Sex and the City was a vastly popular series on HBO. After its series finale in 2004, fans (cougars, socialites and women in their mid-forties pining for the “good ol’ days”) eagerly awaited a movie of some form to wrap up the twisted and frayed ends of their beloved Sunday night show. Actually, that’s quite mean and snarky of me. The fan base of SATC is quite varied. Going from the obvious HBO-philes to the giggly teenage girl scandalized by the “sex” scenes with Samantha (Kim Cattral).The beginning of the movie is the usual montage you’d find in a “Best of…” or season opener of a series. We trace all the main characters (Carrie, Samantha, Miranda and Charlotte) from the last episode to their current lives. Carrie is living it up with her years-long on/off “man-friend” Mr. Big, Samantha is living in California with Smith (the actor turned model turned actor again hunk of the last season) while managing his career, Charlotte is still in Manhattan with her husband and their newly adopted Chinese daughter Lily, and Miranda is “slumming it” in Brooklyn with her husband Steve and Brady, her three-year old son. So we have the fashionista, the “promiscuous”[1] one, the wannabe socialite and the bitchy lawyer all back together again for another episode (one that lasts almost two and a half hours).
While the movie was obviously targeted toward women (the over-use of pink, crystals and girl power), movie aficionados, effeminate “people”[2], giggly tweens hoping to sneak into an R-rated movie, and many more flocked to see it. It’s called Sex and the City, not Gun-Nuts in the Suburbs. Men don’t usually watch shows with such femininity unless they’re being forced to by a significant other, or think they can get something else out of the deal. It’s a movie, based off a show that centers on women. For the most part, women watch shows based off or around women. It’s just a social norm. Besides, what guy wants to watch Carrie Bradshaw whine about how her new boy-toy can’t give her an orgasm when they could just as easily click a button and watch something less Sarah Jessica Parker-y?
The New York Times' review of the movie is scathing, raw and leaves you feeling like you’ve walked out of Pessimists Anonymous. My review (hopefully) leaves you feeling slightly less so. I don’t completely agree with the Times’ review, but it does make some valid points. Two and a half hours for a movie, based on a show, is too long. While I let it slide with The Dark Knight[3], for something that is supposed to be light, fun and quick (like the show was), after the first hour and a half, you begin to wonder why it hasn’t ended yet. Unlike the Times, I found the movie to be a wonderful addition to the SATC franchise, if only taken at face value and not something deeper. I mean, come on, it’s a show about sex, shoes, fashion and middle-aged love (or whatever small pun Carrie is going to turn it into this week). How seriously are we supposed to take it?
