Disclaimer #1: I liked the Movie.
Disclaimer #2: I am not gay.
Now, I’m not going to claim that Sex and the City is some high water mark of American filmmaking. It is unabashedly what it is, a piece of escapist fantasy— the relationship equivalent of an action movie with sex replacing the cars blowing up and shopping montages instead of chase scenes. It hit exactly the mark it was aiming for, and I can’t imagine that anyone who really enjoyed the series wouldn’t enjoy the movie. I can certainly think of other TV shows that transitioned less gracefully to the big screen.
But I am seeing a lot of hate for the film, and a good portion of it seems to be because it isn’t more than what it is:
From Rick Groen:
This is a pricey handbag of a movie, uncontaminated by anything so crass as substance, filled only with the perfumed air of a culture at rest – concept blissfully free of content.
And you were expecting what, exactly?
3 Comments
Michelle · June 6, 2008 at 9:29 am
I thought it was a fun movie. Mr. Big is still quite sexy. Mostly, I liked that it made my husband realize how fortunate he is that I don’t feel the need to wear $525 shoes and $1,000 handbags. I think all normal women (who don’t spend thousands on clothes) should take their men to see this movie! 🙂
Rob · June 6, 2008 at 6:21 pm
My biggest problem wasn’t the show, or the movie, but the hype. It was constant. Entertainment Weekly boasted 63 pages covering this as if it were a culturally significant event.
Naturally, that kind of treatment lends resentment against the media machine, and then against the very thing it was meant to promote.
S Andrew Swann · June 9, 2008 at 8:48 pm
Perhaps I had an advantage, since the only entertainment “news” I actually follow is on Joel McHale’s show “The Soup.” I can only remember a few times the hype got bad enough to make it on, which makes it a .08 on Brittney-O-Meter.
Comments are closed.