Taking a break from politics (ouf). This Netflix series has been the talk of the town—ça défraie la chronique—on my Twitter feed over the past ten days among Americans in Paris and other Francophiles, and has received media coverage on both sides of the pond, with reviews and reports in The New York Times, The Washington Post, The Guardian, Financial Times, and New York magazine entre autres, the leitmotif being the torrent of American stereotypes and clichés in the series about the French and France. As for the reaction here in France, it has been, so far as I’ve seen, largely negative (e.g. here, here, here, here, and here)—i.e. the series has been panned across the board—with the prevailing sentiment summed up in a two-minute commentary by France Inter’s Nicolas Demorand last Friday, who, “hate-watching” (his words, in English) ‘Emily in Paris’, slammed it as “un navet, mon dieu quel navet” [navet = a dud, a turkey].
The cleverest, most amusing commentary has come from the University of Cambridge’s Lecturer in the History of France and the Francophone World, Arthur Asseraf, who has been tweet storming on each episode (the first two are here and here).
I personally had no interest in watching ‘Emily’, particularly after reading some of the above-linked articles and following the Twitter reactions, and declared to one friend that there was not a snowball’s chance in hell that I was going to waste my time with this manifest dreck. As I’ve never seen even five minutes of ‘Sex in the City’, creator Darren Star’s claim to fame, there’s no logical reason for me to see this one, even if it has a Paris theme (as if I can’t see Paris every day of the week, on the screen and in real life).
But then last Friday I went on to Netflix to see what was new and, coming across the ‘new & popular’ category, noted that ‘Emily’ was in first place and ranked #1 in France. So I clicked on the trailer, what the hell, just to see. Finding it a total LOL, I thus reflexively, spontaneously clicked on episode 1 and started watching. And, lo and behold, I was LMAO from the get-go. It’s hilarious, the most uproarious comedy I’ve seen since the 2014 knee-slapper Le Crocodile de Botswanga. On the laugh-o-meter, ‘Emily’ is up there with Le Dîner de cons and Didier, indeed Talladega Nights: The Ballad Of Ricky Bobby.
People are missing the point of ‘Emily’. It’s satire, a parody of American clichés of France and the French—and with Emily (Lily Collins, impeccable in the role) the stereotypical twenty-something American woman, full of exuberance and enthusiasm, whom we adore, but ingénue and clueless. I’m amazed that people, and particularly in France, are at all taking it seriously, let alone taking umbrage. It’s total second degree humor. Obviously the series creator knows that one does not light up a cigarette in an office in France, that the workday does not start at 10:30, that concièreges are not always irritable (and where there are still concièreges, as few buildings outside upscale quartiers still have one). And that there would obviously never be a photo shoot of a woman walking butt naked across the Pont Alexandre III in broad daylight. Allez. The clichés are the point. And the joke is on Americans, not the French.
I’ve watched four episodes so far (at 25 minutes or so each, it’s not a huge time commitment). They remain funny, though the laugh-o-meter has dropped a notch. Will see how the series holds up.
the thing about second degree humor is that you can never be sure that it is second degree humor. As for me i did use to light up in the office where I would arrive around 9:30 – 10 am (not being sufficiently high ranked, ie not ceo). As for the pont alexandre III, I can’t be certain, not being a woman. Oh, and my concierge used to be quite gruff.
It’s true that 2nd degree humor can be misinterpreted but, for me at least, it’s pretty obvious in ‘Emily in Paris’.
Smoking in the workplace: your experience must be pre-2008. It’s been pretty verboten since then.
I mean, Sciolino has always sounded very, very emily and she’s been here, what, 30 years?
Bernard, I love that observation….
🙂 🙂 🙂
I was so happy when the NYT switched (or did she retire?) The correspondent since 2008? 2010? is so much better and has no problem finding his way outside the 4th-5th-8th-16th-17th arrondissements.
I wish US correspondents stayed in another city, like Bordeaux or Lille. 2hours from Paris so they can go whenever they wish, but a less “bottled” view of French life. Or perhaps simply living in a small town 1 hour from Paris with RERB. 🙂
I am delighted to read your review, as I have been tempted to watch, if only to do some virtual sightseeing in my favourite city, but the Sex & the City connection was a turn off. I have watched more than 5 minutes of that execrable show — I think I watched one complete episode and fragments of others as I had a copine who liked it — but you have changed my mind. Comparing it to “Le Dîner de cons” sealed the deal — I love that film (the French original, of course). EinP will be, I hope, a welcome relief from… everything.
Watch “Call my Agent”, too/instead. Also on Netflix, French, actually funny, and you’ll have all the sights without the Sex&the City vibe. 🙂
Thanks, Myos — I will look for that one, too.
So I’ve seen all 10 episodes of ‘Emily’. The latter ones have amusing moments but no outright belly-laughs. And the clichés and stereotypes are a little heavy-going, not to mention outdated, e.g. that French men have a knack for seduction. Really now, does anyone – hormis les Français eux-mêmes – still believe that there’s such a thing as la séduction à la française?
The series is fluff, the lightest of light entertainment. Don’t know if an eventual second season – which the ending of episode 10 leaves open – will hold up.
I will, however, repeat that Lily Collins is perfect as Emily, and quite adorable.