If you hated it that much, then probably its real good.

Thank you, thank you, thank you. Real women are not anything like the hags on SATC. There is more to life that being consumptive, expensive shoes, and a man. Do not get me wrong, I love men. But I mean really. By the time any woman with any sense at all reaches 40, she does not lose sleep over a man who cannot make up his mind whether he wants to be with her, ESPECIALLY if that same man has been seeing her through other relationships and MARRIAGES. Why do we root for Carrie? Somebody tell me. I think she and her posse are a total bore, and an insult to intelligent women everywhere.

In order to really understand the characters you would have needed to watch the entire series. Unfortunately, this is almost a requirement for anyone who wants to "get" the movie. As for whether or not Carrie and her friends are like real people, I could care less. I've gotten a lot out of watching the series and I don't live in New York, have no high end stuff, a boyfriend, or a real career even. I LOVE the show anyway. It is meaningful, thought provoking and life changing even. You should have watched it before going to the movie as homework, and since you didn't, you should watch it now. Your review sounds stupid I'm sorry to say to those of us who are familiar with the material.

I think both of you are very bitter about the whole thing, love, men. Don’t you think you are letting something that suppose to be for entertainment get you worked up like this...it is a shame. Ya, surly the movie speaks to ppl who were fans of the show and final conclusion to the story. The show had ups and downs all women can relate to but that doesn't mean every step of the characters action should symbolized real women. I am sure there is a woman out there that can identify with each of the SATC characters. Everybody is entitled to do whatever makes them happy in life and defines who they are as a human being. If it mean going shopping, hanging out with gf and sleep with men and talk about them so be it. There are many women like Charlotte’s; life revolves around their husband and kids. Even though that is not a life that would satisfy me personally but others are very happy and content with that. To keep it short the movie is supposed to entertain not to be taken as a manuscript for real women, which I think you both should realize and let it be what it is.

I was invited to a SATC viewing party tonight. I told the host that I don't like SATC, and he stared at me like I had two heads. I've watched the show, but it's not my cup of tea, and I will definitely not be seeing the film. The thing I always found most off-putting was that the characters in SATC are 10+ years my senior, yet I was annoyed by their immaturity anytime I watched the show (no small feat, seeing as I'm 30 and right now I'm wearing blue nail polish, hot pink Converse shoes, and a Doctor Who t-shirt, aka my high school uniform). It's cool that other people are really into SATC, but like MAJ, I'm not a fan, and I understand her criticisms.

"Sex and the City"?

From "The Simpsons": "Isn't it that show where a bunch of middle aged women sit around and act like catty gay men?"

I do agree that people who did not follow the show may not "get it", but I am a diehard, 6 season junkie of SATC. It is the only series I ever really liked because I did identify with a lot of the ladies and their experiences. Maybe not the expensive shoes and dress, etc... but definitely the girlfriend power. It is about great friendships,and how they last through thick and thin, heartbreak, breast cancer, etc... Some of it may be silly, but it is fun and this is what the movie is meant to be. And for the record, I am 44 and have crystals all over my computer mouse at work and I also have lime green Converse tennis shoes. I don't even want to associate with anyone who thinks that is immature. Life is too short to take so seriously.

I loved the show because it made me laugh out loud. A lot. I have reservations about the movie. Sister, your review also makes me laugh. Would you really want to watch a movie where the protagonist "is a human being first...." by watching them read a fucking book, think about the state of the world, or balance a checkbook? Zzzzzzz. Ya ya, you didn't really mean we need to see all that, but hey, I just couldn't help but wonder, how about lightening up a little??

I don't think keen female fans of the SATC series ever proclaimed it having a great basis in reality, or that it advanced feminism, as they all know Carrie couldn't have afforded the clothes and shoes she wore in the show. Both in North America and overseas, I'd say this film will have legs and will do very well as a romantic coemdy, especially from most female (and even some male) filmgoers who feel dissatisfied or estranged with the mediocre, overpraised Judd Apatow comedy films of late. It'll
be interesting to see what writer director Michael King does next, as he's signed a deal with
Dreamworks for a romantic comedy film and is a much better writer that Apatow.

On the one hand, I'm glad to see a movie with a bunch of female leads get a big marketing push. But on the other, I really, really dislike the empty-headed materialism of these characters, and I could care less what happens to any of them. Cukor's The Women from 1939 dealt with the topics of shopping and relationships in a much more entertaining way (and sadly is just about as progressive in its depiction of romance).

However, a small part of me wants this movie to do well, just to put an end to all those "can women really make a movie a hit?" stories. But if it succeeds, will more worthwhile movies with likeable characters follow or will there be a stream of chick-lit copycats?

It's a tough call, but I'll be optimistic and predict that crappy movies like this will help lay the foundation for better movies with female leads in the future - movies with interesting plots and characters whose goals and actions have nothing to do with designer apparel or men... or the divine secrets of magical pants.

I have but one question, have any of you who made a nasty remark, took a horrible view on, or even had a bad thought about the movie/series. Ever truely watch a single episode episode beyond your narrow minded, self-centered judgement of the first episode you watched? Did you carry on and watch every single episode of those 94, at all? If you hadn't then you are what people need to be less of, in this day and age.
Open minded people are what the world needs, not closed minded jerks like I suspect most of you are.

The show was never just about shopping, fucking, and carrying on about all that utter bullshit. It was about being human, having flaws, having relationships, going up and down in relationships, attempting to make things worth while. Perhaps it is not about certain women. But I know pleanty of real women who are different from eachother, I know pleanty of women who share characteristics of these four characters. And if you don't see a little of yourself in one of them, beyond what the outside shows; after watching the television show. Then don't love the show, don't watch it. But those of us who have seen something they loved, or numeral things that they loved enjoy every second of what these writers have created.

I suggest before you watch another movie based on a television show, you possibly watch the actual show before you decide to pass your judgement onto another piece of someone elses hard work.

Look, me too:

http://www.wayneindependent.com/opinions/x1829911731/The-Incredible-Shrinking-Woman-10

I don't know...I usually don't need to watch more than 50 episodes of a show before I can figure out if I like it or not.

