‘Sex & the City 2’: the reviews are in & they are horrible


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.

Premiere Of 'Sex And The City 2' In NYC

Were The Celebs At The 'Sex And The City 2' Premiere Dressing Their Age?


EW cover & poster courtesy of HuffPo.

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

87 Responses to “‘Sex & the City 2’: the reviews are in & they are horrible”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. bellaluna says:

    Is this really a surprise to anyone?

  2. Lizzard says:

    What in the Photoshop hell did they do to that poster??? Kim Catrall looks more like Rachel McAdams and I know SJP has close eyes, but WTF? Her eyes are on top of one another? Cynthia Nixon looks like they need to feed her a hamburger pronto.

  3. Crash2GO2 says:

    Ugh. SJP spent 2 months away from her infant daughters for this crap? She’ll never get it back. Awful.

  4. Vichy says:

    The poster is indeed awful photoshopped. Nothing seems right in that picture.
    About the movie: what did the reviewers expect then? Not an Oscar-worthy movie I hope.

  5. Jeri says:

    Totally agree w/you Kaiser.

  6. meme says:

    wow. three shockers in one day.

  7. Kaye says:

    The sad part is this movie is going to make oodles of money and they will feel vindicated. I enjoyed the original series but it hasn’t aged well (and I don’t mean the women). I find it very hard to watch re-runs because the characters have become very annoying in hindsight.

  8. Katija says:

    Back in the day, I LOVED Sex and the City. I think most people did.

    But this is just ridiculous. They might as well be putting a corpse on strings and parading it around as alive.

    The series finale of SATC was a great, lovable, and a beautifully sentimental high note. Instead of letting this franchise die with dignity, they’re milking it for every last dime. The heart of the series is gone. Honestly, in the first SATC movie, I thought that the characters behaved so unlike themselves that I thought I was watching a different movie with the same actresses.

    I will see the movie because I’m a fan and I’m curious, but they’re will be no opening weekend attendance for me.

  9. RReedy says:


  10. LolaBella says:

    Meh. This is not surprising; the sneak peeks that were shown were painful to watch and showed that it was going to be a suckfest.

    The show lost itself after the first few years.

    The reason that the first movie was so successful is because we, the loyal viewers, missed the women’s camaraderie, the fashion porn, the handbag porn and the shoe porn. Plus we wanted to see Carrie’s extravagant wedding to the love of her life.

    SATC 2 was obviously cobbled together to feed egos and make money, plain and simple.

    Sadly it seems as though it’s become a campy, horrible caricature (Carrie-couture?) of a once beloved show, but it will STILL rake in millions of dollars.

    One redeeming factor for me is that Smith Jerrod will be in this movie. Sigh.

  11. Ruby Red Lips says:

    I saw the first movie and felt like I was in the cinema for 3 months….

    I won’t see this one, even b4 reading these awful reviews, the series was great, they really should have left it alone at the finale

  12. rundee says:

    God, I love that quote: “this film is offensive because it replaces hyper-consumerism for genuine feminism and political, economic and social equality”
    I should be carved in stone and with this exact stone the creators and fans of “sex and the city” and “desperate housewives” etc. shall be hit on the head!

  13. jover says:

    Rex Reed’s first paragraph is epic :brainless exercise in pointless tedium. Delicious. The entire self-servinig media/Hollywood/music axis of prententious mediocrity needs dismantled. Its making a few rich and wasting everyone’s time; if SATC 2 were even a failed attempt at art, it would be excusable; but it’s a failed attempt at doing something because we are too lazy and self-indulgent to create somethng original. I pray there is a God and it bombs and we see the ladies buying their shoes at Payless.

  14. Bel says:

    I loved SATC, it was fun and i was fond of the characters (except Carrie) but the first movie was a disaster. I won’t make the same mistake twice. I will forget it and stick with the tv reruns, just like in my mind there’s only one Matrix film.

  15. missmilly says:

    Well this is sure a shocker!

  16. missmilly says:

    @Katija “But this is just ridiculous. They might as well be putting a corpse on strings and parading it around as alive.”

    —-I can’t stop laughing!! Thanks for this one!!!! OH this helped my Tuesday afternoon slump here at work!!!

