‘Sex & the City’ stylist Patricia Field asks: why not just replace Kim Cattrall?

Latin History For Morons Opening Night - Arrivals

It is hopefully clear by now that Kim Cattrall was “over” Sex and the City a long time ago. I’m not even sure how Sarah Jessica Parker even managed to talk Kim into doing that horrible second movie unless it was already some sort of contractual obligation. But after that, Kim was done and no amount of whining or tabloid-bullying was going to change Kim’s mind. And then, after all of that breast-beating about how Sarah Jessica would absolutely love to do a third movie and how they totally have a script and Kim was the sole holdout, guess what? Cynthia Nixon is running for governor and she won’t have time to film a third SATC movie either. It’s strange how there isn’t one peep from SJP’s camp about that, right? Well, anyway, legendary SATC costumer Patricia Field has some thoughts about Kim and the idea of a SATC 3.

“Sex and the City” stylist Patricia Field says that if Kim Cattrall doesn’t want to do another “SATC” movie, then good riddance.

“If she doesn’t want to do it then they should replace her,” Field told friends at the Stephen Petronio Dance Company opening honoring herself and art patron Sylvia Mazzola. Ultimately, she says it’s Cattrall’s call.

“That is her own personal decision based on whatever she experienced and she doesn’t feel like experiencing it again,” according to Field. The 76-year-old fashionista says she too would have to think long and hard before helping keep “Sex and the City” alive.

“For me, it was 10 years or more. It was the first movie started 5 years after the TV show and then another movie,” she said. “To be honest, I would have to see the script because I can’t imagine what this would be.”

Fans of the HBO, which spun off two movies, had been clamoring for a trilogy right after “Sex and the City 2″ hit theaters in 2010. The show’s star Sarah Jessica Parker told Extra! In September 2017 that a “beautiful, funny, heartbreaking joyful, very relatable script” was in place, but the deal fell apart.

[From The NY Daily News]

“They should replace her” – that’s what Kim said last year! Kim basically said if they really, really wanted to do another movie so much, they should just write her out or replace her or recast the role or whatever. And I still don’t understand why that wasn’t an option, unless the whole point was to publicly bully Kim Cattrall. As for Field not even being sure if she would do a third film…. Hahaha. I eagerly await the Daily Mail article where anonymous sources call Patricia a money-hungry diva.

Women in Film & TV Awards

wenn5346728

Photos courtesy of WENN.

Related stories

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

38 Responses to “‘Sex & the City’ stylist Patricia Field asks: why not just replace Kim Cattrall?”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. JRenee says:

    Wow she’s 76?

    • KBeth says:

      Samantha can not be replaced, the idea is absurd.

      • ValiantlyVarnished says:

        No it isnt. Kim even said they could kill her character off. The point is that the movie doesn’t hinge on Kim being a part of it. They could have very easily made it without her. Which is why I find the public bullying really pointless and mean-spirited. If they want to do the movie they can do it. They are choosing not to.

      • KBeth says:

        Replacing her would be absurd, killing her off would not be.
        Apples to oranges.

      • ValiantlyVarnished says:

        Hardly apples and oranges. The whole point is that the movie could go on without her with her blessing. Not that anyone wants another movie anyway. The last one was complete crap. SJP needs to let it go and move on with her life. No one is interested in seeing a geriatric SATC.

      • RYotGrrrl says:

        IMO the conflict should be worked into the next movie. Carrie the character is an annoying narcissist, and her self-centeredness could be a decent “reveal”, like an intervention.

      • Kathleen Penland says:

        I absolutely agree! It wouldn’t be the same. If it’s not the same, who would care. The characters are ICONIC.

      • raincoaster says:

        Samantha can’t, but Kim can.

  2. Chaine says:

    Thank you! I have wondered this myself. It’s not like there are many parts out there for 50-something actresses—I’m sure they could find dozens of more-than-qualified candidates that would be more than happy to take over the Samantha role…

    • HK9 says:

      If it were actually that easy, I think they would have done it. The thing about it, is that people LOVE Samantha, and as I remember the show, I’m not sure there are a lot of 50-somethings actresses who would/could do what that role requires. It’s shit-or get off the pot time time here and quite frankly, they need to ‘get off the pot’ , walk into the sunset and put this brand to bed.

      • RYotGrrrl says:

        Seriously, the Samantha character has more heart than Carrie; you can’t have Samantha the ring giver (for Carrie’s mortgage) Samantha the cancer survivor; then kill her off the show? Oh hell NO.

      • susiecue says:

        RYotGrrrl I hear you but Charlotte gave Carrie her ring for the mortgage, not Samantha.

    • DesertReal says:

      They could.

      If anyone was clamoring.

  3. Loopy says:

    Patricia is amazing she really got the Casts wardrobe and characters perfectly. I used to love Charlotte’s preppy style but in real life i was probably closer to Miranda’s wardrobe lol.

  4. Birdix says:

    I haven’t heard about Stephen Petronio in so long! He used to be amazing sort of punk meets modern dance.