Actually, Carrie does read a book in this movie! Did you forget or did you not even watch the movie at all before writing this review? She reads that book of love letters that she got from the library and she mentions and even reads a couple passages of love letters from the likes of Voltaire, Beethoven, Lord Byron, John Keats, etc.

I just saw the movie with my significant other. It was very long. It has some funny moments. In my opinion it was entertaining, but I would be surprised if any man would find these characters marriage/date material. Call me crazy but there's something attractive about a woman who is committed to one guy. Sex is about as fun as eating fast food unless your both truly committed to one another, and let me tell you the longer your married the deeper and more satisfying. I would root for Jessica Parker's character more if she showed a little self sacrifice. All the best love stories are when the main character loves the other person so much that they are willing to sacrifice what they want in order to make the other person happy.

The characters in the show are a lawyer, a very successful PR agent, a successful writer, and a mother who quit her job as a fine art curator so she can be with her family.

But of course, they shop and have relationship troubles, so they're not realistic anymore. This review is ridiculous. It's a MOVIE. Do you think they're going to accurately portray women in a movie based on a series about SEX AND THE CITY? Seriously, think about it.

What did you want a movie about? A woman that sits on her couch and writes bad reviews for movies about a show she never watched anyway, then she goes to a library with her friends and they discuss Steven King novels for 2 hours?

It's supposed to be glamorous, fabulous, and FUN! Look at the women going to see the movie, probably half of them dressed up and they were having a great time just being girls. Stop taking entertainment so seriously, if you want more rehashed drama continue watching Lifetime.

My wife is a pretty big fan of the series so I've seen every episode - several times. I went with her to the opening and actually felt bad for her that the movie was such a letdown. It's depressing and not "fun" at all. All the way home she tried to justify the storyline but by the time we arrived in our driveway she said, "Wow, that was pretty bad." I could'nt agree more - and that's coming from a guy who enjoied kicking back with his wife and watching the original series.

god, am I glad to see a woman ragging on this! i'm tired of all the females gushing over this piece of fluffy crap!

right on, MaryAnn!

I loved SATC TV series, despite the froufrou expensive bags,shoes and clothes. I loved the 4 women and the 5th "girl" New York City. The movie disappointed as it was full of product placement, over-the-top fashion, and frankly, too little of the SATC men! Anyone seeing the SATC movie before viewing the entire TV series will never "get it" and will think the women are nothing but froth and foolishness. Not true but the movie is all style, no substance and that is a damned shame. Cannot imagine a sequel to this souffle- what, would Carrie and Big divorce???

"From "The Simpsons": "Isn't it that show where a bunch of middle aged women sit around and act like catty gay men?"

Actually, no.

Most gay men aren't this shallow.

I defy the stereotypes a bit, because I'm a single straight male who enjoyed the show a great deal. I liked it primarily because it was one of the few pieces of pop culture acknowledging that it was okay to be single (also that it was okay for women to enjoy sex and that a stable relationship isn't always easy to find or maintain). The strength of that and the way they adhered to it helped overcome some of the very real flaws--namely that the characters were almost criminally self-absorbed. Also, one of the establishing rules of SATC was that these four women do not have any problems outside of their relationships. At all. They have fantastic jobs, they make scads of money, they wear incredible outfits, etc. The inherent unreality of that was built in to the show in order to focus more or less completely on the relationship question. Worrying about other things would just make it another soap opera. So let's make their lives totally blissful except for this one issue, which we can then center everything on. It was part of the show's core concept, and I believe one of the reasons why it did so well.

SPOILER

(though the movie's trailer kind of reveals this)

Ironically, the show's finale let me down in a big way by having all four characters more or less settle into fairy-tale romantic bliss... which undermined the whole notion that it was okay to be single. Yes, I understand the need to see them happy as they ride off into the sunset, but it really felt like a letdown--a complete reversal of one of SATC's principle strengths. Accordingly, I have no real desire to see the movie, even though I never missed an episode of the show.

$26m on Friday... will probably make $60m+ for the weekend. i am shocked and appalled.

So much for "movies about women never make any money." Any other half-assed excuses you want to foist on us, Hollywood?

If you agree with this reviewer than you missed the point of the movie. She's right in many ways but she (and others who agree with her) dont see it as what it is... a movie, a fantasy story. Of course, Carrie's life is only going to revolve around those things . Hellooo the show is aimed to that, why do you think they call it Sex and the City? If she was going to be any different than that was not the point. It is true that the movie and the TV show could have shown more aspects of a women but that's beyond the point of the show.
Anyway, shows are successful if you get advertisers and this serie and movie has a whole lot support from companies. Apple, All famous brand clothes, Starbucks, etc etc etc. It is not about reality or what we want to see. Even a ten year old (a smart one anyway) can see this today. It is all about money and business.
There is a side in the movie you do not mention: the ironies and portrayal of the fairy tale as business, the illusion of things they all knew from the beginning. It is reality in a way because even though women are smart to realize these things nowadays, we still fall into that trap of romance and love. Why not? We all want to believe in good things. Do they always happen or when they happen are they always as good as we thought? Well, that is what this show is all about.
At the end, Carrie's phone is no longer pink. It is black, and she marries with the dress she had picked in the first place and no fancy wedding either, right?
Again, I am not saying I disagree with all points the reviewer made but I think women that criticize a stupid show and movie (made to entertain and by advertisement agencies) should not expect more from such. It is such a wast of time! It is like a child trying to get some sort of lesson or philosophy from Tom & Jerry. Even though there might be lessons it is beyond the point to expect Tom and Jerry stop fighting with each other and have a conversation. Get it?
Alright, that's all for now. I loved the movie. And no, I do not think I am Carry or any other character or believe that at the end we all get our fairy tales but some of us do sometimes and for some time so the trick is keep believing without making that the whole point of your life. Now, that is the real thing to accept life either way as Carry did before her "happy ending" arrived.

The movie only portrays people of color as help. The only other people of color I saw was the little girl they stole from China and the little boy that caused a ruckus in the store. This movie as well as the show is extremely shallow (beyond any romantic comedy I have ever seen) and makes me wonder about the socialization women go through watching terrible shit like this.

