These are photos of Sarah Jessica Parker in NYC yesterday, filming that romantic comedy she’s doing with Pierce Brosnan. In some of the shots, she’s fake-crying. At least, I hope that’s her “rom-com fake cry” because if that’s really her emoting… well… yikes. Anyway, I think I mentioned this a couple of months ago, but I finally got around to watching Sex and the City 2. I have to say, I actually enjoyed it much more than the first one. The first movie was just Carrie whining and acting like an a–hole for two and a half hours. While SATC 2 had huge, gigantic problems (like racism, narcissism, ugly Americanism), at least the pace was quick and I actually laughed at a few parts. Coming out of the film, though, I had one thought: “Well, they did it. They finally killed it. A once beloved franchise is now dead.” Not so fast! SJP was just interviewed by the LAT, and she thinks there’s “one more story to tell.” UGH. Just burn it with fire, SJP.

The prospects for another “Sex and the City” movie have been in question ever since the diminished box-office dollars and lukewarm reviews for “Sex and the City 2″ began coming in last spring. But Sarah Jessica Parker, who produced as well as starred in the two Michael Patrick King creations, said this week she’s not willing to give up on the franchise just yet.

“I would go back,” said Parker, speaking to 24 Frames on the New York set of her new movie, the working-woman comedy “I Don’t Know How She Does It.” “I think http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/movies/2011/02/sex-and-the-city-3-satc-carrie-bradshaw-blake-lively-sarah-jessica-parker.html. I know there is.”

The second “SATC” ended with Parker’s Carrie Preston and Chris Noth’s Mr. Big reconciling their marriage differences after said nuptials faced a threat from Carrie’s former beau Aidan. Over six TV seasons and two movies, however, there have been no children (yet) for the former Miss Bradshaw, something that a third film could explore.

But Parker, taking on her biggest film role with “I Don’t Know How She Does It” — in which she stars in pretty much every scene — said she may not be interesting in reprising her iconic role at this point in her career.

“I’d definitely tell that [third] story, and I know Michael would do it right. But maybe not now. Maybe in five years, you know?” she said.

Parker explained that the impulse to wait came from a desire to feel challenged in her work.

“It’s not that I want to get away from [SATC]. In a million years, who could get away from it?” she said. It’s just that “if I’m not scared again that’s not good for me. That’s literally no good for me. If I’m not terrified and nauseous and worried the first two weeks of production, then what’s going to happen? You could wither on the vine. It’s like if you can’t use your leg. It just atrophies.”

Some reports have said that a new movie would, in the manner of so many Hollywood franchises, take the shape of a prequel, with Blake Lively taking on the role of a young Carrie Bradshaw. (Candace Bushnell is set to publish “Summer and the City,” about a 19-year-old Carrie’s move to New York that said movie would be based on.) Parker said she was pretty taken aback by those reports.

“I was like, Wha-a-a-a-t?’ ” the actress said. She said she wasn’t opposed to the idea of a “Sex and the City”-type story with twentysomethings — she just didn’t feel it should feature specifically SATC characters, especially since both the TV series and the movies explained some of those characters’ backstories.

“There are a lot of important and interesting stories that 21-year-olds can tell,” Parker said. “I don’t begrudge any 21-year-old the opportunity to tell their stories. They prove to us on an everyday basis that they’re interesting. Even their narcissism is interesting. Even their inertia is interesting. Even their tonal speech patterns are interesting.

“But I don’t think we can pretend to go back,” she continued. “It’s creating two histories. It’s like, ‘Oh I didn’t know that about Carrie Bradshaw.’ “

[From The Los Angeles Times]

Okay, that interview was kind of hilarious. At first SJP is all “I love SATC, I would never run away from it, we’ll totally do another movie” and then the dark side rises and she starts talking about feeling atrophied. Also, I find this to be hilariously bitchy: “I don’t begrudge any 21-year-old the opportunity to tell their stories. They prove to us on an everyday basis that they’re interesting. Even their narcissism is interesting. Even their inertia is interesting. Even their tonal speech patterns are interesting.” LMAO. That’s her polite way of saying “These young, lazy, vapid, narcissistic whores have a place in society too. I‘m hip, I swear.”

