WEBVTT 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:04.179 Today we are tackling an actress who, well, she 00:00:04.179 --> 00:00:06.980 defined a generation, didn't she? Yet somehow 00:00:06.980 --> 00:00:09.619 she's managed to have this career spanning, what, 00:00:09.779 --> 00:00:12.980 five decades? Easily. And most people kind of 00:00:12.980 --> 00:00:15.199 overlook a lot of it, all because of those four 00:00:15.199 --> 00:00:18.059 simple words, Carrie Bradshaw. Welcome to the 00:00:18.059 --> 00:00:20.980 deep dive. We are, of course, focusing on Sarah 00:00:20.980 --> 00:00:24.079 Jessica Parker. And it's understandable why the 00:00:24.079 --> 00:00:27.440 2 -2 and the New York column really dominate 00:00:27.440 --> 00:00:29.460 the public memory. It was huge. Absolutely. But 00:00:29.460 --> 00:00:32.340 when we actually look at the sources, this comprehensive 00:00:32.340 --> 00:00:35.079 stack you provided detailing her whole life, 00:00:35.119 --> 00:00:38.039 her trajectory, it becomes really clear that 00:00:38.039 --> 00:00:41.100 the iconic HBO role was, yes, a massive engine. 00:00:41.100 --> 00:00:45.740 absolutely, but just one part of a very shrewdly 00:00:45.740 --> 00:00:49.320 engineered multifaceted career. Right. She leveraged 00:00:49.320 --> 00:00:52.359 that fictional persona into real world business 00:00:52.359 --> 00:00:55.000 and cultural power in a way that honestly, almost 00:00:55.000 --> 00:00:57.520 none of her peers really managed. That's exactly 00:00:57.520 --> 00:00:59.659 what we want to do today. Our mission here is 00:00:59.659 --> 00:01:02.200 to move past just the fashionista image, you 00:01:02.200 --> 00:01:04.219 know, and really uncover the depth of her influence. 00:01:04.260 --> 00:01:07.599 We're analyzing the actress, the savvy producer, 00:01:07.659 --> 00:01:10.439 the ambitious entrepreneur, and also the power. 00:01:10.310 --> 00:01:13.870 cultural advocate she's become. This dive is 00:01:13.870 --> 00:01:17.209 gonna detail everything from her incredibly humble 00:01:17.209 --> 00:01:20.590 beginnings back in Ohio, right up to being recognized 00:01:20.590 --> 00:01:22.650 as one of the 100 most influential people in 00:01:22.650 --> 00:01:26.959 the world by Time Magazine. That was 2022. And 00:01:26.959 --> 00:01:30.719 that influence, it's rooted in verifiable professional 00:01:30.719 --> 00:01:32.879 success, you know? Before we really dive in, 00:01:32.939 --> 00:01:35.099 it's worth noting the scale of her achievement 00:01:35.099 --> 00:01:38.299 at a high level. She has secured six Golden Globe 00:01:38.299 --> 00:01:41.280 Awards and two Primetime Emmy Awards across her 00:01:41.280 --> 00:01:43.879 career. So that really confirms she achieved 00:01:43.879 --> 00:01:47.319 critical and industry recognition, not just pop 00:01:47.319 --> 00:01:50.319 culture status. Good point. Okay, so let's unpack 00:01:50.319 --> 00:01:52.040 this journey. Let's start right at the beginning, 00:01:52.099 --> 00:01:54.700 which was... Pretty difficult. Right, section 00:01:54.700 --> 00:01:57.859 one, the early foundations. We're talking Broadway, 00:01:58.359 --> 00:02:00.739 hardship, and the real start of her career. You 00:02:00.739 --> 00:02:02.760 mentioned difficult beginnings, and the sources 00:02:02.760 --> 00:02:05.140 really, really underscore this. They do. Sarah 00:02:05.140 --> 00:02:09.539 Jessica Parker was born March 25, 1965, in Nelsonville, 00:02:09.539 --> 00:02:12.680 Ohio. And the family structure itself was immediately 00:02:12.680 --> 00:02:15.000 kind of complicated. She was one of eight children. 00:02:15.159 --> 00:02:18.039 Eight. from her mother Barbara's two marriages. 00:02:18.439 --> 00:02:20.060 Yeah, and that family size, that's really the 00:02:20.060 --> 00:02:22.319 key to understanding the early drive, I think. 00:02:22.479 --> 00:02:24.539 Her mother was a nursery school operator and 00:02:24.539 --> 00:02:28.060 teacher, and her father, Stephen, he was an entrepreneur 00:02:28.060 --> 00:02:30.479 and journalist. Okay. But the sheer logistics, 00:02:30.620 --> 00:02:33.159 I mean, supporting eight children meant intense 00:02:33.159 --> 00:02:36.360 financial scarcity. The sources really detail 00:02:36.360 --> 00:02:38.300 the significant struggles her parents faced. 00:02:38.319 --> 00:02:40.639 And she's spoken about this very candidly, hasn't 00:02:40.639 --> 00:02:43.500 she? Painting this powerful image of early poverty 00:02:43.500 --> 00:02:46.780 that just runs completely counter. to her current 00:02:46.780 --> 00:02:50.000 glamorous image. Completely. She recalled times 00:02:50.000 --> 00:02:51.759 when the electricity would often just be shut 00:02:51.759 --> 00:02:53.939 off in their home. Wow. Or when the family was 00:02:53.939 --> 00:02:56.360 forced to forgo things like Christmases and birthdays 00:02:56.360 --> 00:02:59.199 because they simply didn't have the money. Yeah. 00:02:59.500 --> 00:03:02.979 It sounds like just a constant grinding struggle 00:03:02.979 --> 00:03:05.479 to make ends meet. It certainly paints a picture 00:03:05.479 --> 00:03:08.460 of a childhood defined by lack. Yeah. But what's 00:03:08.460 --> 00:03:10.180 fascinating, and you see this in the sources, 00:03:10.840 --> 00:03:13.319 is that financial constraint did not lead to 00:03:13.319 --> 00:03:16.759 cultural deprivation. Her mother, Barbara, made 00:03:16.759 --> 00:03:20.680 this deliberate, almost sacrificial effort to 00:03:20.680 --> 00:03:22.860 immerse all the children in culture. How did 00:03:22.860 --> 00:03:25.580 she manage that with no money? Well, she focused 00:03:25.580 --> 00:03:28.620 on free public institutions, taking them to places 00:03:28.620 --> 00:03:31.219 like the ballet and the theater in Cincinnati, 00:03:31.699 --> 00:03:33.789 things that were accessible. That's a crucial 00:03:33.789 --> 00:03:36.330 distinction, isn't it? It wasn't just about survival. 00:03:36.770 --> 00:03:39.689 It was about ensuring they lived what she described 00:03:39.689 --> 00:03:45.090 as full rich lives, despite the economic reality. 