Yup, it's official, Sex & The City has just pulled off the upset of the year and will beat Indy this weekend.

http://movies.yahoo.com/mv/news/va/20080531/121226386200.html

Who could have predicted that?
A cinematic legend returns after 19 years with Spielberg, Lucas, Ford and a $185 million dollar budget and gets beaten in its second weekend by 4 bubble-headed middle-aged fashionistas.

Good luck extrapolating the social relevance of this weekend , MJ.
I expect you've got some deep thinking to do. ;)

I completely agree. I know it's supposed to be light and frothy, but some sense of a conscience, of a political mind, of religious and existential yearnings, would make the characters far more important and moving to me.

The only time religion is raised, for instance, is when Charlotte converts from Christianity to Judaism in order to marry her man. Charlotte is actually my favorite character, but her conversion is treated as a matter of simple convenience, a means toward an end. Would she never, not once, have stopped to ask whether there is a *difference* between the religions? Whether she believes one is closer to the truth? Or whether it shows any integrity to 'convert' with absolutely no religious self-reflection?

I don't mean to rile people up, or sound like a fundamentalist or something, but it just symbolized for me everything I dislike about the show--it was simply a matter of convenience and romance, with no deeper reflection whatsoever. That's the show, I'm afraid, like one of Carrie's ridiculous dresses: all glossy, shimmering surfaces and nothing that goes more than skin deep. If that's your fantasy...well, that's pretty sad.

Oh, and in response to the previous message...I think everyone expected that SATC would win the weekend.

There are two kinds of people in this world. First-weekend moviegoers, and the rest who will go whenever. The first-weekend people gave Indy a huge opening. But most of Indy's fans will be older folks, who don't care too much whether they go in the first or the fourth of sixth weekend. Plus, there have been all sorts of parties and arrangements set up among women to see SATC at the beginning.

In other words, it cannot be "the upset of the year" when everyone knew full well this would happen. And Indy is well on his way to great revenues, in any case. Both movies are.

Yup, imdb had a blurb in their studio briefing section about the BO predictions. As a feminist, I'm not sure how exactly to feel about the success of this film. To the extent that it means studios will take female consumers more seriously, I'm happy. To the extent that it means more movies like Sex and the City will be made, I'm disappointed.

happy + disappointed = ??

After the breakup, the dark-haired one (you know, the only one that's attractive) says something about how she's thought very hard about what she's going to say to the jerk who hurt her friend. It is "I curse the day you were born." The other three agree that that's pretty clever.

That's it?? That's all she came up with?? Goddamn, do I feel like a schmuck for calling [i]Juno[/i] "overwritten".

By the way, hope you like poop jokes, ladies.

"After the breakup, the dark-haired one (you know, the only one that's attractive)"

Finally someone agrees with me! I'm tired of people saying Sarah Jessica Parker is attractive. Hello, no she isn't! She's got a nose like Albus Dumbledore mated with an eagle. And what's with all that frizz!?

The other two are just cougars, and unhot cougars at that.

But Charlotte (the brunette)...now that's what i call a MILF.

I have to STRONGLY agree with "Ann" (May 30, 2008 7:36 PM)
I just turned 40 last week. I have never been married and have no children. I'm a total catch if I have to say so anonymously. (I have been told that I am very pretty, I am a self employed lawyer, thin, fit, no type of attention-getting - or other kind of - eating disorder, and I have a totally hot, successful, and funny, never married, no kids, boyfriend of seven years.)
I didn't watch the series for the first few seasons; I was convinced that it would make single women look like desperate, man-obsessed, sluts.
I was SO upset when I saw the first episode of Ally McBeal - she went to law school just to follow a guy who dumped her, she acted like a babbling idiot and her co-workers were catty and petty: THAT was an insult to women. It perpetuated every negative stereotype about women. I thank GOD I didn't know any women like any of them.
I was therefore leery about SATC. It did take me watching a few episodes before I got it. It is about the friendship mostly but what I found appealing is how none of the women are desperate, they are independent and strong. They didn’t live their lives to find a man and then dump their friends like I have seen some of my old "friends" do. I actually see a little of myself in every one of the characters! I also hate that just because I am 40 I am expected to look or dress a certain way. I wish the media would show more women in their 40's who don't look like fat, wrinkly, dumpy housewives. I really miss the series.

I would have liked to have seen alittle more emotional acting from Mr. Big - the reconciliation between he and Carrie at the end took a "Big" second seat to the reunion of Miranda and Steve on the Brooklyn Bridge - which really more touched the heart.

Another movie I have no intention of seeing. It's not that I hated the show, I saw it one time and it was funny, in an 'okay, I get it, but what else do they do?' kind of way.

"I wish the media would show more women in their 40's who don't look like fat, wrinkly, dumpy housewives."

Are you watching Romanian media or something? Almost every woman over 40 that I see on television is going for that (usually unattractive) I-never-grew-up "sexy grandma" look. Yes, all the fat and dumpy housewives of Wisteria Lane... sheesh.

Another example of how two different people can watch the same television show and see completely different things....I'm not talking about the movie reviewer (who is spot on). I'm talking about the poster who claimed that the characters on the show weren't "desperate," they were independent and strong....!!!!???? I too watched pretty much every episode of that show, because the four lead actresses are really good, but the Carrie and Charlotte characters were the epitome of desperation and dependence (Samantha and Miranda, not the same)...they spent the whole series desperately looking for a man, and when the relationships went sour (frequently due to immaturity on their own part) they cried, screamed, moaned and complained endlessly about the men they just left, the one they were looking for now, etc. That is pretty much all they talked about; that's supposed to be healthy independence and strength? Sounds like being pretty dependent on having a man for self-worth to me.
And it sounds like the movie is no different...the Carrie character is desperate to cling to a guy who has repeatedly dumped her, slept with her while he was married, etc. Right, real healthy to think that somehow someone like that is going to magically change.
Yes, it's just a movie/tv show, and the actors are really good (with pretty limited material, btw...the writing was frequently trite and cliched on the show), but honestly, I don't get the fans who insist that all four of these women were not desperate, but independent women...just not the case week after week in the show.

Dear MaryAnn,

you wrote "And men wonder why we call them pigs." You know the "Wow, you suck at math - Wow, girls suck at math" cartoon? If it is not okay to make a sweeping generalization of girls because of one girl (and it is!), it is also not okay to make a generalization of men because of pedro.

Best regards,
M.