  5. minx says:

    No one wants this movie in the first place.
    If they have another actress play Samantha it won’t work. KC is Samantha. And If they replace the Samantha character it won’t be SATC.

    • Maria F. says:

      i totally agree.

      How do you replace her? With somebody who is like Samantha? Very difficult, it will always be a pale imitation. With a totally new personality? She would just have 2 h to win over the audience, that is a very hard challenge. And if it does not work, everybody would just be complaining that Samantha was missing.

    • tracking says:

      This, on all counts.

  6. LittlefishMom says:

    Oh my goooooosh SJP let it go. Get over it. No one needs to see these ladies in blinged out wheelchairs. Replace Kim?! Please, she’s the whole show.

    • KBeth says:

      Agreed.

      • ann carter says:

        I’ve always loved SJP, but this whole thing has been eye-opening.
        She is really ambitious and she KNOWS they have NO MOVIE without KC…
        that’s the ONLY reason for the drama….

    • sunshine gold says:

      Seriously. This is such a stupid debate….no one wants a 3rd movie!! We all know it would be terrible and disappointing and its only purpose is for the paycheck.

  7. Abby says:

    I thought this film was supposedly ready to go prior to the public dispute. But apparently they hadn’t locked down Big or many (any?) of the men and the stylist hadn’t read the script? But according to some they were weeks away from being greenlit or whatever. Yeah, sure.
    And Kim already said kill Sam, write her out or recast the role. They are choosing to anchor themselves to Kim and then acting all indignant.

    • MissMarierose says:

      Exactly! It couldn’t be as close to production as SJP wanted people to think it was if the key male roles and the costume designer who has been on board since day 1 didn’t know about it.

  8. greenmonster says:

    If they could make a movie without Catrall they would. I don’t understand how anyone who ever liked that show could say ‘Just kill the character off or let her live somewhere else again’. Wasn’t this show mostly about the friendship of these four women? Even if it was just a show? Replacing one of them changes the whole chemistry of the cast. In general I don’t want to see a third movie but without KC as Samantha I would definitely not watch it.
    It is a bit like Golden Girls. After Bea Arthur left and they created Golden Palace – the magic of the cast was gone. Sure, they also changed the whole setting, but it wouldn’t have worked if they kept the original house and just got a new roommate. An integral character can not just be replaced.

  9. The Original G says:

    Or, Samantha could die and the rest could all put in Oscar nomination worthy performances of the “beautiful, funny, heartbreaking joyful, very relatable script” and go on to make another 10 sequels.

  10. pwal says:

    It’s pretty fcuking refreshing that she isn’t wading into this from a Team SJP or a Team Cattrall perspective. Just come with a script that’ll make sense for the characters at this particular stage of their lives (read: pushing 50).

  11. No Doubtful says:

    Kim and Samantha are not replaceable. How do you replace the most popular character on the series? Impossible. Plus fans would not want her killed off either. Just leave it be!!

  12. Victoria says:

    Don’t these people have other work to fulfill them??? Who cares anymore. They should make a sex and a city movie to kill off Carrie. She dies from boredom of being married and the rest of the group realizes they are matured and hav no time to dea with a woman-child. I’ll write the script!

  13. Eliza says:

    Samantha became such a caricature of the original character she could be easily replaced because what she boiled down to in the movies was just dirty one liners.

    • ValiantlyVarnished says:

      Which is right around the time when SJP got her executive producer title and Kim’s storylines started changing…She said how much she disliked doing most of those outrageous storylines.

  14. jferber says:

    Obviously a close friend of SJP. If Samantha can be replaced, why not just replace the whole damn cast with four different actresses?

    • ValiantlyVarnished says:

      No the close friends of SJP were the ones bashing Kim on Twitter after Kim herself tokd them to either kill Samantha off or replace her – that was KIM’S idea. She doesn’t care what they do with the character because she’s done. Patricia Fields is a voice of reason basically stating the same thing Kim said. I personally love that she didn’t tow the SJP line and talk about how they can’t go on because of Kim. They can. They just choose not to.

  15. Snapper says:

    I’d love to see the script…. does anyone have any insider information? Kim can be killed off and replaced with Bonnie Sommerville. I loved her in Cashmere Mafia. I think she would make an ideal replacement for the Samantha character.

  16. Sassy says:

    This is my idea, and it’s fabulous!
    “The girls from SATC are reunited after Samantha dies under mysterious circumstances! Charlotte becomes a modern-day Nancy Drew, and the girls are off on a caper to see whodunit!” Spoiler alert: it’s Stanford!

  17. Rori says:

    I definitely have no desire for a third movie, but if they were going to do one without Kim, I think one possible solution would be to cast a younger gal in the role of a fourth Samantha like character. It could breathe new life into the dynamic and demonstrate dating as a 30 something today versus in the 90s when the show first came out. It could be someone working at Vogue with Carrie or something and she has to go on a work trip with her. There could be a lot of juxtaposition that would be rich grounds for comedy. Plus it would keep it from being a stale as the first two films.

  18. N.L. says:

    I don’t really want to watch SATC without Cattrall as Samantha. :(