00:03:45.129 --> 00:03:48.069 Exactly. This emphasis on high art, despite that 00:03:48.069 --> 00:03:50.870 sort of Midwestern poverty, must have been incredibly 00:03:50.870 --> 00:03:53.500 formative. It sounds like it instilled in her 00:03:53.500 --> 00:03:56.020 an ambition for a specific kind of world, maybe 00:03:56.020 --> 00:03:58.159 the high art world of New York. I think you're 00:03:58.159 --> 00:04:00.539 right, exactly. And speaking of specific cultural 00:04:00.539 --> 00:04:03.240 foundations, while she had no formal religious 00:04:03.240 --> 00:04:05.919 training, Parker identifies as culturally Jewish 00:04:05.919 --> 00:04:08.669 like her father, Stephen. The family's original 00:04:08.669 --> 00:04:11.509 surname was actually Barkhan, which translates 00:04:11.509 --> 00:04:14.430 to son of Cohen. Interesting detail. Yeah. And 00:04:14.430 --> 00:04:17.250 it reinforces that she was raised in this, you 00:04:17.250 --> 00:04:20.209 know, highly cultured, if cash strapped environment 00:04:20.209 --> 00:04:23.290 that really prioritized history and art. This 00:04:23.290 --> 00:04:26.370 blend of, let's say, Midwestern practicality 00:04:26.370 --> 00:04:29.529 and artistic ambition. It created a very distinct 00:04:29.529 --> 00:04:31.930 psychological engine for her career, I think. 00:04:31.930 --> 00:04:34.550 And that engine started turning pretty much immediately. 00:04:34.649 --> 00:04:37.069 She began training in singing and ballet as a 00:04:36.910 --> 00:04:39.709 young girl. Right. And that professional training 00:04:39.709 --> 00:04:42.610 led quickly to the professional stage. She made 00:04:42.610 --> 00:04:46.629 her Broadway debut at the age of eleven. 11. 00:04:47.230 --> 00:04:49.490 Incredible. Appearing in the 1976 revival of 00:04:49.490 --> 00:04:52.329 The Innocence. And we need to pause on that professionalization. 00:04:52.490 --> 00:04:55.230 She wasn't just, you know, a child actor dabbling. 00:04:55.230 --> 00:04:57.790 She was a working professional, basically helping 00:04:57.790 --> 00:04:59.970 to support her family almost from the jump. Wow. 00:05:00.170 --> 00:05:02.430 Her truly breakout stage role came just three 00:05:02.430 --> 00:05:06.209 years later. In March 1979, she landed the title 00:05:06.209 --> 00:05:09.410 role of the Broadway musical Annie. Annie, that's 00:05:09.410 --> 00:05:11.829 huge. A massive high profile role for a child. 00:05:12.269 --> 00:05:16.050 And she held that role for a full year. I mean, 00:05:16.129 --> 00:05:18.689 think about the stamina, the discipline, the 00:05:18.689 --> 00:05:22.129 sheer memorization required to sustain a performance 00:05:22.129 --> 00:05:24.310 schedule like that as a young teen. Oh, yeah. 00:05:24.490 --> 00:05:27.250 That's an apprenticeship in relentless hard work 00:05:27.250 --> 00:05:30.029 and reliability right there. Absolutely. From 00:05:30.029 --> 00:05:31.870 the stage, she then transitioned to the small 00:05:31.870 --> 00:05:34.209 screen, and critics immediately took notice. 00:05:34.790 --> 00:05:38.769 In 1982, she got the lead role in the CBS sitcom 00:05:38.769 --> 00:05:41.870 Square Pegs. I remember that show, vaguely. Yeah, 00:05:41.910 --> 00:05:43.470 the show itself was short -lived, only ran for 00:05:43.470 --> 00:05:46.310 one season, but her performance was widely acclaimed. 00:05:46.389 --> 00:05:48.930 Right. She played Patty Green, this sort of shy 00:05:48.930 --> 00:05:52.209 teen navigating high school, but one with significant 00:05:52.209 --> 00:05:55.290 hidden depths. This established her early ability 00:05:55.290 --> 00:05:57.870 to portray characters who were layered and relatable, 00:05:58.009 --> 00:06:01.759 not just like... And the 1980s then solidified 00:06:01.759 --> 00:06:04.300 her presence in film, showing that early genre 00:06:04.300 --> 00:06:07.040 flexibility we talked about. Exactly. The sources 00:06:07.040 --> 00:06:09.740 highlight her role in the 1984 drama, Footloose, 00:06:10.360 --> 00:06:13.500 and significantly, the 1986 Disney science fiction 00:06:13.500 --> 00:06:15.959 film, Flight of the Navigator. Yeah, good example. 00:06:16.040 --> 00:06:18.920 She wasn't just taking any role. She was making 00:06:18.920 --> 00:06:22.459 these deliberate choices to jump across genres 00:06:22.459 --> 00:06:26.399 from, you know, teen dramas to family sci -fi. 00:06:26.399 --> 00:06:29.180 She was learning the craft of film acting. Really 00:06:29.180 --> 00:06:30.939 setting the foundation for what turned out to 00:06:30.939 --> 00:06:34.420 be a pivotal decade the 1990s precisely and that 00:06:34.420 --> 00:06:36.899 foundation of versatility Leads us directly into 00:06:36.899 --> 00:06:40.180 section 2 the path to stardom and her extensive 00:06:40.180 --> 00:06:44.779 1990s filmography this decade is so crucial because 00:06:44.779 --> 00:06:47.660 it's where she really developed the The market 00:06:47.660 --> 00:06:50.060 muscle I guess yeah market muscle and critical 00:06:50.060 --> 00:06:52.100 trust right the trust necessary to eventually 00:06:52.100 --> 00:06:54.819 carry a massive franchise This is a remarkable, 00:06:54.819 --> 00:06:57.279 really strategic period of building credibility. 00:06:58.000 --> 00:07:00.100 In the early 90s, she demonstrated her range 00:07:00.100 --> 00:07:03.279 almost yearly. Like in 1991, she was in the Steve 00:07:03.279 --> 00:07:06.220 Martin romantic comedy LA story. Oh, I love that 00:07:06.220 --> 00:07:09.180 movie. Yeah. She played a ditzy aspiring spokesmodel 00:07:09.180 --> 00:07:11.220 and got really positive reviews for hitting those 00:07:11.220 --> 00:07:13.120 comedic notes perfectly. And then the next year, 00:07:13.199 --> 00:07:14.879 1992, that was a big commercial step, right? 00:07:15.240 --> 00:07:17.420 She starred opposite Nicolas Cage in Honeymoon 00:07:17.420 --> 00:07:20.560 in Vegas. Yep. That film was a critical success, 00:07:20.720 --> 00:07:24.800 and importantly, it earned US $35 million at 00:07:24.800 --> 00:07:26.879 the box office. Okay, so proving she could anchor 00:07:26.879 --> 00:07:30.259 successful studio comedies. Exactly. And then 00:07:30.259 --> 00:07:33.180 we get to the film that has truly become this 00:07:33.180 --> 00:07:35.879 cultural landmark long after its release, Hocus 00:07:35.879 --> 00:07:40.360 Pocus in 1993. Yes, Halloween staple. Totally. 