Ok. So I guess nobody in NYC obsesses about shopping and all those stores -- thousands -- are a front for money laundering? This this characterization is bogus and no such people exist.

I agree with much of what you've said MaryAnn. This film was directed and written by a man, Michael Patrick King, and it's supposed to be representative of women? Yikes! It's like the former SATC writer having such success and being on Oprah with his book "He's Not that Into You." It's because as women, we have to realize that there is something wrong with us that we are single after a certain age.

People get very defensive about this silly show. I enjoyed it and was a fan-- what I appreciated was that Carrie did not end up with the guy and the ring at the end. When I heard about the movie and that there would be a wedding I expected mediocrity which is what this film is. I sat with my friend (and usually as a film reviewer, though not successful like you, I don't have this type of disrespect) and made comments to her about what was happening next and how it was predictable and pathetic. It's okay to be over 35 without a boyfriend or husband but Hollywood does not want to show that of course and people don't want to see it. Why else would people dress up to see this film and go get cosmos and make a whole girls night out when they don't see another film for months at a time (in the theater)? I could go on and on but I won't.
Oh, and the friend I went with (we see a movie together maybe once a month),a 46-year-old single mom of two, said she nearly cried a few times because the movie made her (and women in general) feel they may never find love over a certain age yada yada. Kudos to Sarah Jessica Parker and Michael Patrick King for making tons of money with this tripe.

For a fan to try to engage in a discussion with non-fans is more than a little difficult. Fans of say, Attack of the Sith Clone Accountants or whatever the hell the prequel Star Wars movies were called, can talk about a movie with terrible writing and directing and still call the movie great--logic doesn't always apply. Still as a married man who'll stake his man-feminist cred alongside anybody's (I saw "Free to Be You and Me"--and LIKED it. Mommies are people, and William abso-fuckin'-lutely should have a doll), I'll share two elements of the movie I greatly appreciated.

1) Writing with a sense of structure--complete with set-ups and payoffs, and parallelism and echoing. *SPOILERS* For example, Charlotte imagines what she would say to Big--"I curse the day you were born!" Audience anticipation: will she really say it when she inevitably sees Big again? Will she chicken out? No! Holy shit! She says it! And the look on Chris Noth's face--priceless. As for parallelism--Miranda finds herself echoing the same pleas of forgiveness that poor, hapless Steve has been using throughout the film. Audiences pick up on that sort of thing, and go, "aha"--would that more writers understood that. *END OF SPOILERS*

2) Romance for grown-ups. Granted, the great emotional investment isn't going to be there except for fans. But I was happy to see people 40+ and even 50+ struggling with romance, making occasionally really bad decisions, and dealing with the consequences. Let's compare that, say, to "Atonement"--another movie I enjoyed, but when you boil it down, the Great Tragedy of the young couple rests on an "oops, I sent the dirty letter by mistake" mixup more suitable for "Superbad" or "Bevis and Butt-Head Atone for Stuff" ("Um, Bevis? Are you sure you sent the right letter?" "Yeah, heh-heh, heh-heh...").

And finally, if you absolutely don't care about something or someone, the expression you're looking for is "I COULDN'T care less"--not "I could." Sorry, but that really burns me.

You know MaryAnn, if you look at the top right of your page, just underneath your pretty little picture and you'd read your description of yourself, you'd rethink your little 'I don’t see myself or the women that I know in them'-tirade, you geek goddess, you. Because honestly, that sounds just like the girls in Sex and the City (except maybe they'd manage to word it better). But the great thing about your site is that I could get past that 2 sentence, superficial fluff of a description by reading your reviews and getting an idea of your way of thinking, what constitutes a good movie for you, your sense of humour or even life experience. What's even better about your site is the fact that it's a movie reviewing site..by you..a movie reviewer..not to be confused with a surgeon working for Medecins Sans Frontieres, a Nobel prize winning writer or a Tibetan monk. I can read your site if I deem it funny or interesting enough, but I think we both know I wont be coming here for any deep insight into the world of movie critiquing. But sure, we already know you're capable of not taking life too seriously, with your pair of cherry-red Converse high-tops. And I have the impression that the exact same might just apply to the movie as well.
People don't regard SATC as some sort of iconic poster for the perfect lifestyle with . It's just heaps of fun, and there's just so much eyecandy involved (from the fashion, to the men, to the drinks and food), not to mention some lines are deliciously funny/witty and best of all, its main appeal is how the four of them stick together like the good friends that they are, regardless of their problems, relationships, achievements (honestly, you really can't relate to that?!..note how I didnt say 'identify yourself with'). I thought they did such a good job at translating all that into the movie, but if you're looking for anything more, you are completely missing the point.....maybe just the fact that you like high-tops isn't, after all, such a good example of your laissez-faire attitude.

You're far more impressed with those things than I, shoop -- I didn't think any of that was particularly impressive. I could(n't) care less that she said that to him -- it's not a great line and neither Charlotte (the one who pooped herself) nor Big have much presence in the movie, outside Charlotte pooping herself. She pooped herself. I especially wasn't impressed with "romance for grown-ups," as it didn't seem particularly romantic nor particularly grown-up. Seriously: clothes clothes clothes boys boys clothes boys clothes boys boys -- Are these women 40 or 15?

I don't know what it is that makes it different from standard romantic comedies, but seriously, I think MaryAnn has it right on the head when she asks if these women balance their checkbooks. It really feels like these women have no interest at all in politics, religion, spirituality, morality, art, nature, or even in a lot of ways romance and family. It's nice that Samantha is honest about not being a relationship kind of girl, but besides orgasms, what does she have in her life? Christ, they get attacked by anti-fur activists and they just enjoy it as part of being an NYC fashionista.

Wanted to add: I've seen a lot of women argue that this movie isn't supposeed to be an endorsement or something to aspire to, it's a female wish-fulfillment fantasy. I don't find it a particularly attractive fantasy, but more importantly, I think that, through the fantasy argument, that Sex and the City has positioned itself as a female Porky's. That's not a flattering description.

Well. Discussing feminist politics over this movie is bit like dicussing animal rights over Babe. Mmmm, bacon. But I digress...