Photos courtesy of Fame.

There have been conflicting reports as to whether Sex and The City is going to come back for a three-quel, but the consensus has generally been that it’s over. The last film underperformed at the box office and was lambasted by critics. It wasn’t a complete failure, but it didn’t do as well as was expected and was a disappointment on many levels. Most people place the blame for the franchise’s demise on creator Michael Patrick King and star Sarah Jessica Parker for whipping up a sequel that sucked the charm out of the television series and left us with soulless consumerism and dumb jokes. According to Chris Noth, who played Parker’s flaky love interest, Mr. Big, it’s all the critics’ fault for not liking the movie. He told the press at a recent premiere that “The franchise is dead. The press killed it.” Way to blame the messenger.

Chris Noth does not actually appear in Philip Seymour Hoffman’s directorial debut Jack Goes Boating, a drama starring John Ortiz and PSH himself as a pair of limo drivers in complicated romantic relationships. Still, it’s a good thing we caught up with Noth at the movie’s premiere last week, because he had interesting things to say about Sex and the City. Take it away, Mr. Big: “It’s over. The franchise is dead. The press killed it. Your magazine f’ing killed it. New York Magazine. It’s like all the critics got together and said, ‘This franchise must die.’ Because they all had the exact same review. It’s like they didn’t see the movie. Got any more gum?” (Note: That’s not a reference to anything. He really asked us if we had any more gum.)

[From NY Magazine via OK!]

The critics didn’t kill that franchise, it committed suicide by stiletto and everyone saw it and commented on it. There was nothing conspiratorial about the bad reviews. If something stinks to high heaven people notice and usually agree about it.

Maybe Noth was joking around, but it at least sounds like he’s upset about the fact that he’s not going to get a fat paycheck for the third film. Kim Cattrall has been open about the fact that she’ll continue to play Samantha as long as she gets paid (she said “as long as the audience is there” but we know what she means) Thankfully she won’t get another chance.

Chris Noth is shown on 9/16, 7/18 and 6/13/10. Credit: WENN.com

Sex and the City 2 was not a complete and utter box office disaster, although it did nowhere as well as the first movie. The larger disaster – beyond the millions of dollars the studio won’t make back – is that everyone involved with Sex and the City ruined what could have been a quality brand/franchise. Remember the TV show? Sure, there were problems, but it was actually about characters, and there was some good writing and there was, you know, actual character development for all four women. For the films, not so much. So whose fault is it? The writer/director Michael Patrick King? The executive producer Sarah Jessica Parker? The fans, for not responding to two-and-a-half hours of screeching about shoes and orgasms and desert jokes? Eh. SJP apparently thinks Michael Patrick King is to blame, at least according to the latest reports:

Sarah Jessica Parker has reportedly fallen out with Sex And The City 2 writer and director Michael Patrick King after public reaction to the film.

The movie, also starring Kim Cattrall and Kristin Davis, underperformed at the US box office and received a mixed response from fans and critics.

A source told the National Enquirer: “Don’t look for Michael on future projects – SJP feels he’s lost his hit-making touch.

“She felt unsure about the script from the start, especially the whole ‘the girls drop in on Dubai’ twist, but Michael assured her they had a blockbuster on their hands… and told her to trust him. She did – but she won’t make that mistake again.”

[From Digital Spy]

What’s funny to me is that historically, SJP has been very eager to take credit for SATC’s successes, as she constantly reminds the world that she is The Star of the series, as well as the executive producer, and that she got approval over the script (not to mention the schedule). But now that there’s a failure, she’s all “I didn’t have anything to do with it, it’s his fault!” If this report is true, SJP completely sucks for throwing King under the bus when she was a vital part of making SATC 2 happen.

Meanwhile, most industry insiders now acknowledge that the franchise is dead. While SJP happily talked about the possibility of a third film a few months ago, no one wants to touch it at this point. It’s dead. Thank God.

SATC posters courtesy of HuffPo & ScreenCave.