00:07:40.639 --> 00:07:42.879 She played one of the villainous Sanderson sisters 00:07:42.879 --> 00:07:45.800 alongside screen veterans Bette Midler and Kathy 00:07:45.800 --> 00:07:49.240 Najimy. It's such a classic case study in delayed 00:07:49.240 --> 00:07:51.680 gratification, isn't it? It really is. The sources 00:07:51.680 --> 00:07:53.639 note that critically, the film was only rated 00:07:53.639 --> 00:07:56.639 average by reviewers at the time. Pretty mediocre 00:07:56.639 --> 00:07:59.160 reviews. And its initial theatrical gross was 00:07:59.160 --> 00:08:02.199 modest, like US $39 million. You could have easily 00:08:02.199 --> 00:08:04.579 just considered it a minor entry in her filmography 00:08:04.579 --> 00:08:07.060 back then. Easily. But here's where the resilience 00:08:07.060 --> 00:08:09.670 of her choice really shines through. Hocus Pocus 00:08:09.670 --> 00:08:12.350 went on to become this massive enduring cult 00:08:12.350 --> 00:08:14.949 film. How did that happen? Well, that status 00:08:14.949 --> 00:08:18.050 wasn't built in the theater. It was cemented 00:08:18.050 --> 00:08:21.810 over time due to extremely strong DVD sales and 00:08:21.810 --> 00:08:24.350 just an enormous dedicated television following, 00:08:24.449 --> 00:08:25.810 especially, like you said, during the Halloween 00:08:25.810 --> 00:08:27.970 season. Right. It means that by the time Sex 00:08:27.970 --> 00:08:30.269 and City launched, she already had this loyal 00:08:30.269 --> 00:08:32.629 kind of cross -generational fan base outside 00:08:32.629 --> 00:08:35.309 of just adult comedy. That's smart. And she balanced 00:08:35.309 --> 00:08:37.990 these broader, more family -oriented comedies 00:08:37.990 --> 00:08:40.470 with serious artistic choices in the mid-'90s, 00:08:40.610 --> 00:08:42.669 too, often collaborating with powerhouse directors. 00:08:43.740 --> 00:08:47.080 In 1994, she appeared opposite Johnny Depp in 00:08:47.080 --> 00:08:49.820 the highly acclaimed Tim Burton biographical 00:08:49.820 --> 00:08:53.019 drama, Ed Wood. Oh, right. She played Dolores 00:08:53.019 --> 00:08:55.580 Fuller, the titular character's long -suffering 00:08:55.580 --> 00:08:57.759 girlfriend. This really proved she could hold 00:08:57.759 --> 00:09:00.299 her own in a critically dense, character -driven 00:09:00.299 --> 00:09:02.340 environment. Totally different vibe. Completely. 00:09:02.480 --> 00:09:05.179 And she stayed in the Tim Burton universe, showcasing 00:09:05.179 --> 00:09:09.120 her adaptability to ensemble mayhem, let's call 00:09:09.120 --> 00:09:12.440 it. OK. In 1996, she was part of that huge... 00:09:12.299 --> 00:09:15.080 star -studded cast in the sci -fi comedy Mars 00:09:15.080 --> 00:09:17.600 Attack. She played Natalie Lake, a chat show 00:09:17.600 --> 00:09:20.440 host. And we have to mention the specific detail 00:09:20.440 --> 00:09:22.539 from the sources, because it really demonstrates 00:09:22.539 --> 00:09:25.779 her commitment to high -concept, absurd comedy. 00:09:26.720 --> 00:09:29.279 Her character, in one of the film's most memorable 00:09:29.279 --> 00:09:32.259 moments, has her head transpused by the invading 00:09:32.259 --> 00:09:34.539 aliens with that of her chihuahua. Oh my god, 00:09:34.539 --> 00:09:36.840 I forgot about that. That was her. That was her. 00:09:36.899 --> 00:09:39.919 It's physically comedic, almost grotesque, and 00:09:39.919 --> 00:09:42.360 just a world away from the ref... defined acting 00:09:42.360 --> 00:09:45.120 of Ed Wood. That sequence, yeah, while brief, 00:09:45.539 --> 00:09:48.340 it cemented her ability to be recognized even 00:09:48.340 --> 00:09:51.000 in a massive ensemble cast like that. Definitely. 00:09:51.200 --> 00:09:53.320 But the real commercial juggernaut of the mid 00:09:53.320 --> 00:09:56.970 -90s was the first Wives Club. also in 1996, 00:09:57.549 --> 00:10:00.470 which reunited her with Bette Midler. Yes. This 00:10:00.470 --> 00:10:03.049 film was a commercial phenomenon, grossed a massive 00:10:03.049 --> 00:10:06.490 US $105 million at the North American box office. 00:10:06.509 --> 00:10:09.289 Wow. But the impact is what matters most here, 00:10:09.289 --> 00:10:11.990 I think. This film developed a hugely significant 00:10:11.990 --> 00:10:14.429 cult following, specifically among middle -aged 00:10:14.429 --> 00:10:16.710 women. Interesting. A demographic she would very 00:10:16.710 --> 00:10:18.970 soon come to define with her next big project. 00:10:19.200 --> 00:10:22.799 Ah, okay, I see the connection. That's the strategic 00:10:22.799 --> 00:10:25.120 convergence we need to note then. Exactly. She 00:10:25.120 --> 00:10:27.659 simultaneously appealed to critics with Ed Wood, 00:10:28.200 --> 00:10:30.379 kids in nostalgia audiences with Hocus Pocus, 00:10:30.899 --> 00:10:35.620 and this core devoted adult female audience with 00:10:35.620 --> 00:10:39.639 the First Wives Club. She had built up this massive, 00:10:39.980 --> 00:10:42.879 diverse, and loyal portfolio just before she 00:10:42.879 --> 00:10:46.590 received the script that would, well... not just 00:10:46.590 --> 00:10:49.309 her life, but the cultural landscape of television. 00:10:49.529 --> 00:10:51.350 She had the credibility, she had the range, and 00:10:51.350 --> 00:10:53.830 she had the audience backing. All that hard work, 00:10:53.830 --> 00:10:56.110 you know, from the stage to the B -movies, it 00:10:56.110 --> 00:10:58.629 was all preparation for the massive weight that 00:10:58.629 --> 00:11:00.809 was about to land squarely on her shoulders. 00:11:00.909 --> 00:11:03.090 Which was Carrie Bradshaw. Yeah. And that brings 00:11:03.090 --> 00:11:05.710 us to section three, the Carrie Bradshaw cultural 00:11:05.710 --> 00:11:08.549 phenomenon. This really runs from 1998 through, 00:11:08.649 --> 00:11:11.250 well, arguably even 2015, if you count the films. 00:11:11.370 --> 00:11:13.649 Yeah, the influence lasted. This is the ultimate 00:11:13.649 --> 00:11:15.870 turning point, isn't it? transforming a respected 00:11:15.870 --> 00:11:19.190 actress into a global icon, which also brought 00:11:19.190 --> 00:11:23.220 unprecedented scrutiny. Absolutely. The HBO dramedy 00:11:23.220 --> 00:11:25.700 Sex in the City was adapted from Candice Bushnell's 00:11:25.700 --> 00:11:28.960 book, of course, and the creator, Darren Starr, 00:11:29.299 --> 00:11:32.559 he was apparently insistent that SJP play the 00:11:32.559 --> 00:11:35.480 lead. Really? Yeah. The sources indicate she 00:11:35.480 --> 00:11:37.519 initially had genuine doubts about committing 00:11:37.519 --> 00:11:39.860 to a long -term television series, you know, 00:11:39.899 --> 00:11:42.399 after years of flexibility in film and stage. 