I'm pretty sure, for those people that think that this movie doing well strikes a blow for "girl power", that the business world recognizes your purchasing gravitas already. Just look at malls and supermarkets--not designed for men. There are more woman graduating college than men, while we're at it. Things are going swimmingly! Pretty soon all the evil men will be under your high heels and you can force them to watch 57 Dresses and impress them into going to the supermarket to buy feminie hygeine products! Muah ha haaaa! Yes, maybe this movie IS indeed the vanguard a new age--an age where the Sisterhood of Empresses reign supreme, where men will know their place (killing bugs, getting stuff off high shelves, dealing with particularly hard-to-open jars) and, by law, have to truthfully say what they're thinking when a woman asks! I take it back, this movie IS important--ignore it and be imperiled!

What might be more meaningful is how long this thread became in such a short period of time. The movie means something to many.

John, you might want to check out the Ozzie and Harriet episode where Harriet pushes Ozzie into returning her bra to the store because she's too busy. It's the entire plot and quite funny. Where you would find that episode, I have no idea.

Didn't Sarah Jessica used to play geeks? She was the pretty girl's best friend in Footloose, wasn't she? That's what surprised me the most when I first heard of the show. Makes one wonder if any woman's social status is only a make over away, which I mean to be a comment upon society's judgments.

When I go to the mall or the supermarket, I don't particularly notice that they were designed with women in mind (is that even true?). It certainly doesn't influence the quality of my shopping experience. When I go to the theater, I can't fail to notice that most of the movies were designed with young men in mind, and it is irritating and incredibly boring. I can't imagine how annoying it must be for a woman.

I know you're intentionally being melodramatic MBI, but there are quite a lot of men out there that still think feminism and misandry (and lesbianism, and male slavery, and sometimes even *chuckle* Communism) always go hand in hand. Phrases like "evil men" tend to reinforce those misconceptions. Although some feminists hate men, most do not - they hate patriarchy. I can only speak for myself, but I would guess that SatC is more appealing to feminists than say, Charlie's Angels or Steel Magnolias but I guess that's not saying much.

Oh well, guy-centric movies are 90% crap, so assuming girl-centric movies have a similar crap/decent/masterpiece ratio, studios will most likely have to give filmmakers the chance to contribute a lot more to the library of girl-centric movies before we see high-quality films produced with any regularity. Whatever your opinion of this movie is, its success definitely has the potential to help kick start that process.

Totally off topic, I just realized that SJP is the girl in Flight of the Navigator. I watched that movie dozens of times as a kid; I still use it as an example of Special Relativity in class and none of the kids knows what the hell I'm talking about... but they all know about Planet of the Apes... hmm... because of Marky Mark maybe?... alright I'll stop rambling now.

Cathy said it best, "In order to really understand the characters you would have needed to watch the entire series".

All the things you complain about Carrie being, the stereotype and all, just isn't true when you watch the series. In fact, all the characters are better understood in the series, and for someone who has seen every single episode many of times I should know this.

I have a feeling you didn't watch very many shows before seeing the movie. This is who the movie was made for, people like me, who "get it".

I loved the movie, it was nice to re visit the characters I fell in love with years ago.

I really wish, as a woman you can buy the dvds and get over the stereotype that is applied to Sex in the City in general. I think you'll find you have more in common with the girls then you think.

"Maybe it’s a blow for gender equality that women are now allowed to extend adolescence into the years once considered “middle-aged.” Carrie’s cell phone is covered in pink glitter, after all..."

*** Wow, lets please take a right turn and drive all the way back to the line of the feminist revolution; that’s what your statement says to me. Being a woman, who is proud of her gender and who lives a life of equality has nothing to do with the color of one’s cell phone, look at the market honey, pink glitter is everywhere. As for the adolescent behavior surrounding the wedding itself, have you seen woman get married? Have you? It really is a fairy tale trip back to your teen year dreams, and the behavior in general is pretty adolescent, damn the entire concept of marriage is pretty damn adolescent. I think the movie was addressing that.

But what gender empowering themes are there in this movie?
1. Sam's choice with Jared, shit, Sam in general. How old is that bitch and she's still living up life as a single woman. There is no “old hag” there, something we’re taught to fever out entire lives, Sam shows us all that is just total bullshit.
2. Miranda is the fuckin working mother Lawyer and always has been. Hello!
3. Not every woman's life is about her family, but those women who choose to have children and love their husband and babies like Charlotte are not how you described her. Again, series needed some viewing to understand that one. Charlotte is a hopeless romantic who’s always wanted babies but she's intelligent and highly educated. Just because you have a mind and a vagina doesn't mean you should never seek out the “stay at home wife” lifestyle. Powerful woman do what they WANT to with their lives.
4. As woman, we will always deal with the issues of giving up some part of ourselves to make some relationships work. The movie addresses that issue, which is an issue most woman (you and your friends I’m sure) never even discuss. The more this topic is discussed the more likely it is to change.
5. Friendship with other females. Get on the female love train and bond together with all types of woman to influence you in ways you never thought where possible. The biggest thing holding woman back today is inside resentment towards each other, much like your resentment towards the movie in general. It holds us back more than any male made stereotype. We should be loving those woman that can still rock at 40 plus.

Sex in the City, in my point of view is helping the movement. Giving woman role models who are, yes, capable of love, and who, yes, have issues with men. Like we all do, thats who we are. We are woman who love and have problems with our relationships. We are woman who have friends who are woman who will always be there for us. We are woman who can choose whatever path we want in life.

Most woman can't be past the shoes and pink phones to see the real message of Sex in the City.

I liked the movie. Just saw it today, Sund. afternoon in an urban locale, the seats stufffed with obvious fans of the tv series, all races, all ages, and both genders laughing their butts off. I was really surprised, having watched the show by myself for so many years. I'd read negative reviews so expected it to be a very trite, superficial H'wood movie and to be racist in the way it treated the Jen Hudson character. Couldn't have been more surprised. It was fun, funny and as funny as the series. It was moving, although it had some stupid moments like when the Mario Cantone and Willie Garson hooked up. That was a stretch and seemed like a wink to the audience. but overall it was worth my $8.25. A friend called me last week to see the Indiana-Lost whatever movie. I told her, I don't want to see that. SATC is my kind of movie. Do more. Do some with black people in the lead role, and I'll be really proud of my country for the first time in my lifetime. Ha ha.

