Ah, Fall. The leaves change, the kids go back to school, and more lame TV shows try to find a spot on the network line-ups.
Last season, and mostly due to the Writers’ Strike, we saw some of those lame shows come and go, FOX’s K-Ville being a perfect example. Now, again, K-Ville, once watched, proved to be not nearly as bad as you’d think it would have been, but still, not good enough to escape the FOX programmers and their canceling ways.
One show that I really thought would not make it past a truncated season-ette was and is Lipstick Jungle, but then, just last night I saw an ad for its return this fall.

Lipstick Jungle would have and should have become a “K-Ville”, and for two reasons. The first being that this show is a rip-off of another man-made disaster, Sex and The City, and two, it should have been canceled during that first season. So, Lipstick Jungle falls into K-Ville category #1, and just narrowly makes it out of the #2 category.
I have to point out that I have never actually watched Lipstick Jungle, nor do I ever plan on watching this show. My reasons are fairly straightforward. I hate chick shows, where it is all about women juggling men, work, kids, and still dressing like they are going to be strutting down a catwalk at any moment. Just not my kind of show…
I did read a bit about Lipstick Jungle last season, when it debuted, and this is what I gleaned about the show. Three women, all professionals working in those industries that no one really works in, or at least no one who is as attractive as the older, soon to be obscure (except you, Brooke Shields, but then we have Satan to thank for that, don’t we? ) actresses. But no matter, because the real drama comes from the way that these powerful women have to deal with also having a family and a passionate loving relationship and all those things that we girls are taught to expect from the time we are reading the Disney Princesses books.
Either way, I don’t like that actress Kim Raver anyway, and enough so, that I wouldn’t be able to stomach watching her again, after getting sucked into that season of 24 when she is whiny and helpless for the most part.
Sorry for the rant. I just really don’t know why any show that centers on women has to also center on how a woman is incomplete unless she is in a marriage-like relationship with a man. Subtle sexism, but sexism all the same. I don’t mind having relationships become sub-plots and so forth, but when a woman’s identity depends on the completeness of a couple, it is just lame and totally loses my interest. Kind of like when on Moonlighting, when David and Maddie finally got together, the show became dumb. Romantic relationships are always more interesting when the two people in the relationship are kept apart. Why do romantic comedies always end when the two characters get together? Because once they are together, it’s boring.
Now, true, the flip side of that argument is that it is conflict that is interesting to watch. And yes, relationships can be rife with conflict, and that can be television gold, but in the case of L.J., I just don’t see it happening. Seems too much like committee thinking. And did anyone bother with Cashmere Mafia? No. Why? These shows are too much of SATC wannabes , which is surprising to me as I thought SATC was horrible, trite, and stupid. But those wily tv execs…they never see a vacuum they won’t try to get a marketshare in.
K-Ville, FOX, NBC, Lipstick Jungle, Brooke Shields, Kim Raver, Sex and The City, 24, Moonlighting, SATC, Cashmere Mafia