  17. andrea says:

    i am an avowed, long-time supreme despier of all things SATC. i am loving this. “this film is offensive because it replaces hyper-consumerism for genuine feminism and political, economic and social equality.” – that was true of the series from day 1, straight on through to what is hopefully, finally, now, the END. good riddance to the grievous offense that is satc.

  18. alexandra says:

    Although the movie looks ridiculous I will go see it. I am tired of the happyly ever after, it is great to see a continuation of something that I loved. Since evryone is such a critic what would you have liked. Carrie getting divorced with two kids, single parent moving in into an efficiency. Looking for job writing classifieds…
    I don’t care what my husband or anybody says I love SATC no matter what.

  19. Jo 'Mama' Besser says:

    Didn’t AbFab do this better about fifteen years ago? Who’s going to get sold into white slavery in this version?

  20. meme says:

    @Jo – i ADORE AbFab. Patsy’s my favorite.

  21. Amneh says:

    Thank you so much for your apology, Kaiser, it means a lot coming from you. I agree with you on the point that they seem to mistake feminism with hyperconsumerism, which is inappropriate especially in today’s economy. Susan B. Anthony and Betty Friedan would turn over in their graves if they knew how loosely the term was being used these days.

  22. Celebitchy says:

    This currently has a 0% on Rotten Tomatoes. An absolute zero percent!

  23. bondbabe says:

    I own the DVDs from the series; and the SERIES was great! I finally saw the SATC One on cable and was glad I didn’t pay to see that disaster. I will definitely not being parting with my money to see this one.

    I mean, c’mon, really? The three of them can just pop over to Abu Dhabi? Gah! Let’s hope this is the of the SATC movies.

  24. jane16 says:

    Yes, it looks like total dreck. Have no intention of seeing it.

  25. RHONYC says:

    well who invited Mr. & Mrs. Bitchy McBitchmire to the party?!

    ME-OUCH! 🙂

  26. Eden says:

    If the writers were smart and had more respect for their audience they would have used this 2nd attempt to give the characters some substance.
    Really used the past flashbacks with creativity and depth to explain how they got to be who they are.
    THAT would have been interesting to me.

    At least they could have gone out with some respect.
    Great example for other popular TV shows of exactly what NOT to do..

  27. Kate says:

    I honestly think the reviewer from The Telegraph summed up why this movie/series doesn’t resonate anymore: the world has been through (and continues to be in) major economic turmoil and the uncertainty that accompanies that turmoil has caused everyone, even if they have not been directly affected, to tighten their belts and focus less on frivolous consumerism.

    That said, the “franchise” is not being handled properly by allowing it to become ridiculously campy with everyone a characature — why, because you are aging, do you have to fall into those stereotypes? And, for the record, it isn’t like these women are at death’s door — except for Samantha, they are all in their late 30s, early 40s (or supposed to be at least).

    Anyway, I was a big fan of the series. Thorougly enjoyed the finale. Was disappointed with the first movie (and found it HORRIBLY depressing), but ultimately satisfied that Carrie ended up with Big. I will see the second movie, but my expectations are low. Very very low.

  28. jc126 says:

    Geez, I had NO plans to see this movie, but the reviews make it sound so awful that I now kind of want to see it, just so I can gauge the depths of its crappiness!

  29. Cheyenne says:

    Gotta love this review in New York Magazine:

    The most depressing thing about Sex and the City 2 is that it seems to justify every nasty thing said and written about the series and first feature film… The film is an epic eyesore.

  30. Bee says:

    @Mama Besser, I loved AbFab. The episode in Morocco was one of the best of the series. As far as who should be sold into slavery, I vote for Charlotte. She always annoyed the hell out of me with her constant “waah waah I’ll never get married”, “I want a BABY!” “Somebody pleeeease love me.” Ugh, someone put her on the auction block tout de suite.

  31. Kim says:

    Lighten up people – ITS A MOVIE. Its offensive because its not serious? HELLO!!!! – We go to the movies to escape reality not to hear about the recession, health car crisis etc etc.

    Its pure pleasure not a documentary on National Geographic for goodness sake! The show was so popular in first place as pure escapism. It isnt most womens reality just like 99% of tv shows & movies out there that are unrealistic – thats why we love them!

    Since when did we start expecting the movies to reflect feminism & social equality? plleeaassee.