I loved the series but thought that the movie went through too many "Hollywood" edits. I didn't believe in the characters anymore and didn't even have the urge to drink a Cosmopolitan afterwards. I would have called it Hmm and the City. So disappointing.

I'm pretty sick of being perceived as an asshole nitwit for liking Sex and the City by women who think they're something special because they don't like it. The show is called Sex and the City, and that's what it's about. When looking to be entertained, do you only want something that directly reflects your personal experience? I'm 28, I haven't polished my nails in probably 4 years, I rarely wear makeup, I'm a bargain shopper who wears a lot of thrift store clothes, and I have a physical job that is dirty and without glamour...but I still love the show.

I'll admit, I was wholeheartedly against SATC until the second to the last season when my roommate and I magically got free cable and started watching out of morbid curiosity. and I must say, it just grows on you, because there is a realness to the relationships and the chemistry between the actors is very natural. Yes, there's plenty of fluff and most of the jokes are groaners...but is your life completely filled with perfectly timed and pitched quips?

the point is the friendships, the rest is just fun stuff to look at or even to mock. these ladies aren't stabbing each other in the back, they're supporting each other. when they're jealous, they admit it and get over it. they aren't getting caught up in competing with each other like some of the back and forth in here about who's got converse...as if wearing a shoe that millions of people have been wearing for a hundred years somehow makes you "fun". I mean, really, I don't think I could roll my eyes back any farther. I've been wearing chucks since I was in 2nd grade so OMG, I must be the coolest one here! give me a break. you're exhibiting the very behaviors you're criticizing.

to the point of consumerism, there's consumerism in every major film. blatant. and at least in SATC they talk about important, real designers. yes, the characters are slaves to fashion, but in case you didn't notice, they all look different. I consider fashion to be art and I think it's nice to see people choosing to construct a look for themselves (however fictional) rather than just going with any sort of preset genre or buying whatever the newest old navy ad tells you to...but I digress.

anyway, the movie was fine, it was for the fans and it was complete with all the flaws you'd find in the show. I'm not going to pretend that I didn't want to punch some of the attendees in the face for being all sorority girly and dressing up. but you know what? they were having fun, and that's the same reason I was there, so who cares? live your life how you want, don't put your own shit on other people just because they don't have the same taste as you.

I'm going to watch The Dead Zone now. maybe read a little more of Grendel. we'll see how well I can identify with the characters even though I can't see the future nor am I a cave-dwelling monster. (well, that's up for debate)

and in case anyone's interested in a comprehensive review that examines all aspects of the movie without taking it personally or demonizing its viewers, check out the New York Times review by Manohla Dargis.

I support SATC all the way. Loved the series. Loved the movie. I wish there was more light-hearted material in the film, but I still enjoyed it.

Every time I'd go through a rough breakup, I would pour myself a glass of wine and throw on a DVD from one of the seasons. Carrie, Miranda, Charlotte, and Samantha got me through it.

I believe the show empowers women. You have four beautiful women (by no means are they hags - and I can guarantee any man who wants to claim this, would probably still go for any one of them, and chances are that any woman who claims this doesn’t look as good as them, or won't look as good as them when she reaches that age) who encounter life's problems and rely on their friendships to overcome the difficult times.

Plus, I'm so sick of seeing men in their forties being portrayed as the handsome, sexy bachelor who can stay single for years to come and continue dating women half his age. And rarely will you find a woman in her forties portrayed in such a positive light. SATC dared to do this. They gave women hope. They help us believe that we too can stay beautiful and sexy while aging.

And although the dialog between the main characters is mostly about men and dating, the underlying theme to SATC is that women shouldn't worry about men so much because we will always have friends to support us. That is a good message.

and in case anyone's interested in a comprehensive review that examines all aspects of the movie without taking it personally or demonizing its viewers, while considering the source material AND respecting the fan base, check out the Los Angeles Times review by Carina Chocano.

Wow. The vitriol and defenses blazing. A good critic does put herself in the criticism. It's not possible to stay out of it. No one would feel so strongly about a movie if they did not associate with it in some way. That's what makes a movie good or bad: how it makes you FEEL.

And as a graduate of a women's college, I am so sad that feminism is still such a dirty, dirty word.

I'm glad aging women can be given this "hope" that they too can be physically alluring as they get older -- confirming that my looks will for the rest of my life be the defining aspect of my personal worth. Thanks, progress!

Gloria…I sense your sarcasm. I too believe women should NOT only be defined by the way they look. But I am also very aware of a thing called reality. And our culture does define people largely by their looks. It’s not right. But it’s a fact.

Sex and the City went against the "old hag" stereotype, and for that I think it does give women hope. I'm 24 years old and I am constantly being pressured to find a man and get married because one day “I will not be able to get one.” One day I will be "too old." Sex and the City gave me the confidence to know it is ok to not settle with a man when I'm young. A lot of women do this. They settle with someone who is not right for them because they feel that if they let that person go, their chances of finding another mate will be slim to none. It's not right for women to have to feel this way. And SATC should be given credit for trying to change this.

Of course I'll "hope" that society changes its ways and starts defining people by more than just looks, but I don't see it happening very soon. But I do believe that even the slightest changes, which make women feel better about themselves, are good. So being given hope that your life isn't over when you reach 40, is a good feeling. And I'm sure a lot of women would agree with me.

Amy S., it is possible to put yourself into a critical review without marginalizing the viewers. For one to claim that she is unable to grasp any sort of reason why people would even like this sort of stuff, reads as someone who thinks they are holier than thou. And to me, it shows a lack of insight or any kind of imagination about the human experience.

I would not call bitter, bitchy generalizations any sort of valid criticism. but I suppose I shouldn't hold a blog described as "cinematic musings" to a very high standard anyway.

I guess I just want the people who are so adamant about hating the show/movie to get over it, get a life, don't watch it, and don't make people who watch it feel bad.

I'm not surpised the woman of Sex And The City come off as sterotypes. Remember this is a gay man;s idea of woman...and they haven't a clue about real straight woman. Instead we have woman who behave like gay men....obsessed with fashion, sex, trival petty annoyances and are chiild like in their behavior and choices.

wow, Catey, did you just read what Lauren Hutton said on the Today show and write it here, or did you come up with that yourself? I'm scared either way.