The Sex and The City ladies are continuing their tour promoting soulless conspicuous consumption and offensive throwaway plot lines. They were seen in Japan toasting their fat paychecks and fabulous outfits. Despite the terrible reviews and mediocre box office performance the show must go on.

Earlier today we reported that Sex and The City 2 was second at the box office this holiday weekend. When Monday was included, the film was actually third, with Shrek 4 in the lead and Prince of Persia second. Kaiser pointed me to this amusing recap of the Memorial Day box office results on Gawker, which makes the scary conclusion that we may be in for yet another Sex and The City if the numbers are right. I’ll quote from Box Office Mojo on how the movie performed as expected for a sequel, especially one as shabbily made as this:

Sex and the City 2 notched an estimated $37.1 million four-day weekend on approximately 6,100 screens at 3,445 locations, bringing its total to $51.4 million since its Thursday debut. That’s a huge step backwards from the first Sex and the City, which bagged $57 million on its first three-day weekend and had $68.1 million by day five. Distributor Warner Bros.’ exit polling indicated that a whopping 90 percent of Sex 2′s audience was female, and 54 percent was under 35 years old. By comparison, the first Sex’s opening weekend audience was 83 percent female.

Prince of Persia and Sex and the City 2 ranked a lowly 15th and 17th, respectively, among Memorial Day opening weekends and, in terms of estimated attendance, they wouldn’t even crack the Top 25. Based on their content and marketing, though, it would have been unreasonable to expect otherwise.

People seem to lose their heads in regards to sequels, but, aside from aberrations like The Twilight Saga: New Moon, Sex and the City 2 was closer to the way sequels are supposed to behave, though the movie’s marketers exacerbated the situation with a severe case of “sequelitis.” They assumed that the brand name was all they needed for another summer hit, delivering an utterly inessential and random sequel after the first movie tidily wrapped up the storylines. It’s a wonder that they didn’t subtitle the movie “The Legend of Carrie’s Shoes.”

[From Box Office Mojo]

I’ve passed a lot of time laughing at the terrible reviews of Sex and The City 2, with my favorite coming from Dustin Rowles at Pajiba. He likens SATC to Transformers 2 for women, but with designer duds instead of Megan Fox’s bouncing butt. There were so many excellent lines in his review it’s hard to know which ones to quote. My favorite was this one, “There’s a definite narrative pattern in SATC 2: Each of the four women does something banal individually, followed by a scene in which they get together and process that banality, usually while drinking and wearing something colorful or with feathers.” Kaiser’s favorite part was this:

If you were so inclined, there’s a lot you could take offense to here: Their disrespect of the culture, the extravagance they are afforded (they each get their own luxury car and their own butler), and the way they choose to comport themselves — not just in Abu Dhabi, but in the entire movie — while the country is mired in a recession. Is it tactless to release a movie that glorifies consumption during hard economic times? It seems like a petty complaint to lob against a Hollywood movie, which are often about wish fulfillment. But it’s an easy critique to offer up. Most offensive of all to me, however, were the groan-worthy puns and the hideous word play littered throughout the film (“Abu Dhabi Doo!” “Bedouin, Bath and Beyond,” “Lawrence of my Labia”).

[From Dustin Rowles at Pajiba]

So have you seen Sex and The City 2 and was it a semi-pleasurable way to waste two and a half hours? Could you turn off your brain and just drool at the shoes and clothes? Like men looking for T&A, there are much better ways to get some (online) than paying someone $10 to deliver it to you with a thin plot. I like my shoe and fashion porn silent.

Note: The term “Dog and Pony Show” is not meant as a negative reference to any of the actresses’ features. It’s meant as a traveling circus, and according to Wikipedia “The term has come to mean an elaborately staged performance, presentation, or event designed to sway or convince people. It is often used in reference to a series of informational events put on by a company or group.”

The ladies of Sex and The City 2 were on The View on Friday and I finally had a chance to watch it. There’s still all this hype around the movie, with audience members holding signs and Elisabeth Hasselbeck declaring “the girls’ night out is reborn!” Given all I’ve heard about it, I would rather sit home and watch whatever happens to be on television while getting my fashion fix online.

