associated with youth. Most people I see doing social media management are usually on the younger side. The French bosses also never seem to trust her with anything in season 1. She’s being mentored in a way by the older people around her.

        I thought she got the job in Paris because she was the favorite of her boss/mentor. It happens.

        The oldest I would think Emily is is 25. No way would a 30 something year old make the kind of romantic or professional mistakes this girl/woman does. What 30-35 year old proudly struts around an office with such confidence proclaiming her lack of French IN FRANCE?

        Maybe I invented this back-story in my mind to make sense of Emily’s stupidity. Personality-wise, she does not seem “older”.

      • WithTheAmerican says:

        This so much. Hollywood despises women over the age of 25. I mean serious contempt. She knows this. Her character couldn’t be over 25 and appeal to the $$$ men who make decisions based on their own baby boy biases.

        That said, she’s being disingenuous re the “mistake” and she needs to stand up for women over the age of 25 having worth re carrying a show, otherwise why have women in charge.

  7. lana86 says:

    The only thing I know about this show, is that they put an actress there, who plays an abhorrent and cringy criminal and claims to be Ukrainian. Like, I have no words… I can’t believe people wrote this script and took these parts. If they took the only black person to play a degenerate thief, the backlash would be huge. But since it’s a supposed Ukrainian woman, ppl still consider it cute and harmless?..

    • Mmc says:

      Because xenophobia against Eastern Europeans is still completely acceptable.

      • Ann says:

        Or at least poking fun at them. My sister-in-law is from Latvia. She shrugs off any stereotyping she sees on TV etc. because she’s too confident (and busy) to care, but it’s a thing. It’s like there is always one ethnic group that is “OK” to use as the go-to villains or stereotyped ones because they’re not seen as being the objects of discrimination so they’re fair game. For a while villains were always white South Africans (which was fair enough at the time), then it became Eastern Europeans. And now, in a few shows I’ve watched, it’s the Irish. Like it’s come full circle.

      • Dashen'ka says:

        And they didn’t even bother to do the most cursory research. “Petra” is not a common name in Ukraine. Other Slavic countries, sure. To me it just adds a layer of contempt.

    • ReginaGeorge says:

      The character you refer to ended up shoplifting some clothes from a department store. I know people who have done it in their past. I don’t think shoplifting is that big a deal tbh and I dont consider the people that do it on the level of “criminals” or bad people, necessarily. But I can see why it may be upsetting

      • Mmc says:

        If the character was, black for an example, would there be backlash? It would.

      • milliemollie says:

        It’s not the shoplifting itself, it’s that a Ukrainian woman shoplifted.
        There’s this xenophobic stereotype in Europe that people from East Europe steal, and Emily in Paris used that offensive stereotype as a “funny” story line. The woman could have had any nationality, but it had to be a woman from Ukraine. The show still learned nothing.

      • lana86 says:

        Really? Then it’s even more funny, because I’m from Ukraine and I don’t know anyone who has ever shoplifted and it’s absolutely considered a theft as any other, something no normal person would do.

      • ReginaGeorge says:


        “something no normal person would do”.

        I mean here in America, the statistics are a bit different. I can’t post a link but Google “The Five Finger Discount: 35 Facts About Shoplifting in America”. It’s a pretty common thing here

        But I wasn’t aware that there was a stereotype about Eastern Europens being thieves, so forgive my ignorance. I can understand the issue with that.

      • Ann says:

        But I think as milliemollie said, why have the Ukrainian character do it? When I was little white girl (I’m as WASP as they come, almost) I once nicked a couple of peppermints from a candy store. I didn’t get caught, and it didn’t impact my life at all, just made me feel guilty for quite a while. If I’d been black or Latina and gotten caught, it might have been different.

    • Lulu says:

      You are spot on! I’m not even European, North American or ‘white’ (I have no bone to pick in this) and I found the Ukrainian shoplifter trope extremely offensive. It’s really not that hard to be minimally cognizant and empathetic of the harm that negative stereotypes perpetuate. I wonder what excuse the writers and director have this time?