Catey,

Don't you mean "Trivial?" Don't you mean we have "women?"

At least Carrie knew grammar.

And how would you describe a real, strait woman? What things does she care about? What things does she obsess over? I'm curious to know how you define "real, strait women."

By the way, you are making a huge generalization to assume all gay men are obsessed with fashion, sex, petty annoyances, etc. And are you saying all gay men behave in a childlike manner? You might want to be careful about that.

I can see where you are coming from, but the problem you have with the show oversimplifying what it means to be a woman, is the same problem I have with you oversimplifying what it means to be a gay man. Don’t be a hypocrite.

"Amy S., it is possible to put yourself into a critical review without marginalizing the viewers."

But it's a lot less fun to read and to write.

As for the whole "SatC is about friendship" thing, I'd like this film a whole lot more if they took the friendship part out of it. This is a series that, as far as I can tell, glorifies callow hedonism, and I don't think that's a problem in itself, but I certainly don't buy this "They sleep around constantly, have obscene senses of entitlement, they're insanely wealthy narcissists, but they're also best friends forever awwwwwww." Just seems dissonant to me.

MaryAnn,

Good for you. However, not all women are as confident as you. And by no means does a show "validate" your life, but it can be relatable, inspiring, and sometimes hopeful. I don’t believe I ever said people should use the show to validate their life. I said it can give them hope. Two different things.

Notice how you say "edging" close to 40. If you are as proud of yourself and your age as you claim, wouldn't you say, "I am almost 40?" Or, "heading into 40." Or even, “I will be 40 soon.” “Edging” gives the connotation that you almost fear 40. Just an opinion.

And why are you commenting so much on a show you care nothing for. If you dislike it that much, why waste your time? I was just wondering.

Jacquelyn,
YAY!!! You are smart and I agree 100% with you. Looks ARE important, unfortunately. What I like about the show is that they are fit, attractive (not gorgeous,) smart, successful, and independent. You are 100% right about feeling pressure to settle, and you shouldn't because I can tell YOU don't need to. I can also tell there are some others here who maybe don't have much in the looks/fitness department but more importantly don't have one or more of the following: self confidence, a great personality, sense of humor, or positive energy.
If you are lacking in any of the latter, you probably cannot relate to the show and DO need to settle. For those women: find a man fast because you will not age gracefully.
FOR the record: The series dealt with MANY issues regular women face such as: relationships with men, friends, and co-workers; career changes, financial challenges, cancer, infertility, adoption, and pregnancy, just to name a few. How can HUMAN not relate with any of these things? Just because you didn't experience them in a pair of $300 shoes? Get real!
Catey is an idiot, probably a man. The great thing about SATC is that it ISN'T a stereotype! I wish it were, I'd have more friends if this was the case.
The good news is that there ARE women in real life who live like the girls. There are real women who have lives outside of finding a man and having a baby, even if it includes BOTH, and more important than looking good or spending tons of money on shoes, they have healthy, fun outlooks on life.

MBI, I wouldn't consider this hackneyed review "fun" in the least. it's mean-spirited and shallow.

and by the way, LIFE is dissonant. rich and famous people are still people.

jesus, I didn't mean to get so involved in all of this, and I have plenty more to say, but it appears that the author only responds to points that she can argue.

Isn't the point of movie criticism evaluation of the film in front of you and stating your opinion whether it works as a film or not? Not whether you happen to be some fanboy or girl of said movie?

Methinks too many of you need to think about this aspect, not pillory the reviewer for merely doing her job. It's fine to disagree with her views, but so far I've seen not one of you fans effectively state whether this film makes the transistion to the big screen, and actually works as a film, and not just a series of TV episodes crammed into 2+hrs.

BTW, Bergman's "Scenes from a Marriage" deals with relationships far better than Sex in the City ever will.

My reply to:

"They sleep around constantly, have obscene senses of entitlement, they're insanely wealthy narcissists, but they're also best friends forever awwwwwww."

I'm not sure where I get self absorbed and narcissistic when looking into the characters. Sure we all went to high school or college with women who strived towards the "I'm so modest, real and will make someone a sweet wife some day" stereotype. If you're "that girl", good for you. But is the alternative really that bad?

What is so wrong with wanting to embrace life as a single adult woman, with focus on your career, friendships, fun and fashion, and along the way still try to find "Mr. Right". How is this pursuit in any way shallow, bubble-headed, or other dis'par'age I hear from posters?

Does a woman have to be a Steel Magnolias sappy kind of girlfriend, who marries by 24 and puts all her "self" and energy into kids and husband to be virtuous? Again, nothing wrong with that choice, but those who put down the characters might be either a bit more uptight than need be, or perhaps even jealous of those who actually live that life.

Why does it have to be one or the other:

clothes, sex, fun with friendships = shallow/narcissistic
girly-girlfriend, playdatemates, husband, babies = not shallow, good person.

Sometimes when women strive to have the most interesting life they can before settling down, it is harder to find love. As if they're punished. Funny how the same doesn't hold true for men. I think the show speaks precisely to those of us with that experience.

And as for religion, politics, thoughts of substance, etc... C'mon. When men are portrayed as heros, executives, nice guys, etc... on film/tv, are they reading books, balancing checkbooks and "proving" they have brains? This position makes me think of the *Stuff White People Like* blog that makes fun of yuppie-types that always need to demonstrate their depth and intellect by ad-nauseum discussing books, history and politics. When you have a brain, people who also do know it...

STC was a funny, groundbreaking show and the movie gives a little taste of it for those of us who miss it.

I love the TV show. I've seen every single episode several times and I even watch the TBS versions because I liked the show so much.
That said, I hated the movie and what it did to the characters. Charlotte was just screamy and over the top, Samantha is too much of a cougar and it's not sexy anymore, it's just sad. Carrie and her bad puns and her whining and her little girl behavior are just irritating and Miranda, heck, no wonder Steve cheated on her. In real life, the poor guy would have SHOT her.
This movie was as predictable as a Harlequin romance and not as well thought out.
And music montages? Two of them? Where are we, 1980s?
And did anyone notice that Mr. Big's hair was not only abnormally black, but that his greying temple changed places in different scenes? Hello, makeup, time for a touchup!
And what was with Anthony and Stanford. They HATED each other on the show. Suddenly we're supposed to believe they are together?