Sarah Jessica Parker was inevitably asked on The View about her twin girls, Marion and Tabitha, who were born via surrogate about 11 months ago. She talked about how much she loves them and how her son, James Wilke, helps her out with them. She didn’t mention the fact that she has plenty of professional help and she didn’t talk about her husband, Matthew Broderick.

Cynthia Nixon discussed her engagement, to same sex partner Christine Marinoni. She said that they can’t yet marry in New York and that their friends have plenty of suggestions for destination weddings to where same sex marriage is legal. Cynthia said that they were going to try and wait until same sex marriage was legal in their state. “We’re going to try and stick it out in New York and… fight the good fight, but we’re not going to wait forever.” She said something similar to People Magazine, and explained that she’s not spending much time planning out the details and was more concerned with her basic right to marry. New York recognizes same sex marriages from other states.

On The View, Nixon clarified the hilarious quote she told The Advocate that Christine “was like a short man with boobs.” It was about Christine’s fashion, she explained:

“It is a funny and cute quote… I was actually speaking about Christine’s love of clothes, but how difficult it is for her to find suits that she fits into… She wears men’s suits and she’s a little short for a guy. It’s a challenge.”

The girls then all chimed in about where Cynthia and Christine should get married and how they were all looking forward to a trip.

Kim Cattrall ruled out ever married again after having been married three times. She said “I like being single… I’m very much in a work mode. If I was in a relationship it wouldn’t be a happy one, because I wouldn’t be there.” Kim then said “I wish I had a relationship like we [the SATC women] have. We’ve been together 14 years.”

In earlier interviews Kim said that she would be open to doing yet another sequel, but creator Michael Patrick King and star Sarah Jessica Parker separately said that decision wasn’t made yet. The box office will determine whether they’re drive this series even further into the ground. The numbers are in and they’re not as good as the first film, but not bad overall. Over the weekend Sex and The City 2 was second to Shrek 4, in its second week, but above Prince of Persia, which also premiered this weekend. SATC 2 took in $32.1 million its opening weekend, which was below the opening weekend of the first SATC at $56.8 million.

When CB and I were looking at photos of Sienna Miller this morning, I asked her what the deal was with all of these women – younger and older – and their recent red carpet appearances where all of them seemed to be applying their makeup with shovels. I call it the “Kardashian Effect”. And it is recent – I’ve been looking at red carpet photos for years, and it seems like the new trend is wearing really, really heavy makeup. Speaking of, here are the brand new photos of the Sex and the City 2 premiere in London. The fashion doesn’t seem as garish as it was for the NYC premiere. I wrote that before I realized Sarah Jessica had a mountain on her head.

I’ve mentioned my love of Cynthia Nixon before. I think she’s great, and I love how Cynthia Nixon looks here. Pretty hair, pretty styling. The dress isn’t hands-down fabulous, but I like seeing her in that color. But stand up straight!

Kim’s dress is probably my favorite, but how garish is her makeup?

Kristen Davis is prettier when she does the girly-girl stuff, I think. When she does this sparkly Vegas showgirl stuff, it kind of falls flat. But her makeup looks good.

Oh, Sarah Jessica. Puffy mullet dress? Check. Hair and makeup overdone? Check. Boobs out? Check. Strange black arm piece to represent her fallen homeys? Check. What did I forget? Oh, right. Her gigantor headpiece. How… ridiculous. One of the biggest tragedies in the world is that SJP thinks she’s pulling this off.

And last, Chris Noth. He looks like he’s sleep-walking through these appearances.

SATC 2 – London premiere on May 27, 2010. Credit: WENN.

A few hours ago, Gawker put up a summary of some of the new reviews for Sex and the City 2, and to say that this film is a critical disaster might be the understatement of the year. Some of the highlights? Rex Reed’s review in The New York Observer noted: “Sarah Jessica Parker looks better after her face mole was surgically removed, so why does her hair look like 20 pounds of mattress stuffing?” Here’s more:

The only thing memorable about Sex and the City 2 is the number two part, which describes it totally, if you get my drift. Everything else in this deadly, brainless exercise in pointless tedium is dedicated to the screeching audacity of delusional self-importance that convinces these people the whole world is waiting desperately to watch two hours and 25 minutes of platform heels, fake orgasms and preposterous clothes. It is to movies what fried dough is to nutrition.