00:11:42.500 --> 00:11:44.399 That makes sense. But she eventually agreed, 00:11:44.600 --> 00:11:46.799 taking on the role of Carrie Bradshaw, the narrator, 00:11:47.000 --> 00:11:50.080 the main protagonist, structuring each episode 00:11:50.080 --> 00:11:52.779 around her weekly column for the fictitious paper, 00:11:53.179 --> 00:11:55.580 the New York Star. And the success was immediate 00:11:55.580 --> 00:11:58.409 wasn't it? But the enduring critical response 00:11:58.409 --> 00:12:00.769 to her performance, that was sustained throughout 00:12:00.769 --> 00:12:03.590 the show's initial run. It really was. Carrie 00:12:03.590 --> 00:12:06.230 Bradshaw wasn't just popular. She was instantly 00:12:06.230 --> 00:12:09.169 canonized, included in virtually every list of 00:12:09.169 --> 00:12:11.629 the greatest female characters in American television 00:12:11.629 --> 00:12:14.389 history. She really transcended acting. She became 00:12:14.389 --> 00:12:16.610 this cultural representative. We have to highlight 00:12:16.610 --> 00:12:19.049 this powerful quote from The Guardian in 2009, 00:12:19.429 --> 00:12:22.389 which named Bradshaw an icon of the decade. And 00:12:22.389 --> 00:12:25.289 they stated she did as much to shift the culture 00:12:25.289 --> 00:12:28.179 around... certain women's issues as real -life 00:12:28.179 --> 00:12:31.840 female groundbreakers. Wow. That is an immense 00:12:31.840 --> 00:12:35.519 claim. Yeah. How do we analyze that level of 00:12:35.519 --> 00:12:38.480 influence? How does a fictional character achieve 00:12:38.480 --> 00:12:40.820 that kind of real -world sociological impact? 00:12:41.100 --> 00:12:43.620 It's complex, definitely. But I think it comes 00:12:43.620 --> 00:12:47.220 down to providing this. visual, aspirational, 00:12:47.399 --> 00:12:50.019 yet also deeply relatable narrative for women 00:12:50.019 --> 00:12:53.600 who were navigating modernity, sexuality, career 00:12:53.600 --> 00:12:56.279 choices, especially in the city. Carrie Mae talking 00:12:56.279 --> 00:12:58.580 about things like... female friendship, financial 00:12:58.580 --> 00:13:01.480 independence, complex romantic choices. She made 00:13:01.480 --> 00:13:03.600 it mainstream and acceptable all wrapped up in 00:13:03.600 --> 00:13:06.379 this glossy high fashion package. It provided 00:13:06.379 --> 00:13:08.340 conversation points that had maybe previously 00:13:08.340 --> 00:13:11.000 been confined to, I don't know, academia or niche 00:13:11.000 --> 00:13:14.000 literature and launched them into global water 00:13:14.000 --> 00:13:17.419 cooler territory. And the award sweep reflects 00:13:17.419 --> 00:13:20.139 that dominance during the initial run 1998 to 00:13:20.139 --> 00:13:23.009 2004. The industry was fully recognizing the 00:13:23.009 --> 00:13:24.669 cultural weight of the show and her performance. 00:13:24.690 --> 00:13:27.070 Absolutely. She secured two Primetime Emmy Awards. 00:13:27.389 --> 00:13:30.149 one in 2004 for lead actress in a comedy series. 00:13:30.470 --> 00:13:33.610 And perhaps more tellingly, one in 2001 as a 00:13:33.610 --> 00:13:36.049 producer for outstanding comedy series. Ah, the 00:13:36.049 --> 00:13:38.529 producer credit. That's key. That producer credit 00:13:38.529 --> 00:13:40.750 shows her early commitment to having control 00:13:40.750 --> 00:13:42.850 behind the scenes, right? Definitely. And add 00:13:42.850 --> 00:13:45.789 to that list, four Golden Globe Awards for best 00:13:45.789 --> 00:13:48.570 actress in a comedy series spanning 2000, 2001, 00:13:48.710 --> 00:13:52.470 2002, and 2004, plus three Screen Actors Guild 00:13:52.470 --> 00:13:55.149 Awards. Four consecutive Golden Globes for best 00:13:55.149 --> 00:13:57.129 actress. Yeah, that four -year run. that just 00:13:57.129 --> 00:13:59.690 speaks volumes about her total domination of 00:13:59.690 --> 00:14:01.710 the comedic acting landscape during that era, 00:14:01.809 --> 00:14:04.669 no question. Okay, so following the series conclusion 00:14:04.669 --> 00:14:07.610 in 2004, the transition back to film was critical. 00:14:08.509 --> 00:14:11.230 Could she shed the character? Could she escape 00:14:11.230 --> 00:14:14.009 Carrie? Big question. In late 2005, she starred 00:14:14.009 --> 00:14:17.070 in the family dramedy, The Family Stone, reuniting 00:14:17.070 --> 00:14:19.710 with Diane Keaton. She played this classic kind 00:14:19.710 --> 00:14:22.860 of uptight New York... career woman who's thrown 00:14:22.860 --> 00:14:25.039 into chaos during a family Christmas. Right, 00:14:25.139 --> 00:14:27.360 and the performance was a huge test, and honestly, 00:14:27.740 --> 00:14:29.600 she passed it with flying colors. You think so? 00:14:29.919 --> 00:14:32.759 Yeah. Reviewer James Bradnelli specifically noted 00:14:32.759 --> 00:14:36.240 that Parker eases it. He stated that of all the 00:14:36.240 --> 00:14:38.220 characters in the movie, she underwent the biggest 00:14:38.220 --> 00:14:40.679 transformation, proving she wasn't just Carrie 00:14:40.679 --> 00:14:43.100 Bradshaw wearing a different suit. Okay, that's 00:14:43.100 --> 00:14:45.480 significant. And the film was a huge commercial 00:14:45.480 --> 00:14:48.980 success, too. Grossed over U .S. $92 million 00:14:48.980 --> 00:14:52.220 worldwide and earned her yet another Golden Globe 00:14:52.220 --> 00:14:55.600 nomination for Best Actress. Wow. So she followed 00:14:55.600 --> 00:14:59.019 that with more box office hits, notably the romantic 00:14:59.019 --> 00:15:01.759 comedy Failure to Launch in 2006. Which opened 00:15:01.759 --> 00:15:03.820 at number one. Right. Opened to top the North 00:15:03.820 --> 00:15:06.740 American box office. And of course, the studio 00:15:06.740 --> 00:15:09.259 couldn't resist leveraging the brand further 00:15:09.259 --> 00:15:11.639 with the future films, right? Sex and the City 00:15:11.639 --> 00:15:14.320 in 2008 and the sequel Sex and the City 2 in 00:15:14.320 --> 00:15:17.159 2010. Yeah. And while those films were undeniable 00:15:17.159 --> 00:15:19.340 commercial successes, I mean, they demonstrated 00:15:19.340 --> 00:15:21.600 the sheer power of the brand. Oh, yeah. They 00:15:21.600 --> 00:15:23.919 were met with a very lukewarm, sometimes even 00:15:23.919 --> 00:15:27.080 hostile, critical response. Right. This is where 00:15:27.080 --> 00:15:28.879 the intense public scrutiny started to turn a 00:15:28.879 --> 00:15:31.159 bit negative, wasn't it? Definitely. The pressure 00:15:31.159 --> 00:15:34.039 to maintain that iconic image became really apparent. 00:15:34.250 --> 00:15:36.470 I think we need to analyze that contrast, though. 00:15:37.309 --> 00:15:39.889 How do you square being named one of the greatest 00:15:39.889 --> 00:15:42.250 female characters in television history? Right. 