  32. judyjudy says:


  33. andrea says:

    kate, im just asking – havent the women always been ridiculously campy caricatures? i think as much as they may be offensive caricatures of women in their 30s/40s now, they were offensive caricatures of women in their 20s from go.

    was carrie ever NOT whiney and imbalanced? was she ever NOT wildly stupid in terms of her personal life? were any of them ever NOT narcissistic, vain, materialistic and utterly and ridiculously obsessed with shoes and dependency on men to a degree that is damn insulting? maybe part of what i find so offensive about the b.s. “feminism” of that show is the extent to which WOMEN bought into and perpetuated it.

    and big was an asshole. she married an asshole wearing a peacock on her head. this is good? if any of my girlfriends every continually went back to a guy who treated them that way, i would have them committed. and gag me that her culmination as a person was marriage. of course. that show is every bad stereotype rolled into one repulsive package.

  34. danielle says:

    Andrea – I watched one season early on and found them funny – but also disturbing. I think for all of the reasons you and so many others said. Being a feminist in that series seemed to require only promiscuity – these were a group of women utterly obsessed by men.

  35. Michelle says:

    AbFab rocked! Specifically because it poked fun at the vapid, self-absorbed lifestyles of Patsy and Edwina. The Moroccan “photo-shoot” episode was one of my favourites 🙂
    SATC could have used a character like Saffy’s to confront these ladies on their shallow existence 🙂

  36. westcoaster says:

    Considering that a big part of the series was based on fashion, etc why did the producers decide to base this movie in Abu Dhabi? Could they not have thought of Milan, Paris, London any number of cities known for fashion. The movie may have still not be great but it would make a bit more sense. Maybe Hollywood producers and writers should start reading the comments on sites like Celebitchy. The posters here have some strong opinions on what they like or dislike!

  37. I should be working says:

    Hmm. Well, SJP looks pretty in her yellow dress and make up looks good. (I said something nice! YAY ME!)

  38. Ann says:

    Big deal. The movie is supposed to be a piece of fluff. I don’t know why it’s generating so much hatred and so many hateful comments about the leading ladies’ looks.

    We have these endless middle-aged manchild bro movies where overweight ugly guys get the hot chicks and yet none of the male reviewers get as irate as they do with SATC.

  39. Xander says:

    Well, It’s just a feel good movie, people! I’m going to see this movie tomorrow, and I just wanna see fabulous outfits, all the main characters of SATC and some nice decors. Offcourse it’s not an acadamy award winner, but I just like it! No crisis, always enough money, beautiful dressed people, It’s a fantasy, and I just like to get carried away :-P!
    Xander, The Netherlands

  40. Taya says:

    I loved everything about the series-the characters, scenery and writing, however; towards the end of the series it did turn into watching a grown narcissistic woman complain about her amazing life. Watching the SATC movie I felt as though they forgot what the series was about and just focused on product placement, even the male characters were not even close to their original selves. It was just an extension of Carrie whining about her entitled life with three other female characters thrown in to entertain her. That and watching a so-called grown woman, once again, go back to a man that dumped her, over and over and over again. The series was about four women, not Carrie and her sidekicks. And, unfortunately thats what it turned into. Carrie, Carrie, Carrie.
    Will I see SATC 2? Probably.

  41. original kate says:

    good god that poster is a mess! i’ve seen marionettes that look more lifelike.

  42. sassy says:

    well….I’m still going to see the movie and enjoy myself. I was hoping that this franchise would become sort-of like Star Trek did for movies of Star Trek.
    Old Fart Rex Reed had no business watching this movie and reviewing it. It wasn’t meant for mean old men like Rex. It would be like me reviewing Elmo Live 1..2…3..! I personally thought that show sucked, but my 3-year old loved it because it was meant for preschoolers, not adults. Yes, it’s all about over-consumerism. Yes, it’s all about sexy men and expensive clothes and accessories. And fake superficial shit. I can only afford Target right now, and I enjoy looking at the clothes and all the fun superficial stuff. It’s supposed to be fun! Not thought provoking. Anyway, I’m going in the theatre with “enjoying the movie” in mind and hopefully I will. So there!

  43. Kaboom says:

    Every time I see something related to that movie my first thought is “weren’t there only 3 witches in Eastwick?”