It has been two years since their last chick flick and in the interim, Carrie, Samantha, Charlotte and Miranda have turned from Cosmo girls who munch into cougar ladies who lunch. They still devote their lives to the credo that no crisis is ever so great that t can’t be solved by a new pair of Manolo Blahniks, but now there’s a difference. No longer waiting for orgasms, they’re waiting for menopause, and in all four cases, they’ve found it. No film has ever contained so many sloppy hairdos soaking wet from hot flashes. Tired of being called the heterosexual equivalent of Armistead Maupin’s gay West Coast lampoon Tales of the City in the San Francisco Chronicle, this installment opens with Carrie in a man’s tuxedo, playing the best man at a gay wedding almost as vulgar as the homophobic one-liners about the minister, played by-are you ready?-Liza Minnelli, who parodies herself by telling the congregation, “Marriage is serious … or so they tell me,” before blasting off with Beyoncé’s “Single Ladies (Put a Ring on It).”

Dragging its deplorable carcass into infinity, Sex and the City 2 is so bad you can’t even watch the trailer. Almost everyone who has ever appeared on the TV series reappears to mutter two or three lines that contribute nothing to the film they’re in. The women-too old now to pout, whine and babble about their wet dreams, affluent and successful for reasons that are never clear-are all vain, narcissistic, selfish, superficial and really rather stupid. The actors work hard to perform triage, but they’ve been playing these roles so long they’ve grown moss. The insipid screenplay and catatonic direction seem chloroformed. Both are by Michael Patrick King. He’s an expert at product placement and marketing (the end credits list hundreds of free plugs for everything from limousines to breakfast cereal), but I seriously doubt if he could direct Jeeps in the middle of the Mojave desert.

When all this greed pays off with millions in box office receipts, the hacks responsible for Sex and the City 2 will say, “I told you so.” But that won’t make the movie any better. You can’t make caviar out of jujubes.

[From The New York Observer]

I also appreciated the NYDN’s review, which included this gem about the Carrie character: “As if she can’t help it, Carrie kicks up some trouble for herself after finding Aidan (John Corbett), now a married dad of two, in a souk. She’s dressed as Glinda the Good Witch in a poufy skirt and “J’adore Dior” T-shirt, and she looks like a maniac. But the drama that ensues is so been-there, done-that, you wonder if she has an emotional imbalance that keeps her perpetually dissatisfied with life.” That’s what she’s ALWAYS been like.

Oooh, here’s another bitchy one from The Telegraph! The reviewer claims, “For one, the clothes are mostly dreadful. Sarah Jessica Parker looks like a cross between Wurzel Gummidge and Bride of Chucky; Miranda looks badly embalmed. In one scene, where the gang appear coming over a dune in the Arabian desert, they resemble a karaoke tribute act to the Village People. Worse, they don’t act like a gang, appearing as awkward and semi-detached in each other’s company as if they were attending a school reunion party. Is it because they’re so much older and still carrying on like members of an Imelda Marcos-organised hen party? Or is that we’re older, being asked by the government to tighten our belts and look askance at the spend-spend habits that got us into the current recession, to the extent that there seems something not so much escapist as straight-out vapid about Carrie and her pals?” Also at issue: how many times the word “sparkle” was used in the script!!! It’s like the writers were reading about Robert Pattinson all day instead of working.

Also, on a personal note, I just wanted to apologize for offending some people with my earlier post about Sex and the City 2 and whether it would offend Muslims. I knew I was making gross (and in some cases, false) generalizations, but I still think my larger point is valid – this film is offensive because it replaces hyper-consumerism for genuine feminism and political, economic and social equality. It shouldn’t just be offensive to Muslims, it should offend most people – and I think it’s well on its way.

EW cover & poster courtesy of HuffPo.