00:15:42.649 --> 00:15:45.309 With the fact that she garnered nominations for 00:15:45.309 --> 00:15:47.769 the Razzie Award for Worst Actress for Sex in 00:15:47.769 --> 00:15:50.450 the City 2. It's jarring. And these nominations 00:15:50.450 --> 00:15:54.049 extended to her other 2011 roles, including I 00:15:54.049 --> 00:15:56.350 don't know how she does it in the ensemble film 00:15:56.350 --> 00:15:59.110 New Year's Eve. Yeah. It's a classic case of, 00:15:59.110 --> 00:16:01.990 I think, public fatigue and brand overexposure. 00:16:02.389 --> 00:16:05.009 When a character becomes that culturally powerful, 00:16:05.470 --> 00:16:08.289 the line between the persona and the actress 00:16:08.289 --> 00:16:11.429 blurs completely. OK. So critics and audiences 00:16:11.429 --> 00:16:13.509 start projecting all their dissatisfaction with 00:16:13.509 --> 00:16:15.730 the show's evolution, or maybe the cultural evolution 00:16:15.730 --> 00:16:18.690 it represents, onto the actress herself. So the 00:16:18.690 --> 00:16:20.620 Razzie's weren't just about her acting. I don't 00:16:20.620 --> 00:16:22.500 think so. They were criticizing the perceived 00:16:22.500 --> 00:16:25.720 vanity and sort of decadence of the sequel as 00:16:25.720 --> 00:16:27.779 much as anything. That intense scrutiny is just 00:16:27.779 --> 00:16:30.460 the price you pay for that level of global fame. 00:16:30.539 --> 00:16:33.000 How did she handle that? That intense pressure? 00:16:33.399 --> 00:16:36.259 Well, she strategically chose her next move back 00:16:36.259 --> 00:16:39.690 to television, even if it was brief. In 2012, 00:16:39.950 --> 00:16:42.570 she guest starred in three episodes of the Fox 00:16:42.570 --> 00:16:45.730 musical series Glee. Oh, I remember that. She 00:16:45.730 --> 00:16:48.149 played Isabelle Wright, a sophisticated Vogue 00:16:48.149 --> 00:16:50.809 executive who mentors Kurt Hummel in New York. 00:16:51.129 --> 00:16:53.529 Exactly. And that was a smart pivot, I think. 00:16:53.850 --> 00:16:58.539 It used her existing known brand. you know, fashion 00:16:58.539 --> 00:17:02.399 New York chic. But put her in a supporting role 00:17:02.399 --> 00:17:04.660 that allowed her to demonstrate she still had 00:17:04.660 --> 00:17:07.380 that magnetic, charming presence on the small 00:17:07.380 --> 00:17:09.819 screen without the pressure of anchoring a whole 00:17:09.819 --> 00:17:12.200 franchise. Right. Wulcher remarked at the time 00:17:12.200 --> 00:17:14.319 that she was absolutely an asset, confirming 00:17:14.319 --> 00:17:16.359 the power of her presence remained. And of course, 00:17:16.500 --> 00:17:18.240 the enduring nature of the character meant she 00:17:18.240 --> 00:17:20.900 returned yet again in the revival series. And 00:17:20.900 --> 00:17:22.799 just like that. Which ran from twenty twenty 00:17:22.799 --> 00:17:25.210 one to twenty twenty five. Yeah. This just proved 00:17:25.210 --> 00:17:27.549 that despite the critical ups and downs, the 00:17:27.549 --> 00:17:29.049 character remains one of the most culturally 00:17:29.049 --> 00:17:31.410 durable in modern media history. She just keeps 00:17:31.410 --> 00:17:33.210 coming back. She does. The connection is just 00:17:33.210 --> 00:17:35.990 too strong. The journey from actress to activist 00:17:35.990 --> 00:17:38.670 and entrepreneur, though. That's the real deep 00:17:38.670 --> 00:17:41.529 dive here, bringing us to section four, the entrepreneur 00:17:41.529 --> 00:17:44.950 and producer. This is where she leveraged that 00:17:44.950 --> 00:17:48.009 global fame into these profound business and. 00:17:49.140 --> 00:17:51.500 ethical platforms, really starting around 2005. 00:17:52.220 --> 00:17:54.480 Yeah. This is where the strategy moves way beyond 00:17:54.480 --> 00:17:57.079 just performing. This is where she truly becomes 00:17:57.079 --> 00:17:59.460 a cultural architect, I'd argue. The producer 00:17:59.460 --> 00:18:02.640 role is absolutely vital here. In 2005, she founded 00:18:02.640 --> 00:18:05.339 her production company Pretty Matches with Alison 00:18:05.339 --> 00:18:07.680 Benson. Apparently, they were introduced by her 00:18:07.680 --> 00:18:09.720 agent. Okay, Pretty Matches. And what was the 00:18:09.720 --> 00:18:12.180 goal there? Well, the mission statement is foundational 00:18:12.180 --> 00:18:15.119 to her later career. The company aims to significantly 00:18:15.119 --> 00:18:17.740 increase female representation in media production. 00:18:17.960 --> 00:18:20.599 Oh, OK. So not just a vanity project. It's a 00:18:20.599 --> 00:18:23.579 strategic move to ensure control and influence 00:18:23.579 --> 00:18:26.019 content from the ground up, aligning with those 00:18:26.019 --> 00:18:29.680 feminist themes she championed in SATC. Precisely. 00:18:29.920 --> 00:18:32.160 And they immediately set out to achieve this. 00:18:32.319 --> 00:18:35.180 They produced and she starred in the HBO dramedy 00:18:35.180 --> 00:18:38.559 series Divorce, which ran from 2016 to 2019. 00:18:38.900 --> 00:18:41.529 I remember Divorce. And divorce was a very deliberate 00:18:41.529 --> 00:18:44.670 choice. She played Frances Dufresne, a married 00:18:44.670 --> 00:18:47.710 woman whose affair kind of precipitates her divorce. 00:18:47.710 --> 00:18:51.450 It was a role that was grounded, complex, mature, 00:18:51.789 --> 00:18:54.609 the exact opposite of the sometimes whimsical 00:18:54.609 --> 00:18:57.089 Carrie Bradshaw. Good point. It was a prestige 00:18:57.089 --> 00:18:59.930 HBO vehicle designed to showcase her serious 00:18:59.930 --> 00:19:03.089 acting chops post -Carrie. And you know, it worked. 00:19:03.410 --> 00:19:05.490 She owned another Golden Globe nomination for 00:19:05.490 --> 00:19:08.549 it. And she also produced and starred in the 00:19:08.549 --> 00:19:11.289 independent drama Here and Now in 2018, right? 00:19:11.710 --> 00:19:14.009 Yep. The acting choices are now becoming inseparable 00:19:14.009 --> 00:19:16.130 from her production agenda. She's controlling 00:19:16.130 --> 00:19:18.769 the narrative. OK, so beyond production, her 00:19:18.769 --> 00:19:22.390 status as a fashion icon is just. unparalleled. 