    • Norman Bates' Mother says:

      This is why many times I don’t feel like I belong here on this website – where it’s always a very American mindset of “white people can only be predators, because they are privilaged, they cannot be discriminated against etc” while my Eastern European self was treated like garbage while living in England, even though I’m white. Where is my privilage? Eastern Europeans are very much discriminated against in the Western Europe. We hear we are only good for cleaning toilets (even those with PhD), that we are less cultured, stupid, backwards and suspected of being criminals wherever we go. There were instances of people being killed in England for speaking Polish publically. This Ukrainian character’s storyline was abhorrent, not only because of the shoplifting thing, but because of the entire persona – stupid, tacky, loud, dressed in a cheapest, most ridiculous way while stealing designer stuff.

      • Cessa says:

        I am from England. I am sorry you were treated like garbage in my country. I am ashamed to be English at times. 😥❤

  8. ReginaGeorge says:

    I just binged watch both seasons recently after being turned off to it due to hearing the backlash last year and I don’t get what the problem was? It’s was a light hearted show.

    And the criticisms about diversity? I dunno. I’m a mixed race Latina and I really didn’t have an issue with it. She has a Koren/Chinese best friend, one of her coworkers is Black and gay, and that was season 1. They added a Black love interest, another Asian (and gay) character and Mindy’s new boyfriend looks mixed race to me?

    Could it be more diverse, sure? But I didn’t need it to be for this kind of show. And especially NOT if they’re gonna tackle it in the most cringey, awkward and forced-woke kind of way “And Just Like That” is doing. No thanks.

    EIP actually felt a lot like the OG Sex and the City, aesthetically, as it’s a Darren Starr production, and Patricia Fields does the wardrobe. It’s just a fun, silly watch. Period.

    • goofpuff says:

      Using minorities as window dressing side character stereotypes does not make it diverse. every single minority you listed exists only for Emily.

      Sex and the City has a huge problem with that back then and now.

      Shows like this center around cis white passing women only. non whites and gay people are just used as set dressing. their lives revolve around the white women.

  9. Watson says:

    This is a fun and stupid show. Not sure why they expected anything in depth from a character that succeeds in a job in France (and everything else!) even though she doesn’t speak the language and it was required for the job. From the get go nothing was realistic.

    • Tessa says:

      There’s a difference between not realistic (limitless expensive wardrobe, spectacular promotion, every friend being a billionaire or an heiress, failing up at every turn, etc.) and being tone deaf and offensive (see the discussion about the Ukrainian lady and notice how many Americans blow right past it without even noticing, because they weren’t trained to react to that as they were to racist tropes).
      It’s like Hollywood can’t help itself, it HAS to be mean to some group of people. If it can’t be nationalities, we must move on to white ethnicities, I guess, because the idea of not kicking anyone at all and coming up with better storylines instead is just unfathomable to “fun” Hollywood shows with huge budgets. And then they claim they learned so much. Unbelievable.

      • Watson says:

        My point was: the whole show is stupid. I haven’t watched season 2 so can’t comment on the Ukrainian character plot. But from what people are saying I do think it’s interesting how I would have never seen this as racist cause every Ukrainian person I know has made their dreams come true in Canada (high levels of education and extremely professional careers). Never would have even crossed my mind that there was a negative stereotype out there.

      • Tessa says:

        Well, that’s why you listen to the people who are affected. I’m not sure what the level of success in real life has to do with stereotypes portrayed in media. Barack Obama was a highly successful and classy man. Just because a Black man can achieve the highest post in the land does not mean there aren’t negative stereotypes of Black people out there.
        I suppose you haven’t heard of a “mail order bride” trope re: Eastern European women, either?

      • Watson says:

        Tessa i realize this may sound crazy to you, but just because you have experienced what a negative Ukranian stereotype is doesn’t mean that everyone else has. If you look up thread, I’m not alone.

  10. Acal says:

    I don’t think the golden globes thing was helped by the fact that Netflix flew a bunch of the HFP voting group to Paris for a huge wine and dine (and bribe) vacation. It was tacky and when other deserving shows didn’t get nominated was deserving of that backlash. Her nomination was bought plain and simple.