  44. javagirl1 says:

    I will go see it for one person…Mr. Big. So hot!!!

  45. Gigohead says:

    I won’t go see it in a theater. I may rent it. Money is too tight to mention. For two tickets and popcorn and soda, its a 50 expense here in NYC. So I’d rather use the money for something fabulous for myself!!

  46. Aussie Mama says:

    I can honestly say I’ve never gotten into this, nor the desperate housewives phenomenon.
    the whole concept is to empower women and give them a false sense of what life should be like. i find the whole thing destructive to the traditional family on every level. it’s like yeah i’m a selfish, wingeing slut and proud of it. it is utterly repugnant!

  47. sunnyjyl says:

    @Ann, Hahahaha!!! Thank you.

  48. Bobby the K says:

    This movie has a huge p.r. budget, yet it still gets bizarre amounts of free publicity from all media.
    Too bad, because there is some real talent making film, but they don’t have the budgets to get people’s attention.

  49. Chico says:

    NO–keep this series going. How about Sex and the City 8–where we’ll see 82 year old Samantha in a hot, red mini pick up a 19 yr old stud who is . . . Miranda’s SON! . . . while at Carrie’s funeral (all that smoking finally caught up to her). Special guest star–Madonna! She’ll do a hot, bump/grind of “Holiday” . . . on Carrie’s coffin! Can’t wait!

  50. NYC Snark says:

    I found the series (which I’ve only seen in re-runs) and the much-hyped first movie terribly depressing and even insulting. These are seriously horrible, cardboard characters one can only pray not to meet. The friendships are preposterous and wholly unbelievable. They are narcissists who have no self respect. If Carrie would have dusted herself off after Big left her at the altar, and made something of her life, that would have been a story. Instead the moral is: pick a rich man, that’s all that matters. Instead of making a movie, those characters should have each spent those 2 hours in therapy. Or maybe I should have, exploring why I so loathe SATC in all it’s permutations.

  51. yae says:

    guess who is the star? guess why?

  52. Confuzzle says:

    I loved most of the original series except for the final season which just came across as ‘wrap this shit up’. The loose ends were stupidly tied.

    I downloaded the movie and cringed. The only good thing about it was J Hud.

    I cannot believe they’re trying to sell Anthony and Stannie getting married. What, did they run out of gay men in Manhattan? What rubbish.

  53. gen says:

    I gotta say I never watched the series but a handful of times or the last movie. I never got it. I couldn’t relate to any of the women at all. And I love how people are like, their spending is ridiculous looking in this economy. Um, I thought it was ridiculous in any economy. Spending a bunch of money on how you look is ALWAYS disgusting.

  54. Luci says:

    “you wonder if she has an emotional imbalance that keeps her perpetually dissatisfied with life” <-totally

    Ive watched all SATC seasons plus the movie, and Ive always thought that carrie is the worst role model of the 4
    the other three have their own ethics and follow them, each to their beat, but carrie? she’s emotionally dependant and very imbalanced

  55. Nessie says:

    I agree with Luci who says that Carrie was always the worst role model. I have always been annoyed with the fact that the show evolved mostly about her. She has got to be the most selfish, self absorbed person and could never be a friend of mine.

    As for the movie it doesn’t take itself seriously so I’m not too bothered about that.
    What else to expect with four middle aged women still trying to act like they are in their 30s, they are in major denial in several ways and if real women behave like that, I would feel sorry for them.

    What happens to the characters when they hit 60 or 70? Will they still be living the same lives, will they be the future “role models” of senior citizens?
    A frightful thought……….

  56. Larissa says:

    I am with Kim.

    C´mon, it´s retarded but it´s just a damn movie people, don´t take it so seriously…

    The tv series was never close to profound to cause such outrage in 1st place. lol

  57. London Lady says:

    If they hadn’t cancelled Lipstick Jungle, I think there would be limited buzz for this movie. That was a really fun series that should still be on the air.

  58. Bobby the K says:

    One word:

    AbFab – The Movie

  59. chris says:

    Most reviewers are fanboys. Fanboys always get their panties in a twist whenever there is a female dominated franchise. I’m sure the movie isn’t great but it probably doesn’t deserve 13%.