00:19:22.490 --> 00:19:24.930 Oh, yeah. Numerous publications have labeled 00:19:24.930 --> 00:19:27.809 her as such, citing her personal style, her high 00:19:27.809 --> 00:19:31.009 profile Met Gala appearances, and just the indelible 00:19:31.009 --> 00:19:33.150 influence of Carrie Bradshaw's fashion choices, 00:19:33.349 --> 00:19:35.450 its constant media attention. And this iconic 00:19:35.450 --> 00:19:38.109 label was immediately translated into massive 00:19:38.109 --> 00:19:41.009 lucrative business ventures. Yeah. In 2003, she 00:19:41.009 --> 00:19:43.289 signed that high profile deal with Garnier for 00:19:43.289 --> 00:19:46.789 Nutris Hair Products. Then in 2004, right as 00:19:46.789 --> 00:19:51.250 SATC wrapped, she made a monumental deal. A $38 00:19:51.250 --> 00:19:55.089 million multi -season contract with Gap. $38 00:19:55.089 --> 00:19:57.650 million. Okay, let's stop and analyze that Gap 00:19:57.650 --> 00:19:59.789 endorsement, though, because the sources suggest 00:19:59.789 --> 00:20:02.470 it generated immediate public criticism. It did. 00:20:03.009 --> 00:20:05.750 Why did a high -fashion icon synonymous with 00:20:05.750 --> 00:20:08.670 Manolo Blahnik's and designer labels sign a deal 00:20:08.670 --> 00:20:11.289 with a mass -market, non -high -end clothing 00:20:11.289 --> 00:20:15.259 brand like Gap? It seems odd. Well, that's the 00:20:15.259 --> 00:20:17.500 genius strategic maneuver, I think. The criticism 00:20:17.500 --> 00:20:20.420 was exactly that. The glamorous urban chic image 00:20:20.420 --> 00:20:23.339 of Carrie Bradshaw seemed contradictory to Gap's 00:20:23.339 --> 00:20:26.259 accessible, casual identity. However, Gap executives 00:20:26.259 --> 00:20:29.180 felt they desperately needed an iconic but contemporary 00:20:29.180 --> 00:20:32.380 face to lend high luster around the brand, as 00:20:32.380 --> 00:20:34.279 Wendy Liebman, a strategic retail president, 00:20:34.339 --> 00:20:36.319 put it. So Gap needed her more than she needed 00:20:36.319 --> 00:20:39.140 them. Kind of, as SJP took a calculated risk, 00:20:39.160 --> 00:20:40.859 knowing that if she could bridge that gap... 00:20:40.910 --> 00:20:43.210 Literally, her brand recognition would become 00:20:43.210 --> 00:20:46.829 universal. And the ad campaign succeeded. They 00:20:46.829 --> 00:20:50.470 ultimately gave Gap a much needed fresh face 00:20:50.470 --> 00:20:53.829 and made SJP's endorsement accessible to the 00:20:53.829 --> 00:20:56.509 middle American consumers who didn't buy $500 00:20:56.509 --> 00:20:58.789 shoes. OK, that makes sense. That move kind of 00:20:58.789 --> 00:21:01.109 inoculated her brand against elitism, maybe. 00:21:01.230 --> 00:21:04.009 I think so, yeah. And her product diversification 00:21:04.009 --> 00:21:05.910 didn't stop there. She entered the fragrance 00:21:05.910 --> 00:21:09.210 market in 2005 with her first perfume, Lovely. 00:21:09.369 --> 00:21:11.960 I remember it lovely. followed by Kava in 2007, 00:21:12.339 --> 00:21:15.240 capturing that high end retail sector. But then 00:21:15.240 --> 00:21:17.019 she pulled probably the most surprising pivot 00:21:17.019 --> 00:21:19.880 in 2007. She moved into deep budget fashion. 00:21:19.900 --> 00:21:22.319 Yeah. She launched her clothing line called Bitten 00:21:22.319 --> 00:21:24.339 in partnership with the discount chain Stephen 00:21:24.339 --> 00:21:26.680 Barry's. Which sadly went bankrupt later, but 00:21:26.680 --> 00:21:29.579 the line itself. Right. But the core unbelievable 00:21:29.579 --> 00:21:32.420 promise of the line was that all clothing items 00:21:32.420 --> 00:21:35.759 and accessories would be priced under $20. Under 00:21:35.759 --> 00:21:38.460 $20, how could she manage that radical brand 00:21:38.460 --> 00:21:41.180 split? You've got luxury fragrance, the Gap deal, 00:21:41.380 --> 00:21:44.440 the high fashion Met Gala appearances, and now 00:21:44.440 --> 00:21:47.240 launching a $20 line at a discount retailer. 00:21:47.839 --> 00:21:50.559 Wasn't that a massive risk of diluting the Carrie 00:21:50.559 --> 00:21:52.559 Bradshaw brand? You'd think so. Traditionally, 00:21:52.779 --> 00:21:54.660 yes, it would absolutely be seen as dilution. 00:21:55.259 --> 00:21:57.619 But she established herself as an accessible 00:21:57.619 --> 00:21:59.640 entrepreneur who understood that her influence 00:21:59.640 --> 00:22:02.819 spanned at all socioeconomic levels. She was 00:22:02.819 --> 00:22:05.180 appealing directly to the vast majority of her 00:22:05.180 --> 00:22:08.240 audience, who loved the idea of Carrie Bradshaw 00:22:08.240 --> 00:22:11.180 style, but could never ever afford it. It was 00:22:11.180 --> 00:22:14.460 incredibly smart, inclusive branding. She captured 00:22:14.460 --> 00:22:16.440 the high -end enthusiast with her footwear line, 00:22:16.559 --> 00:22:19.059 the SJP collection, launched later at Nordstrom 00:22:19.059 --> 00:22:22.900 in 2014, and simultaneously embraced the mass 00:22:22.900 --> 00:22:25.420 market consumer with Bitten. She even branched 00:22:25.420 --> 00:22:27.900 into the luxury wedding market with a ready -to 00:22:27.900 --> 00:22:30.380 -wear bridal collection in 2018. she covered 00:22:30.380 --> 00:22:33.440 all bases. Wow. Okay, if that wasn't enough diversification, 00:22:33.900 --> 00:22:36.660 her focus then transitioned into literary and 00:22:36.660 --> 00:22:39.759 advocacy work, creating this complete sort of 00:22:39.759 --> 00:22:42.240 circular strategy for her influence. Exactly. 00:22:42.640 --> 00:22:46.119 In 2016, she launched a publishing imprint, SJP 00:22:46.119 --> 00:22:48.980 for Hogarth, with Crown Publishing Group. A publishing 00:22:48.980 --> 00:22:51.460 imprint. Yeah. And later partnered with Zando 00:22:51.460 --> 00:22:56.750 in 2023 to create SJP Lit. sjp lit this pivot 00:22:56.750 --> 00:22:59.349 connects directly back to her early life doesn't 00:22:59.349 --> 00:23:02.930 it that culturally rich but impoverished childhood. 00:23:03.430 --> 00:23:05.690 Absolutely. She is now literally influencing 00:23:05.690 --> 00:23:07.930 the production and distribution of literature, 00:23:08.049 --> 00:23:10.470 which leads directly to her advocacy role. Right. 00:23:10.789 --> 00:23:13.150 In 2017, she partnered with the American Library 00:23:13.150 --> 00:23:16.349 Association, the ALA, to create Book Club Central. 00:23:16.809 --> 00:23:19.210 It's an online platform providing reading resources 00:23:19.210 --> 00:23:22.130 and book lists. She's promoting reading on a 00:23:22.130 --> 00:23:25.410 national level. But the advocacy deepens dramatically 00:23:25.410 --> 00:23:28.150 beyond just book clubs, doesn't it? She has become 00:23:28.150 --> 00:23:31.240 an incredibly vocal and active defender of freedom 00:23:31.240 --> 00:23:34.740 to read. Very much so. This culminated in 2025 00:23:34.740 --> 00:23:37.359 when she served as an executive producer on the 00:23:37.359 --> 00:23:39.599 documentary The Librarians. What's that about? 