The most fun I had was coming out and saying in front the line that was waiting "man, that was sad when Steve died" and watching the ladies flipping out.

Oh, yeah, I'm female. No penis here, so you ladies have no reason to hate me.

Just call me a very disillusioned, disappointed fan.

That's $7 and two and a half hours I'll never get back.

"MBI, I wouldn't consider this hackneyed review 'fun' in the least."

That's because you didn't read it. The review doesn't say a single bad thing to slam the many fans of the show -- matter of fact, it states that those who've watched the show have built an emotional attachment that she isn't able to share. The only thing to be offended by is the implication that fans of this movie like bad movies -- and if you know a way to write a negative review without implying that, go ahead. As far as I can tell, the meanspirited one is you, whose first sentence was an insult.

And for the record, I'm not saying liking clothes makes you a shallow person, but is anyone really going to argue to me that Carrie Bradshaw is deep? That "Sex and the City" is not often, if not primarily, a celebration of the immature pleasures of life? That's not a bad thing on its own, as I said -- but it is if you expect her to be a romantic avatar that you can relate to. I don't watch James Bond movies to see Bond have romantic issues, I do it to watch him drink, fuck and kill. The heart and soul of "Sex and the City" actively works against what it's trying to accomplish; it's like watching Patrick Bateman from "American Psycho" fall in love. And yes, real life is dissonant, but I don't see what real life has to do with "Sex and the City"; even most fans would agree with me there.

As my last point, Charlotte poops herself. I really do not want people to forget that. Charlotte... poops... herself.

This is a series that, as far as I can tell, glorifies callow hedonism, and I don't think that's a problem in itself, but I certainly don't buy this "They sleep around constantly, have obscene senses of entitlement, they're insanely wealthy narcissists, but they're also best friends forever awwwwwww."
--MBI

I don't suppose it helps to note that that's basically the same formula employed for the two lead male characters of "Boston Legal."

Lord Almighty! I myself have had instances of disagreement with Mary Ann (mostly because I'm not a huge fan of certainty in regards to religion), but her job is to have an opinion! And this is it! She really doesn't hate you or your lifestyle! She is not trying to to dampen your fervor for the feminist movement. If you prick her, does she not bleed? If you trip her, does she not stumble? If you poke her, does she not become irate? If you do all three things, does she not call the police? The lady's all suffragetted and sh**--she's allowed her opinion about this silly movie. Don't make us men pull this country over and get out the burqas! Hey Paris, would you pass me that golden apple...

MaryAnn, well, I suppose I shouldn't expect you to concede to any points conflicting with your own on your own website, no matter if they make sense or not.

I read the review, I found that it was based not solely on the movie, but on preconceived biases and opinions formed about the whole SATC machine. Some of the things mentioned about shopping and orgasms...just weren't in the movie. and the part about Carrie not reading...when clearly she is not only reading a book (albeit about love letters) at one point, but she has a god damn library card and actually goes to the library. I guess I just figured someone who is a self-proclaimed "geek goddess" would notice such details.

It's not a good movie, I never said that. it's predictable and some parts are completely stupid. but as a whole, it honored the series and was satisfactorily entertaining.

MY PROBLEM IS THIS: criticism should be about evaluating the content and execution of a subject, not a glazing over of generalizations peppered with personal bias. and I am offended that purported "intelligent" people think they're hot shit because they don't "get" Sex and the City. I'd think that anyone with a reasonable amount of brainpower could venture a guess as to why it's so appealing to a good amount of people.

I guess I just think there's a lot more to be upset about in this world than a t.v. show/movie that for whatever reason makes millions of people happy. but this is the internet and anonymous egos are involved so nothing will be agreed upon or resolved. so fuck it.

I apologize MaryAnn. I didn't realize this was the same MaryAnn that wrote the review.

Most critics I know don't get too involved with their comment section. Because a critic's opinion is already clearly stated, most leave the arguing to their readers.

Now that I understand you are the critic, I do applaud you for reviewing films of all genres and tastes.

When I thought you were just a reader, I didn't comprehend why you were commenting so much because I didn't understand why someone would waste so much time on a movie/subject they really didn't care for anyway.

You see...I hate horror flicks. I might see one and absolutely hate it, but I wouldn't waste my time to tell everyone how bad it is, over and over. I'd probably just make one comment saying why I think it sucked. That’s just me. Although, arguing can be a fun pastime. Cheers

A number of your readers commented on your review saying something like (to quote one of them): "If you agree with this reviewer than you missed the point of the movie. She's right in many ways but she (and others who agree with her) dont see it as what it is... a movie, a fantasy story."

This seems to be an excuse for doing almost anything dumb in a movie. The characters behave stupidly, aren't realistic, etc. "It's just a movie, so that's OK." (I see similar things from people trying to defend bad SF movies, saying "it's science FICTION so it doesn't have to make sense," which really bothers me.)

Jim

And thank you Michelle. I appreciate the compliment. Plus, I’m relieved that others can see this world for what it is. It’s superficial and unfair at times. Not agreeable, but definitely not ignorable.

And about the settling…a quote from SATC:

Carrie: "Some people are settling down, some people are settling and some people refuse to settle for anything less than butterflies."
Sex and the City

I'm in no hurry to find those butterflies =)

"Criticism IS biased. It can't NOT be biased."

yes, but the bias should come from an academic or journalistic perspective, not a "these ladies are dumb and I'm sick of hearing about them and I hate all the girls who go ga-ga over them" perspective; which I am gleaning from the tone of your piece...if this is not the case, then I apologize for reading too far into it.

the fact of the matter is, the movie was made for fans. it'd be impossible to build a backstory that would form the same kind of bonds with the characters that fans already had. the exposition would just be redundant for the majority of the people viewing it. It was just a chance for people to enjoy seeing characters they love interacting again.

of course, you're entitled to your opinion. I guess I was just disappointed to once again read something that seemed ill-informed and reactionary. but reading these comments and seeing that what you respond to is in a reactionary manor anyway (considering you only responded when I began using inflammatory language), just leads me to believe that's just how you are.