Screw this
Seriously, though, what is it with the Sex and the City adaptations and their incredibly well-endowed…running times? I mean to say, men do account for some 49% of the western world’s population and, no matter how much modern women may bang on about asserting their independence, there’s no way that most of them won’t be going to see this without a man in tow. And only women bleed, right? Hmmm.
Now, back in the day, I acknowledged that the first cinema installment recounting the love-, fashion- and sex-lives of the curiously popular TV show, featuring Carrie Bradshaw (Sarah Jessica Parker), and three close friends Samantha (Kim Cattrall), Charlotte (Kristin Davis) and Miranda (Cynthia Nixon) was a ‘fun frolic’ (kinda, ironically) but I am sorry – once, in this case, was definitely, absolutely, utterly enough. See what I did there?
But no – Michael Patrick King, who has to date directed ten episodes of the TV series and, erm, Sex and the City (2008) (which came in at 148 minutes, God save us all) has decided otherwise, so we are back into the perilously close-to-interesting realms of Bradshaw et al.
Seriously, though, the story is even more boring this time around – and, if truth be told, tasteless. From my own perspective, a ‘men with tits’ take on modern female mores is patronising and irritating in roughly equal measure, and that is just about all that this has to offer.
So, am I motivated by misogyny? How many people am I going to irritate with my preceding thoughts? In short, ‘No’, and ‘Don’t Know, But Lots, I Hope.’ Hope that works OK and, for whatever good it will do, may I ask you not to watch this film? Pretty please?
I thank you.
146 (count ‘em) mins.
It says it all when you look forward to the reviews more than the film itself, and a critical mauling was almost guaranteed for this one.
I wouldn’t normally dare to advertise a competing critic’s work on Picturenose, for fear of offending Colin and Jimmy, but since in this case the reviews are more entertaining than the movie (allegedly), I am sure they’ll forgive me.
Ouch!
Hi Chris,
Hope you are well, mate – and of course you are forgiven, thanks for the diamond link.
I do hope that your darling lady isn’t insisting that you accompany her to this ‘film’, but I would imagine it’s really not her style. Tell me I am right, please?
Absolutely beautiful. This is an extract from the review (by Lindy West on The Stranger, thanks Lindy
) sent in by Chris – I don’t say this very often, because I am so unbelievably arrogant 
, but I Really Wish I Could Write Like This:
“Sex and the City 2 makes Phyllis Schlafly look like Andrea Dworkin. Or that super-masculine version of Cynthia Nixon that Cynthia Nixon dates. Or, like, Ralph Nader (wait, bad example—Schlafly totally does look like Ralph Nader in a granny wig). SATC2 takes everything that I hold dear as a woman and as a human—working hard, contributing to society, not being an entitled cunt like it’s my job—and rapes it to death with a stiletto that costs more than my car. It is 146 minutes long, which means that I entered the theater in the bloom of youth and emerged with a family of field mice living in my long, white mustache. This is an entirely inappropriate length for what is essentially a home video of gay men playing with giant Barbie dolls.”
Ah no, you’re completely wrong. Kylie is biting at the bit to gallop to the nearest cinema to savour every single one of those 147 minutes. And its a three-line whip for me…I’ll get my own back the next time a long and slow sci-fi movie is released. Mind you, she loved Moon (2009), so I can’t win.
It seems that – along with the majority of the western world – Roger Ebert also agrees with Picturenose’s take on this ‘film’.
Hey, Chris, I don’t take offence – it’s not in my nature
My advice to you is go with your lady to SCAT2 (misspelling intentional) provided she goes to the director’s cut of Das Boot (1985) – but only on the condition they are done back-to-back, and in that order. What’s that? Oh, no, it’s OK – you can thank me later.
Great idea Colin, and if she enjoys Das Boot - and she might, long things full of sea men and all that – then I’ll subject her to the full series of Heimat.
But, more urgently, does anyone else agree that Sarah Jessica-Parker’s face looks a bit like a horse’s?
I loved it. Best movie I’ve seen in ages. Made Krzysztof Kieślowski’s Dekalog (1989) look shallow.
“Lawrence of my labia” – lolololololol. How I laughed.
Ignore James’s review, people, SATC2 is a masterpiece.
Bit slack on the old response front here, sorry ’bout that. I certainly agree, and so do many others, if this site is anything to go by: http://sarahjessicaparkerlookslikeahorse.com/ – makes me grin every time I see it
Well, she may look like a horse I agree, but I would imagine that she also goes like a lively filly.
And (this will probably comes as no surprise to anyone who knows me) she does have great legs…