00:23:40.019 --> 00:23:42.400 It focuses squarely on librarians combating the 00:23:42.400 --> 00:23:44.420 rise of book banning across the United States. 00:23:44.480 --> 00:23:47.960 Wow, okay. Let's take a stand. This is the definitive 00:23:47.960 --> 00:23:50.240 strategic shift in her later career, I think. 00:23:50.500 --> 00:23:52.779 She is protecting the very content she is now 00:23:52.779 --> 00:23:54.819 championing as a publisher. That makes sense. 00:23:55.099 --> 00:23:57.259 She received the Peanautable Literary Service 00:23:57.259 --> 00:24:00.480 Award in May 2025 specifically for her work on 00:24:00.480 --> 00:24:03.519 the librarians and for uplifting underrepresented 00:24:03.519 --> 00:24:07.460 voices through her SJP lit imprint. The award 00:24:07.460 --> 00:24:10.400 called her an indispensable defender of the freedom 00:24:10.400 --> 00:24:12.839 to read. Indispensable defender. She's moved 00:24:12.839 --> 00:24:15.420 from fashion icon to cultural defender in the 00:24:15.420 --> 00:24:18.339 most profound. It's a huge shift. And finally, 00:24:18.500 --> 00:24:20.720 just to round out the empire, we have to mention 00:24:20.720 --> 00:24:24.259 her foray into the adult beverage industry, demonstrating 00:24:24.259 --> 00:24:27.900 just... relentless enterprise. Right. In 2019, 00:24:28.180 --> 00:24:30.359 she partnered with New Zealand winery Envivo 00:24:30.359 --> 00:24:33.119 and Co. Okay. Producing the award -winning Envivo 00:24:33.119 --> 00:24:35.460 X, Sarah Jessica Parker Sauvignon Blanc from 00:24:35.460 --> 00:24:38.559 Marlboro, and also a rosé from Provence. She 00:24:38.559 --> 00:24:40.940 ensures her enterprise extends across fashion, 00:24:41.319 --> 00:24:43.859 media production, literature, and now, you know, 00:24:44.160 --> 00:24:46.359 luxury consumables like wine. She's everywhere. 00:24:46.640 --> 00:24:49.000 Truly multifaceted. Now that we've covered the 00:24:49.000 --> 00:24:51.390 sheer breadth of her professional life. I mean, 00:24:51.710 --> 00:24:55.730 from a stage debut at 11 to basically a global 00:24:55.730 --> 00:24:58.289 media conglomerate. Let's look at section five, 00:24:58.710 --> 00:25:01.539 personal life and career synthesis. This helps 00:25:01.539 --> 00:25:03.940 contextualize the emotional landscape of her 00:25:03.940 --> 00:25:06.759 journey, I think. Yeah, good idea. Her personal 00:25:06.759 --> 00:25:09.220 life often intersected with her formative career 00:25:09.220 --> 00:25:12.039 years in pretty traumatic ways. She was in a 00:25:12.039 --> 00:25:14.740 highly publicized, very significant relationship 00:25:14.740 --> 00:25:18.559 with actor Robert Downey Jr. from 1984 to 1991. 00:25:18.599 --> 00:25:20.819 Why? They met when they were both quite young 00:25:20.819 --> 00:25:23.180 on the set of a film called Firstborn. And that 00:25:23.180 --> 00:25:26.359 relationship lasted seven years, seven years, 00:25:26.660 --> 00:25:29.079 and was deeply affected by his well -documented 00:25:29.079 --> 00:25:32.480 drug problem at the time. It's an intensely emotional 00:25:32.480 --> 00:25:34.900 context for a young woman who is also trying 00:25:34.900 --> 00:25:37.960 to navigate that tricky transition from child 00:25:37.960 --> 00:25:41.180 star to serious adult actress. And she was very 00:25:41.180 --> 00:25:43.539 open about the incredible emotional strain she 00:25:43.539 --> 00:25:45.420 carried during that period. That famous quote 00:25:45.420 --> 00:25:47.539 really gives you a sense of the immense emotional 00:25:47.539 --> 00:25:49.779 labor she undertook. Which quote is that? I believed 00:25:49.779 --> 00:25:53.059 I was the person holding him together. Wow. That 00:25:53.059 --> 00:25:55.900 one line holding him together is so profound 00:25:55.900 --> 00:25:58.700 when you realize she was simultaneously navigating 00:25:58.700 --> 00:26:01.660 the intense pressure of launching her major film 00:26:01.660 --> 00:26:04.160 career in the 80s, right? Appearing in films 00:26:04.160 --> 00:26:07.630 like Footloose and L .A. Story. Yeah. She wasn't 00:26:07.630 --> 00:26:10.769 just performing. She was navigating this complex, 00:26:11.049 --> 00:26:14.230 exhausting personal crisis under intense public 00:26:14.230 --> 00:26:16.349 scrutiny. That's a lot for someone in their early 00:26:16.349 --> 00:26:19.190 20s. Definitely. If we fast forward, her next 00:26:19.190 --> 00:26:22.650 major relationship was a much different foundation 00:26:22.650 --> 00:26:24.990 for her adult life, particularly one built in 00:26:24.990 --> 00:26:26.690 the theater world, which makes sense given her 00:26:26.690 --> 00:26:28.670 background. Right. She later met and married 00:26:28.670 --> 00:26:30.950 actor Matthew Broderick. They were introduced 00:26:30.950 --> 00:26:32.890 by one of her brothers at the Naked Angels Theater 00:26:32.890 --> 00:26:35.309 Company, where both she and Broderick performed. 00:26:35.509 --> 00:26:37.950 Ah, the theater connection again. They married 00:26:37.950 --> 00:26:40.829 in an intimate Episcopal ceremony in Manhattan's 00:26:40.829 --> 00:26:44.970 Lower East Side in 1997. 1997. Just as Sex and 00:26:44.970 --> 00:26:47.710 the City was about to launch and completely revolutionize 00:26:47.710 --> 00:26:50.509 her life. Wow, yeah. Talk about timing. This 00:26:50.509 --> 00:26:52.569 marriage really provided the stability needed, 00:26:52.589 --> 00:26:55.130 perhaps, for the massive fame explosion that 00:26:55.130 --> 00:26:57.609 followed just a year later. Seems like it. They 00:26:57.609 --> 00:27:01.039 share three children. their son, James Wilkie, 00:27:01.180 --> 00:27:04.359 born in 2002. During the SATC run. Right. And 00:27:04.359 --> 00:27:06.859 twin daughters, Marion and Tabitha, born via 00:27:06.859 --> 00:27:10.299 surrogacy in 2009. And we have an incredibly 00:27:10.299 --> 00:27:12.440 specific detail about the twins' middle names, 00:27:12.940 --> 00:27:15.819 Elwell and Hodge. Oh, yeah. She discovered those 00:27:15.819 --> 00:27:18.140 names were derived from her maternal ancestors 00:27:18.140 --> 00:27:20.619 during the filming of that TV series, Who Do 00:27:20.619 --> 00:27:24.319 You Think You Are? back in 2010. Oh, that's lovely. 00:27:25.160 --> 00:27:27.559 That small detail reflects her deep connection 00:27:27.559 --> 00:27:30.180 to her mother's lineage and the history that 00:27:30.180 --> 00:27:32.319 underpinned those early hard -working years. 