    The clothes are great-but the show is blech. Like a Instagram of a US expat come to life.

  11. Nicki says:

    It’s a silly and harmless fantasy, but Lily got punished in a way that the silly and breathtakingly toxic fantasy “Entourage” never did. Agreed re: the blinding whiteness of the show. But the criticisms carry a not-so-hidden undercurrent of misogynistic outrage at a young woman daring to live out a fantasy in a public way. EIP got brutalized while Entourage was lionized for the very same thing.

    • girl_ninja says:

      Entourage WAS called out by many but the time was different and the SM presence was not present the way it is now. I doubt seriously that Entourage would make it in today’s climate. Lily has seemed to learn from her lack of awareness so there is no need to make excuses for her.

    • Ann says:

      I agree with girl ninja that Entourage would never make it today. And yes, I guess Entourage was pretty toxic in its depiction of women vis-a-vis the Vince character. But to be fair, other male characters had actual relationships and marriages (Eric, Ari, Turtle), and it’s probably true that movie stars sleep around with some degree of impunity. Or at least did. Vince was always honest about his intentions.

      I admit, I used to love Entourage because it was funny. Ari Gold was bloody hilarious. I guess Lloyd was stereotyped to an offensive degree. I found him funny at the time, I admit. I don’t think I would now. Times change, people grow. Lily has admitted her mistakes or at least blind spots with the show and I think it seems sincere.

      For the record I watched one episode of EiP and thought it was dumb and annoying, so I stopped. People always have the option not to watch. Should it have been nominated for any awards? I sure don’t think so. But I also thought “The Shape Of Water” was just plain weird.

  12. Kath says:

    For me this show is just a silly fluff show to watch when you’re bored or need something light. My main problem with it is that I think we’re supposed to want Emily and Gabriel to be together, which I think it’s so stupid lol, and the end of season two (mild spoilers) just made it seem even more stupid!

    • ReginaGeorge says:

      Right? Gabriel may be cool and nice, but as a romantic partner, he’s kind of trash. #teamalfie

    • thinking says:

      If this show were on a network, I think it would get cancelled. But since it’s on Netflix it’s easy to just quickly move through the episodes while doing chores or working out on a treadmill. The steaming format benefits the badness of this show and it’s love triangle. That chef is so not worth the women’s time. I’m more frustrated by him than everything else about this show.

  13. Mike says:

    I have no plans to watch the show but I have always liked Lily Collins and I think she has a good heart. She is a child of extreme privilege (Phil Collins) and she has blind spots for sure. But now she has the opportunity to learn and grow a bit

  14. girl_ninja says:

    I see comments about this show was meant to being escapist, silly fun. That may be true but people of races across the spectrum can still be included. Why accept xenaphobia that is on display? The fact there are still folks on HERE dismissing the issues with the show tells me that you still don’t understand that inclusion is important and necessary.

  15. candy says:

    I am French and I love the show. It’s a very American version of Paris with all the glitz. Very USC sorority girl goes to Paris and and her first stop is La Duree. It’s not that different than how S&TC portrays NYC. Sure, you can walk into Prada, or you can step in human feces, to be perfectly honest. Which one do you want to show on TV?

    That said, there is no excuse for a lack of diversity. I’m simply talking about the city itself and how it is portrayed.

  16. thinking says:

    The writing for the show isn’t great. Even if they improve the diversity, I doubt the writing would automatically improve. I suspect the writing for the diverse characters would deviate into some kind of stereotype just as it does with the American and French characters.

    Part of the reason the show is entertaining is because it’s so bad — ha ha.

  17. Abby says:

    I haven’t watched this show yet, which is weird because I love Paris. Since it’s still around and people seem to like it, I might check it out.

    However I’m confused – did Lily write and produce this show? Why is it her fault if the writing and casting isn’t diverse? Is it because she’s the main character?

    • milliemollie says:

      She IS one of the producers of show.

    • thinking says:

      In Season 2, I saw her listed as a producer.

      I don’t know if she was listed in Season 1 as a producer.

      I also saw Darren Star’s name associated with Emily in Paris. That might explain the shallowness of the show.