Here are the photos from last night’s big Sex and the City 2 premiere in New York. Just a couple of fashion/style/observational notes: Kim Cattrall looks very pretty, but she’s started wearing too much makeup in general; Kristen Davis was styled to look like Elizabeth Taylor, as she was often enough in the television series; I think Liza Minnelli was wearing a foil suit(?); and Cynthia Nixon looks a little boring, but pretty. But of course the “star” came, with her husband. I have to say, Matthew Broderick put on his best “I f-cking hate every minute of this” grumpy face and somehow forced himself to walk the red carpet with a neon-clad Sarah Jessica Parker. SJP’s dress isn’t terrible, I just don’t think the color is appropriate. Meaning it hurts my eyes.

In other SATC news, I just want to say, for the record, that I saw this “controversy” coming a mile away. I even talked about it in April, when a longer trailer for Sex and the City 2 came out and I was put-off by the sight of four horny cougars sitting around guzzling liquor in the middle of the Middle East. Well, now that reviewers have gotten a glimpse of the full movie, some are making even more specific comments about how this film could offend many Muslims, mainly because these are “emancipated” Western women in the heart of the Middle East (Morocco, standing in for Abu Dhabi), interacting cartoonishly with Muslim men and women. Here’s The Daily Mail’s take:

The premiere is still days away, but Carrie Bradshaw and the ladies of Sex and the City are already causing a controversy – after being accused of being ‘anti-Muslim’. Sex And The City 2 will find the four friends travelling from their beloved New York to the far-flung sand dunes of Abu Dhabi on an all-expenses paid jolly, thanks to the irrepressible maneater Samantha Jones.

However, the first review of the long-awaited film, which opens in the UK on Friday, has revealed how the Manolo-wearing, Chanel-loving fashionistas get caught up in some outrageous moments while in the Middle East.

One scene even features Carrie, played by Sarah Jessica Parker, Samantha (Kim Cattrall), Charlotte York Goldenblatt (Kristin Scott) and Miranda Hobbes (Cynthia Nixon) , being rescued by Muslim women who strip off their burqas to reveal the stylish Western outfits they are concealing beneath their black robes.

While in another moment, the ladies perform a karaoke version of Helen Reddy’s I Am Woman in an Abu Dhabi nightclub, as Samantha shocks the locals with her sexual escapades.

Officials in the United Arab Emirates had already denied the production team permission to film within the city – as did Dubai – and instead the Abu Dhabi scenes were recreated in Morocco. Writer and director Michael Patrick King admitted: ‘Abu Dhabi was like: ‘You know, the UAE is not really ready to have four sexually liberated American girls filmed here’.’

The review, by industry bible, the Hollywood Reporter, reveals that Carrie and her friends ‘run up against the puritanical and misogynistic culture of the Middle East.’

It says: ‘The rather scathing portrayal of Muslim society no doubt will stir controversy, especially in a frothy summer entertainment, but there’s something bracing about the film’s saucy political incorrectness. Or is it politically correct? SATC 2 is at once proudly feminist and blatantly anti-Muslim, which means that it might confound liberal viewers. These endearingly loopy scenes exhibit the tasteless humour that enlivened the TV series on its best nights.’

Speaking about the storyline, Miss Cattrall, 53, insisted: ‘To transport these emancipated new-millennium women to a world that has not changed, in a lot of ways, since Biblical times was a fascinating idea. You’d think a Muslim country would not embrace a show like this, but they loved Samantha, they loved the show, they understood what we were doing.’

Despite her comments, however, Abu Dhabi is currently considering whether to ban the film. In 2008 the UAE, where kissing, nudity and expletives are routinely weeded out, refused to show the first film. So far, a decision has not been reached as to whether the movie will hit UAE screens, but with Abu Dhabi currently marketing itself as an emerging force where film production is concerned, its sensitivity is unlikely to encourage the big names of Hollywood.

Mr King said: ‘We didn’t kid around. We really went there and made a big old-fashioned Hollywood movie, but hopefully with a current sensibility involved.’

