comment #1

Seal Pup says ...

Yeah, people who think they're still "in the game" regardless of their age are seriously deluded, you're dead right Jeff.

comment #2

vansmith says ...

blacks were happy because someone black 'beat the system' they didnt give a shit if he was guilty or not, it was rodney king revenge. this movie will do 200 million, between the gays and the women with no men, they might do a sequal.

comment #3

btwnproductions says ...

SEX AND THE CITY is for women what TRANSFORMERS is for guys--a wish fulfillment fantasy, swaddled not in robots and weapons and fighting but in shoes and clothes and handbags. And it's a fantasy that women partake in universally, not just in the low thread count suburbs. (Women everywhere know SATC, and get a kick out of it and argue about it.)

If I were a woman, I wouldn't trust a guy who wasn't at least a little conversant with the show (which did, by the way, address the money and affordability issues that seem to bug everyone). The notion that menfolk should protect women from the "spiritual corruption" of this film, which I've encountered in reviews, is laughably Victorian; the OJ Simpson parallel, a stretch.

comment #4

btwnproductions says ...

The only new competition SATC has next weekend is KUNG FU PANDA (families) and a questionable Adam Sandler picture (teens, guys, and idiots, and I say that with love). Sure, SATC willl droop, but you can't keep it up forever, and I suspect a sequel will be greenlit Monday morning.

comment #5

corey3rd says ...

what gets me is the numerous complaints from people about seeing boom mics in the shot. How sloppy was the TV safe cut? If New Line knew the full frame wasn't clean, they should have at least hardmatted the 35mm so that a kid projectionist could at least know where to frame the image.

comment #6

Kim Voynar says ...

I totally disagree with Thompson and Dargis on this one. I'm a fan of the series, loved the movie, and gave it a positive review. And while I understand the need of smart, intellectual women to bash this film (it's superficial! it's about fashion!), a lot of them are judging the movie in a way that's every bit as superficial as they assert the film and characters are.

SatC has never been about fashion or a credit card lifestyle if you look beneath its surface. It's about a group of smart, independent women who, successful as they are, still struggle with figuring out love and relationships and how to have and maintain a relationship with a man without losing who you are as an intelligent woman with a career and life of your own.

And frankly, I'm surprised that so many of these smart women don't seem to grasp that. I'd be willing to bet that most of the female film critics who bitch about SatC as being nothing more than a group of otherwise intelligent women who do nothing but talk about men do pretty much the exact same thing the SatC chicks do when they go out on girls' nights with their own friends.

The single hardest aspect of my own adult life has been figuring out how to be a wife and mother without losing myself in the process, and I know a lot of women who feel that way.

As for the male critics bashing the show -- (shrug) big surprise; why would anyone expect them to understand a movie that's not about them for a change? It deals with issues men don't care about or want to hear a bunch of women talking about -- infidelity, sex problems within marriage, men who (like Big) take forever to get around to growing up, how women give up who they are for the sake of relationships and kids.

For a guy, I'd imagine it's a lot like being forced to go to your wife's girls' night out and just sit there and listen to it -- of course you find it insipid, you can't relate to it. For once, it's not about you.

And as for your "in the game" bit there at the end there, Jeff (and I assume you're talking primarily about the character of Samantha here) ... seriously. What, like older men can pursue sex all they want, but a woman pushing 50 who's still highly sexual and wants to look good and not like a frumpy old grammy schlepping around in a muumuu is deluded? Can you hear my eyes rolling from here?

Not all guys your age want to troll around for young, air-headed tail. There are plenty of men, young and old, who would be more than happy to romp in the sack with a smart, sexy older chick like Kim Cattrall.

comment #7

calraigh says ...

High 5 Kim..

''I mean the average American suburban woman with her fucking credit cards who sees herself as being "in the game" regardless of her age.''

That's literally one of the most misogynistic statements I've ever heard. I'll have to say goodbye for a while because I'm afraid Jeff may have lost me forever with this one. I'm sure he could give a shit but I like it here for the most part. However, this, I dunno. If that's lurking under the surface here, I want no part of it.

comment #8

MDOC says ...