00:27:32.339 --> 00:27:34.619 It brings it full circle. Yeah. As for where 00:27:34.619 --> 00:27:37.539 they live, since 2009, she and her family have 00:27:37.539 --> 00:27:40.059 maintained stability in Greenwich Village, Manhattan. 00:27:40.119 --> 00:27:42.000 Right in the heart of it all. And they undertook 00:27:42.000 --> 00:27:44.700 this massive renovation project, starting around 00:27:44.700 --> 00:27:47.920 2016, to combine two townhouses they purchased 00:27:47.920 --> 00:27:50.680 on West 11th Street. The work continued into 00:27:50.680 --> 00:27:53.619 2019. Combining two townhouses, wow! It's like 00:27:53.619 --> 00:27:56.460 a physical manifestation of establishing this 00:27:56.460 --> 00:27:58.880 firm, permanent, stable foothold in the city 00:27:58.880 --> 00:28:01.500 that she, in many ways, helped define. That's 00:28:01.500 --> 00:28:03.640 a great way to put it. They also spend considerable 00:28:03.640 --> 00:28:06.420 time at their second home near Kilcar in County 00:28:06.420 --> 00:28:09.119 Donegal, Ireland. Apparently Broderick spent 00:28:09.119 --> 00:28:11.680 summers there as a child. Okay, pulling all of 00:28:11.680 --> 00:28:14.220 this together then, let's quickly summarize the 00:28:14.220 --> 00:28:16.559 accolades again. We established the depth of 00:28:16.559 --> 00:28:18.900 her achievement. She has a total of eight wins 00:28:18.900 --> 00:28:21.759 out of 28 total nominations across the major 00:28:21.759 --> 00:28:25.380 awards. Golden Globes, Emmys, and Screen Actors 00:28:25.380 --> 00:28:27.380 Guild Awards. Which is impressive on its own. 00:28:27.869 --> 00:28:30.009 The most powerful summary of her influence, I 00:28:30.009 --> 00:28:32.390 think, goes far beyond just performance metrics. 00:28:32.950 --> 00:28:34.950 Her receipt of the hasty -putting Woman of the 00:28:34.950 --> 00:28:37.890 Year Award back in 2002 marked her cultural standing 00:28:37.890 --> 00:28:40.210 pretty early on. Right. But the ultimate non 00:28:40.210 --> 00:28:42.630 -performance honor has to be being named one 00:28:42.630 --> 00:28:44.970 of the 100 most influential people in the world 00:28:44.970 --> 00:28:48.980 by Time Magazine in 2022. Yeah. That designation 00:28:48.980 --> 00:28:51.400 recognizes the full spectrum of her work, doesn't 00:28:51.400 --> 00:28:53.819 it? The actress, the shrewd producer, the multi 00:28:53.819 --> 00:28:56.799 -tier entrepreneur, and now the tireless literary 00:28:56.799 --> 00:28:59.119 activist. It covers everything we've talked about. 00:28:59.539 --> 00:29:01.680 Exactly. It's the whole package. So what does 00:29:01.680 --> 00:29:03.400 this all mean for you, the listener? What's the 00:29:03.400 --> 00:29:05.599 good picture here? The key takeaway from this 00:29:05.599 --> 00:29:08.559 deep dive, I think, is the sheer scale of Sarah 00:29:08.559 --> 00:29:11.259 Jessica Parker's transformation. And it seems 00:29:11.259 --> 00:29:13.960 driven by an ambition forged to necessity, right? 00:29:14.160 --> 00:29:16.720 Absolutely. She went from that impoverished Ohio 00:29:16.720 --> 00:29:19.960 childhood defined by hardworking stage roles 00:29:19.960 --> 00:29:23.940 and real financial struggle to leveraging one 00:29:23.940 --> 00:29:27.279 iconic defining role, Carrie Bradshaw, into this 00:29:27.279 --> 00:29:29.579 foundation for global enterprise and influence 00:29:29.579 --> 00:29:32.279 that now spans publishing, production, retail. 00:29:32.490 --> 00:29:35.490 Wine. Everything. We've seen her pivot masterfully 00:29:35.490 --> 00:29:37.569 throughout her career. That early poverty seems 00:29:37.569 --> 00:29:39.630 to have created this calculated ambition that 00:29:39.630 --> 00:29:41.470 allowed her to take the fame from Sex and the 00:29:41.470 --> 00:29:44.210 City and channel it into control through pretty 00:29:44.210 --> 00:29:46.670 matches, increasing female representation. Right. 00:29:46.950 --> 00:29:49.809 And into commercial dominance that somehow bridged 00:29:49.809 --> 00:29:52.470 high and low culture. That strategy of the $38 00:29:52.470 --> 00:29:55.470 million gap deal alongside the sub - $20 bit 00:29:55.470 --> 00:29:57.990 and line, it demonstrates a market awareness 00:29:57.990 --> 00:30:00.690 that is almost unheard of for an A -list celebrity. 00:30:00.809 --> 00:30:02.960 Yeah, protecting her brand. against the very 00:30:02.960 --> 00:30:05.200 elitism she often played on screen is quite clever. 00:30:05.440 --> 00:30:08.099 It really is. Her trajectory is truly one of 00:30:08.099 --> 00:30:11.599 consistent, highly calculated ambition. Always 00:30:11.599 --> 00:30:14.240 ensuring her influence served a commercial purpose 00:30:14.240 --> 00:30:17.519 or in the later stages, an ethical purpose. She 00:30:17.519 --> 00:30:20.279 built an empire. Yeah. And now she seems to be 00:30:20.279 --> 00:30:22.759 spending her influence on protecting the right 00:30:22.759 --> 00:30:27.079 to access the very culture that perhaps she felt 00:30:27.079 --> 00:30:30.420 denied as a child due to finances. That's a powerful 00:30:30.420 --> 00:30:32.400 connection, which raises an important question 00:30:32.400 --> 00:30:34.160 as we look at her moving forward, doesn't it? 00:30:34.799 --> 00:30:37.380 Sarah Jessica Parker's later career is now so 00:30:37.380 --> 00:30:39.359 defined by this strong commitment to cultural 00:30:39.359 --> 00:30:42.240 causes like like the freedom to read, evidenced 00:30:42.240 --> 00:30:44.539 by her executive producer role on the Librarian's 00:30:44.539 --> 00:30:46.940 documentary and her publishing efforts with SJP 00:30:46.940 --> 00:30:50.130 Lit. Right. So what does SJP's trajectory tell 00:30:50.130 --> 00:30:52.069 us about the power of celebrity influence when 00:30:52.069 --> 00:30:54.910 it's really channeled toward advocacy like this? 00:30:55.150 --> 00:30:57.529 And maybe more pointedly, how does this commitment 00:30:57.529 --> 00:30:59.910 to high stakes issues, defending knowledge against 00:30:59.910 --> 00:31:02.269 censorship, how does that potentially reshape 00:31:02.269 --> 00:31:04.710 her own legacy? Does it move her permanently 00:31:04.710 --> 00:31:07.130 beyond the image of Carrie Bradshaw and into 00:31:07.130 --> 00:31:09.089 this realm of, as you said, cultural defender? 00:31:09.329 --> 00:31:11.910 That's a great final thought. Something for you 00:31:11.910 --> 00:31:13.950 to consider long after the credits roll.