[From The Daily Mail]

Now, is much of Muslim culture “puritanical and misogynistic”? In my opinion, yes. But if I was in Abu Dhabi, I would respect their culture because I would be a guest, and, you know, I wouldn’t feel like getting stoned (literally, beaten with stones, not “high”). My fear is that Sex and the City 2 is less a triumph of “liberated American women” showing Muslim women how to be emancipated, and more of “ugly Americans” who just go to other countries to order hamburgers and scream at people who don’t speak English. My other fear? That this “liberation” that the SATC ladies offer Muslim women is a consumer-driven emancipation. As in, “We all have the right to wear Monolos! Yay sisterhood!” rather than “We have the right to vote, drive, work, and use birth control, and none of these things is a punishable offense.”

And can I just say something else… if these ladies had said or done something that reviewers considered offensive to Muslims while they were in New York City, I don’t think it would be a big deal. They are New York girls, and there would be American standards of “women’s liberation” at play. I think the criticism mainly stems from the fact that they are American women in the Middle East. I still don’t know why the f-ck the writers decided to set a large chunk of the movie in Abu Dhabi. It just seems so random.

SATC premiere in NYC on May 24, 2010. Credit: WENN.

Carrie on a Mac in the first film and advertising an HP PC for the second, below

The first Sex and The City movie was full of references to specific brands and companies. Some of the products were long running and integral to the show, like the high end Manolos and Jimmy Choo heels that Carrie sunk all of her money into, and the Mac laptop she used to write her column. The film had all of the trappings but none of the heart of the series, which had its superficial moments but focused more on the characters and their relationships. In the big screen version, the characters were secondary to the overpriced designer brands. The lead character made a major life decision based on retrieving a pair of expensive shoes. It was hard to tell which brands were there as paid product placements and which were necessary for the very thin plot, which was about as rewarding as credit card debt sunk into luxury goods. Ask Lindsay Lohan how that feels.

Vanity Fair has an extensive list of all the brands plugged in the first movie, and it’s mind boggling. At least some of it was just for context, though it all kind of ran together. (NY Magazine even marveled that they were included without payment.) That’s got to be an advertiser’s dream. Carrie’s Macintosh, for instance, was just part of the show and couldn’t be replaced. It’s not like Carrie could switch up her Manolo Blahniks for Stuart Weitzmans. They’re both decent shoes but they have quite a different style profile. Carrie isn’t much more than a collection of brand affiliations and you take one away it’s like you’re changing the character.

Thanks to a partnership with Hewlett Packard, Carrie will be working on a PC in this next film. (Apple claims that they don’t pay for product placement.) PopEater has a great editorial about how wrong this is on several levels. When the film is all about brands it’s particularly jarring when they abandon an integral one for cash. It screws up the Sex and The City brand, too, not that it means anything beyond label whoring at this point. Here are some excerpts from Popeater’s article:

Fans of ‘Sex and the City’ have come to expect certain things from the hit TV series-turned blockbuster movie franchise, and seeing the ladies wear and use brand name, big label products is one of them. We all know the girls love to strut around Manhattan in Manolo Blahnik shoes, eat at the fanciest restaurants in New York City and wear only top designers like Dior, Chanel and Roberto Cavalli. And we’re certainly used to seeing our heroine, Carrie Bradshaw (Sarah Jessica Parker), typing her newspaper columns and books on her Mac laptop — you know, the one she left on her bed for Charlotte (Kristi Davis) to find when she left for Paris, the one she returned to when she came back to her beloved New York.

Carrie’s Mac made an appearance in just about every episode and was prominently featured in the first movie, but you won’t be seeing it in ‘Sex and the City 2.’ Because of a partnership with Hewlett-Packard, only HP computers will be featured in the forthcoming sequel.

According to the New York Post, “Every aspect of Carrie’s life is reduced to a vignette that can be monetized: Going to the Gym (sip on Lipton Sparkling diet green tea, an official sponsor of the new movie!), Having Cocktails with Girlfriends (try a specialized cocktail from Skyy, the movie’s ‘official vodka’!), Getting Married (Swarovski paid to be featured prominently in the film) and, of course, Working On Laptop, Staring Wistfully Out the Window (Hewlett-Packard partnered with the movie so its laptops would be featured, and SJP will appear in the computer company’s ads, of course).”