    Also, SJP looks completely atrocious on the movie poster. What the hell did they do to her face? She’s not pretty but she certainly looks better than that.

  60. Melanie says:

    Is this just too early in the morning for me or does the blond in the movie poster look more like Elizabeth Banks than Kim Catrall?

  61. Tess says:

    That poster is devastatingly unkind to SJP.

    Could they have made her face any longer or narrower? I really don’t get the reason for doing that….

  62. Kitten says:

    I do agree that the original series was indicative of a specific time-period in which the American economy was thriving and life was generally on the uptick. To try to take that same sensibility/tone and hope that it will resonate with people in today’s economic and sociopolitical state just doesn’t work.
    But to get down on a show by calling it vapid, superficial, cosumerist, etc etc is pretty hypocritical. Let’s just remind ourselves that we are posting on a GOSSIP website. We’re here for escapism and SATC has always been more entertaining/comical than thought-provoking. BTW, if anyone is interested in seeing a thought-provoking film, I have a long list of favorites……

  63. Green Is Good says:

    ROFL! Team Rex Reed.

    “I seriously doubt if he could direct Jeeps in the middle of the Mojave desert.” Whatta burn. I love it.

  64. MARKY MARK says:

    The reviews for the 1st movie were shitty, yet people ran to see it. The same can be said for this one.
    Also, this series was written for & directed by mostly gay men. One of my friends has money, clothes, the whole nine yards and he’s still whiney. Thats how a lot of them are. The director is probably playing out his disatisfied life in this

  65. Whitey Fisk says:

    I am going to have nightmares about SJP in that header pic. Of course normally she looks like an elderly, malnourished horse; but I don’t think there’s a carbon-based creature comparable to that poster. It’s otherworldly. Yowza.

    Tess- “devastatingly unkind” is a great description.

  66. émerveillement says:

    I loved Sam in satc!!

  67. émerveillement says:

    @Chico : lmao !

  68. Iggles says:

    @ Ann:
    We have these endless middle-aged manchild bro movies where overweight ugly guys get the hot chicks and yet none of the male reviewers get as irate as they do with SATC.

    You’re absolutely right!!!

    It’s so sexist. Ugh. For example, “She’s Out Of My League” where the skinny dorky guy from the Judd Apatow movies get’s a blonde model as a girlfriend! That’s supposed to be more realistic??!

    Like “Knocked Up”, the dude was a chubby, hairy LOSER and we’re supposed to buy Katherine Heigl giving him a chance? The most realistic part of that movie was her making a face the next morning at her beer goggle induced mistake!

  69. lucy2 says:

    I liked the series, but didn’t like the first movie – I felt it never focused on the heart of the show – the friendships between them, and instead was a glorified fashion show with rambling and silly plot lines.
    The second film looks awful, I will not be watching it.

  70. bored says:

    Yeah, but you know we’ll all watch it anyway. Probably as a rental. Agreed, it’s no Ab Fab.

  71. Cheyenne says:

    @bored: Speak for yourself. I never watched a single episode of the series, didn’t watch the first movie, and won’t watch this one.

    However, it finally got one positive review. Things are looking up.

  72. endoplasmic ridiculum says:

    Honestly – was most disappointed by the styling! This show was supposed to have some modicum of style. I’ve watched crap shows like the O.C., Gossip Girl, 90210 etc for the clothes.

    What the hell!!!!

  73. Bee says:

    @Iggles I completely agree with you! I am sick of these movies were the ugly loser guy gets the hot girl. It’s like all of these male writers are trying to live out their fantasies. Where’s the movie where the so called ugly girl gets the hot guy? And when I say ugly girl, I don’t mean she’s ugly until she removes her glasses and lets her hair down.

  74. original kate says:

    the fact that they spend half the movie out of NYC is a mistake. the city was a major part of the glitzy fun of the show. i loved seeing them walking in front of the flatiron, or going to magnolia bakery, or in central park, etc. i always think of the city as another character.

  75. Iggles says:

    @ London Lady:
    If they hadn’t cancelled Lipstick Jungle, I think there would be limited buzz for this movie. That was a really fun series that should still be on the air.


    I loved Lipstick Jungle. Nico and Kirby 4eva!! (He was at Smith Jerrod levels of hotness on that show! Not so much on One Tree Hill..)

