Sex and the City 2: Bad Reviews But Will Moms Still Go?
When I first heard that a Sex and the City movie was being made, I silently pleaded for it to never happen. And it almost didn’t — if I recall it was stalled for quite some time while they worked out inner turmoil including what Kim Cattrall’s pay day would be (she reportedly wanted the same as Sarah Jessica Parker). But then the project was finally given the green light and I was convinced they would ruin what was a perfect ending to the whole story. The series ended so well — how could they match it? But they did — and I, like many others, was pleasantly surprised by the movie. But they couldn’t leave well enough alone, could they? No, they had to make SATC 2, which by all accounts is a horror. I’ll wait for it come out on dvd — and I wonder if other moms, who loved the characters as much as I do, will actually go to the theater. Next are a snippet of the less-than-stelllar reviews.
Los Angeles Times: If only they’d called it “Almost No Sex and Very Little City,” at least we would know what we were in for with ” Sex and the City 2.” In this second screen incarnation of the fabulous HBO series, the satire is sagging, the irony’s atrophied and the funny is flabby.
New York Times: The sequel — which should have borrowed a subtitle from another picture opening this week and called itself “Sex and the City: The Sands of Time” — begins with a wedding and never seems to end. Your watch will tell you that a shade less than two and a half hours have elapsed, but you may be shocked at just how much older you feel when the whole thing is over.
Chicago Sun-Times: This sequence is an exercise in obscenely conspicuous consumption, in which the girls appear in so many different outfits they must have been followed to the Middle East by a luggage plane. I don’t know a whole lot about fashion, but I know something about taste, and these women spend much of the movie dressed in tacky, vulgar clothing.
So tell us, have you seen it and what did you think? Or, like me, will you wait for the video? Or maybe never watch it at all?
Photo: Warner Brothers
I LOVED IT! but then again i love the characters! It was way different then the series or the 1st movie. But it was good in its own right!
I have been a fan of SATC from the beginning and always looked forward to anything related to it, but 2, was awful! The plot was rushed, the characters had no chemistry with one another and the whole story line lacked the depth that made us fall in love with it. There was a reason we went to the movies and paid $9.50, however, Mr. King strayed from what made it great and had me falling asleep in the theater.
[...] and the City 2″ is getting panned by critics and not exactly the box office bombshell that was anticipated (Shrek Forever After and Prince of [...]
Iam a HUGE fan of satc,Have loved it from day one on Hbo,Have all the dvd’s and The first satc,Which I thought was great!!I thought SATC 2 was awful!!It was boring,And nothing like the episodes,I was actually yawning in the theater,And was glad when it was finally over,I thought Samantha was the only funny one,Smith had a very short role,The wedding was nice,But did not enjoy Liza Minelli’s performance at all…Very dissapointed fan,They should have just brough the series back instead…