      I find the show entertaining in it’s own “bad” way, but I wouldn’t characterize it as high-quality. If the show is deficient in certain areas, there’s likely a reason for it — the actual writing is kind of terrible.

      I think people might be expecting “quality” from a show that isn’t really capable of producing it. Or maybe they could produce quality, but then I think it would be an entirely different show — not the “it’s so bad, you have to watch it” kind of show. I’m not sure if that’s the category this show is supposed to fit into, but in my opinion that’s how I see the show.

      • E says:

        While watching I just kept thinking “Jeeze this Emily character is even worse than Carrie Bradshaw” then when I learned Darren Star is involved it all made sense that the main character is a narcissistic petite waif with zero emotional maturity.

    • Flora Posteschild says:

      She’s a producer, and has been since the beginning; therefore, she’s responsible for part of the suckage.

  18. Fabiola says:

    She’s 22 and got a huge promotion and people are mad over that? It’s not real. It’s a show. People need to chill. It’s a fun silly show. It’s not real life.

    • Sof says:

      People were mad at way more serious aspects, hence the new writers, Lily chose to talk about the age thing to stay cutesy. Which is fine, we are meant to learn from our mistakes.

  19. Sof says:

    You can make a silly, harmless show with a diverse cast, you know. POC are not props to make a show “woke” or whatever, showing them doing normal things is part of being inclusive too.
    i don’t think that part of the criticism had anything to do with the pandemic because, let’s be real, under normal conditions “I may destroy you” would have been snubbed too. Award shows are still behind of the times.

  20. The Voice says:

    It’s great that there’s more diversity in season 2 and I love that Mindy has a bigger role. There still aren’t enough Asians on TV in general. I really dislike Alfie’s character and think he could’ve been written differently.

    I get that the show is an escape but as many people commented, it should reflect the time so there should be more diversity. I still like we’re early days in diversity and everyone portrayed has to represent some group but I hope one day we can just see well-developed characters who just happen to not be white and it should be no big deal. I really dislike how diverse cast have to announce their label. Mindy is half Korean and Chinese from China.

    This is why I appreciate Bridgerton. No explanation. Just a character. And Hamilton even though it showed actual people but played by anyone which blew my mind. I still got the essence of the person even though the package was different.

    • Gigi says:

      Tbh this is a very “I don’t see color” comment that also makes it seem like you’ve never encountered any of the criticisms POC have with Hamilton and Bridgerton–namely, “race bending” white characters only reifies the belief that POC don’t have as equally rich inner lives as white people. Or that POC creatives must write through a lens that white audiences will understand in order to be mainstream.

  21. kim says:

    Look. ..when it comes down to it, the show is funny. other countries crap on American stereotypes and think it funny…..people can’t have it both ways…

    besides, if the world allowed the toxic Kardashians to be trendy for a decade….then they need to really evaluate in 2022. . .the show isn’t serious and maybe will teach people how not to act overseas?

  22. Mabs A'Mabbin says:

    I couldn’t make it past ten minutes. Shows like this give me facial tics.

  23. Flora Posteschild says:

    I’d rather chew a jumbo roll of tinfoil than watch this show again. Or wear 99% of Emily’s outfits.

  24. Gigi says:

    The issue is that this show would have been fine if it’d come out 10-15 years ago. Emily fits perfectly with the Pretty Little Liars/Gossip Girl/CW vibe of pretty white girls with problems (h/t Mad TV). But it’s 2020/21, the era of Peak TV, and of increasing presence of diversity in our entertainment. Not to mention that as a Black woman who finally fulfilled her dream of visiting Paris just before the pandemic, I was shocked by how Black and brown the city was. Emily in Paris is just another one of the many many Hollywood productions across decades that has whitewashed Paris.

    Also, Darren Star really just wrote a new version of Carrie in Paris circa 2004. It’s the Gilmore Girls revival all over again with ex-showrunner “fixing” the problems they had with their former job.

  25. Ivy says:

    Part of the backlash of I May Destroy You getting snubbed vs EIP being nominated had to do with the fact that Netflix and producers basically bribed voters. And she conveniently doesn’t discuss that part.