  76. smh says:

    this movie is going to bomb in the theaters.

  77. Ally says:

    I’m a big SATC fan, but it’s been sliding downhill from about Season 6, on through the first movie, and now this… I watched a clip on the Daily Show last night, and it was excruciating. Horrific scene, inane dialogue, high school play acting, inept direction.

    The show really was revolutionary in un-Victorianising Western notions about women’s sexuality. The dialogue was amazingly witty and SJP & the others shone as comediennes. Now, however, it is apparently all about four airheads with too much money.

    As with must revolutions, The Revolution Will Be Commercialized.

    I’ll be giving the movie a miss.

  78. Trashaddict says:

    Not going to see it, not a real fan, but I hope they make lots of money on it and laugh all the way to the bank. Male stars make lots of crappy movies these days with no socially redeeming values, either. Nobody seems to get all that upset about it. So grab the $ while you can, girls.

  79. stylefile says:

    I watched the media premier of SATC 2 last night in Manila. Let me start with this: even after free food and free drinks (terrible cosmos), I still found the film deplorable.

    Yes, there were fun moments. Yes, there were a few one-liners that had me chuckling. BUT two and a half HOURS is waaay too long for a fluff movie. There were so many parts that could have been excised and no one would miss them. Case in point? The terrible karaoke scene where they sing the worst, most hokey version of “I Am Woman” ever.

    Plus, the product placement was soo blatant, with lines like “Four brand-new Maybachs…”

    Can you imagine? It’s not enough to litter the movie with really obvious products, they had to spell it out too. Satc2 = one long commercial for different things.

    Oh, and how they acted and spoke *could* offend Muslims. Hell, my friend and I are Catholic and we got offended.

    The one thing I disagree with in the above reviews is Carrie’s hair. That’s the one thing that’s held up with Carrie: her hair is so bouncy and fluffy and shiny. I wonder how they curled it for the movie? Her hair tried to make up for a wonky cleavage, overdressing (Pat Field is losing her touch, such a shame) and, well, aging.

    Anyway, if you have 2.5 hours to spare (plus 30 minutes for previews) and can turn off your brain, you’ll find the movie fun enough. If not, wait for the dvd.

  80. Whitey Fisk says:

    Thanks stylefile, great post!

  81. Bina says:

    Bee, I believe that movie was called “The Truth About Cats and Dogs”.

  82. oppsite says:

    I saw the film and was actually quite happy with it. Yes, it was superficial for the most part, but it still had some rather deep moments.
    You have two of the characters talking about the difficulties of motherhood and sexism in the workplace. I don’t understand why all the reviews just happen to breeze over these two aspects, that are given credit within the movie.
    Although the show sometimes talked about important issues (marriage, abortions, careers, etc..), a lot of it was just the four characters friendship.
    The second movie continues to demonstrate this.
    It may not be the best movie, but it that doesn’t really matter.

  83. Susan says:

    I thought it was nice:)

  84. I don’t care what the critics say about SATC2. If you don’t laugh HARD when Samantha purrs “Lawrence of my Labia” or when Charlotte falls off her camel and reveals her ahem purry parts, then yes, you would hate this movie.

    True, the clothes/hair were ridiculous, married Carrie seems boring and vapid, the film dragged in places (like, everything after the opening sequence), the PC-ness was teetering on the edge of mockery, and the girls look a litttt-le too long in the tooth to still be bouncing around poolside and oogling hunks, but it was fun to watch and that’s the point!

    Get dressed up, wear some bling…oops “sparkle”, bring champagne (or cosmos), gather your best GFs (or gayfriends) and enjoy your time in the “new” Middle East for one night…no passports required!

  85. Kate says:

    It was awesome!! I absolutely loved it!!!

  86. Jess says:

    I’m sorry, but I HATED, LOATHED, DESPISED this movie. And I have all the series of Sex and the City in a limited edition box set that my husband bought for me. it’s like they took a hatchet their characters. The plot was thin, the outfits not up to scratch, it WAS mildly racially insensitive3, and they kept trying to pull the whole “We are woman, hear us roar” schtick over and over when all they stand for is conformity and commecialism at it’s finest. VERY disappointed. And there wasn’t even that much sex!!!!!!!!

  87. CB Rawks says:

    Why are you sorry?