I am not inferring anything about my wife for wanting to see Sex and the City. I hope she didn't infer anything of me when I took her to see Ghost Rider.

comment #9

Webster says ...

What the fuck is wrong with SATC performing well? And how many movies these days are more than one-weekend wonders, anyway?

In a healthy marketplace, there are movies made for every demographic. The success of SATC is just as good for moviegoing as a Horton Hears a Who, or Tyler Perry flick, or even Step Up 2 the Streets. I had no interest in seeing any of those movies--I may be the only American who paid to see Stop-Loss twice--but I don't begrudge choice.

(For what it's worth, I think that SATC will perform like any front-loaded sequel, and probably gross 40-45 percent of its total this weekend.)

comment #10

wildphantom says ...

I saw the movie with my other half last night and we both didn't like it.
We're relative fans of the show but both felt it was devoid of most of what we liked about the series in the first place - two of the fab four being miserable, unreasonable and completely unlikeable for much of the running time.

The middle 90 minutes of the film were an absolute chore to sit through and you could not hear a pin-drop in the sold out crowd. I swear it was stunned silence. Sure women like this stuff as it dares to go places other rom-coms never dare; but this really forgot to be fun.

I thought it was just me but my wife-to-be hated it.
I agree with Jeff - the uber fans will lap it up this weekend and be in denial; but the regular public will get word out pretty quick - it is the longest 2 and a half hours maybe in movie history.

I feel guilty about bitching over the Tarzan Indy scene last week now. It would have been more in place if it appeared half way through SATC - just to liven the proceedings a little!

comment #11

gruver1 says ...

Wells to Calraigh: Goodbye and good riddance.

comment #12

Zimmergirl says ...

"It's also, arguably, an indication that a certain portion of middle-class American females -- pre-teens, teens, 20- and 30-somethings, middle-agers -- are, no offense, social dimwits and aesthetically clueless saps with the collective depth of three or four quarters laid on top of each other."

LOL. I didn't just read that. He calls Crystal Skull a good movie and then makes this statement.

comment #13

Chris Late says ...

And since critics like Edelstein and Gleiberman liked the movie, I guess it's safe to assume that there's a certain portion of males who are social dimwits and aesthetically clueless.

comment #14

Captain Midnight says ...

My wife went last night to the 10 pm showing in Westchester, NY with three of her friends. She came back and said they all loved it and would see it all over again.

Apparently, this sloppy boom mic during the critical wedding planning scene had everybody laughing and puzzled at the same time. When I Googled it last night for her, it's apparent that it was no fluke -- it was sheer film making sloppiness that they let slip by.

SATC is critic-proof, spiritually depressing or not. Whether it has legs is another story. But if women want to go back and see it again, well, don't be surprised at next week's numbers.

comment #15

The Winchester says ...

corey3rd- To paraphrase Ebert's eternal line regarding your problem, it wasn't the movie showing the boom mike, it was the projectionist not framing the picture correctly. There's always the extra room at the top that gets cut off... etc.

As for Well's rant, well at least he's gotten off the galumph rants for a few weeks. I'm safe until Seth Rogen strikes again.

For those who have seen it, does it really need to be 2 and a half hours? It's not Heat, for Odin's sake.

comment #16

Feathers McGraw says ...

While I freely admit that SatC doesn't look like my cup of tea, I really don't get the anger and disbelief shown by the axis of middle aged male film bloggers and Aint It Cool News "ewww, girl cooties!" types over the fact that a lot of women really like these characters and are happy to have the opportunity to spend more time with them on the big screen. It's a frickin' movie about relationships and stuff, aimed at a seriously underserved demographic. So why the hate?

comment #17

btwnproductions says ...

The Winchester is indeed correct. No filmmaker plans to have the boom mic drop into a shot, unless he or she is messing with your head. It's the fault of the projectionist, who may have gotten the wrong info from somewhere.

comment #18

calraigh says ...