But fans of the show know that Carrie and Mac were made for each other. The Guardian UK sums it up best, noting, “Carrie is a professional homeworking journalist … Macs were invented for them: people without IT support, with no skills or office training, with very little likelihood of ever accruing any knowledge or expertise, with no backbone or basic housekeeping procedures.”

That’s Carrie Bradshaw in a nutshell; she didn’t even have a cell phone until the shows final season in 2004.

Carrie’s Mac was even a subplot for a season four episode — ‘My Motherboard My Self’ — in which her computer, overloaded from years and years of use (and no backing up!), crashes when she goes to save one of her columns. Aidan (John Corbet), just trying to help, buys her a new iMac, which quickly becomes a symbol for change that Carrie simply isn’t comfortable with. [Celebitchy note: that video is below]

[From Popeater]

Doesn’t Sarah Jessica Parker look like a walking skeleton in that top commercial for HP? It’s hard to look at just her body without a head, and maybe HP should have veered from their regular format for this ad. I know it’s petty to point that out, but I can’t help it.

I’m a PC person, but this really annoys me. I haven’t been looking forward to the Sex and The City sequel and this news kind of pushes me over the edge. I doubt I’ll see it in the theater.

Thanks to Popeater for this story and the videos.

At some point, someone high up in the entertainment industry just has to come out and say it – there isn’t a Photoshop program big enough, advanced enough, hardcore enough to make the Sex and the City ladies look like they’re still in their 30s. It wouldn’t be so bad, except for the simple fact that no one wants to acknowledge that all of the women are past 40 years old, and they don’t need to look 30. Except that Hollywood is afraid, I think, of marketing a film about four women over 40 years old. They simply don’t know how to do it. Thus, we get these horrible Photoshopped magazine covers and posters, where it looks like the women are cartoons – Vaseline-covered cartoons. Blurry, unfocused, frozen, waxy. Ugh.

Meanwhile, In Touch Weekly is still promoting their cover story this week with endless stories about Sex and City 2. Here are some of the stories compiled, although I only think one of the quotes is really interesting – they spoke to SATC costume designer Patricia Fields at length, and she’s bitching about how the girls are styled for the promotional images. Woman, you’re looking at their clothes?!? What about their cartoon faces?

As any Sex and the City fan knows, the clothes help tell the story, so who better to give the scoop on the new movie than famed costume designer Patricia Field? “I’m very, very happy,” Patricia tells In Touch of the finished product. “I give it an A and I don’t give As out very often. It was different than any other movie I’ve seen lately. I could call it ‘Sex and the City musical.’ It’s just one happy surprise after another. It was visually beautiful.” A lot of that is thanks to Patricia, who also helped design an exclusive bottle for SKYY Vodka based on Sex and the City style — but there’s one part she wants nothing to do with. “I did not do the movie poster — that’s why it didn’t look like it should,” she reveals. “I guess they didn’t want to pay my price!”

With the glitzy backdrop of Abu Dhabi and 41 costume changes for Carrie Bradshaw — including pieces by designers like Halston, the late Alexander McQueen and Pucci — it’s no surprise that stylist-to-the-stars Phillip Bloch, who was on the set, estimates the Sex and the City 2 wardrobe budget at a whopping $10 million! “Some of these pieces cost more than an SUV,” he says. “But they get better mileage!”

Fans will not be disappointed with the pricey accessories and stunning designs worn by Carrie and her pals. SATC stylist Patricia Field — who Sarah Jessica Parker calls “indispensable” — worked her wardrobe magic again, flawlessly mixing high- and low-end pieces for stylishly innovative looks sure to set trends across the globe. “When you’re in a recession, you want to have a good time!” says Field. As if we weren’t envious enough of the clothes already, Kristin Davis reveals that the actresses get to keep their wardrobes! “We’re really careful though, because they’re often one-of-a-kind samples from the runways,” she says. “So we don’t eat in them!”

[From In Touch Weekly]

Come on, that’s really what the movies are about at this point. Where the television series always had good or interesting fashion porn, the focus really was on character development and the relationships these women had with men and with each other. Not anymore – now the films are just about the fashion and how with enough Vaseline on the camera lens, you too can pretend that you’re 35.

EW cover & poster courtesy of HuffPo.