Oh hi Jeff! Just because I seem to piss you off so much, I'm, gonna stay for the duration. I'm sorry if my accurate observation stuck in your craw but like so many things that do, that's entirely your problem. It's quite evidently a big one.

comment #19

corey3rd says ...

I've worked in the world of film presentation so I understand the framing issues. If the aspect ratio is so critical to filmmakers, then they do need send out 35mm prints with a hard matte to insure that the projectionist has a proper guide.

The ultimate simple solution if filmmakers or studios don't want to hard matte their prints is to devise a company logo that gives the lines that should be at the top and bottom of the screen. It's not like the projectionist watches the entire film at the googleplex

And we do live in the 21st century where a boom mike drop into the TV safe space can be completely taken out thanks to CGI.

comment #20

T. Holly says ...

Jeff may want a Marion Cotillard, but he's dating "a Samantha," only a much, much better, together one. I'd even go so far as to say, "he's dating up" or at least "level."

comment #21

Walter Sobchak says ...

"Not all guys your age want to troll around for young, air-headed tail. There are plenty of men, young and old, who would be more than happy to romp in the sack with a smart, sexy older chick like Kim Cattrall."

My problem isn't Kim Cattrall's age. She still hot and I'd be more than happy to romp in the sack with her. The problem is that she and her co-stars act like a pack of shallow, dim-witted 15 year olds.

comment #22

George Prager says ...

"By the time a person has achieved years adequate for choosing a direction, the die is cast and the moment has long since passed which determined the future."
-Zelda Fitzgerald

comment #23

jimjonesiii says ...

Calraigh and Jeff, please, just kiss already!

comment #24

LYT says ...

The way guys feel about this movie is probably the way women think about a new Star Trek movie.

comment #25

Jeremy Smith says ...

If only chicks turned out like this for Nicole Holofcener movies.

comment #26

George Prager says ...

I want to round up a Friday night audience for SEX AND THE CITY and strap them down CLOCKWORK ORANGE style and make them watch WANDA.

comment #27

supertaster says ...

I'm obviously not speaking of women who are educated X-factor urbans, academics, journalists, hipsters, poets, creatives, etc. I mean the average American suburban woman with her fucking credit cards who sees herself as being "in the game" regardless of her age.

Yeah, I bet back in your bachelorette party stalking days you'd only look to dominate the hipster painters...

So a woman must validate herself by conforming to your narrow view of worth? The question becomes, what's your excuse? You are none of the things you mention...an iPhone doesn't make you hip and based on what's posted here on a daily basis (and your failure to ever sell a script) you're not very creative...

...the show (and movie) may shallow and loathsome, but then you are even more so...

comment #28

K. Bowen says ...

Remind me, Jeff, what was your reaction to Rambo, again? :)

I haven't seen SATC, but I didn't like my short experience with the show, either. I trust this is a spiritually vacant exercise.

However ...

I do think it's a good thing that Hollywood is rediscovering a female audience. I would guess many people here agree that the lineup of actresses in their twenties dwarfs the lineup of actors in their twenties. Sooner or later, the Emily Blunts and Keira Knightleys and Rachel McAdamses and Amy Adamses and Anne Hathaways are going to need more and better material to work with. If this helps achieve that goal, then I'm pleased.

comment #29

Kim Voynar says ...

LYT,

Tsk, don't generalize so much. I love Star Trek, though I am in the camp that prefers ST:TNG to the old Trek (with the exception of a few of the old episodes). I once watched every episode of ST:TNG, in order (on beta tape, even) over a period of a couple weeks. And I'll be there to see the new Trek, though I have concerns that Abrams is going to fuck it up beyond recognition.

comment #30

gruver1 says ...

Wells to Walter Sobchak: Precisely.

comment #31

LYT says ...

Kim,

There are also dudes that like Sex and the City. It works both ways.

comment #32

Kim Voynar says ...

Walter, have you even seen the film? I'm not going to give away any spoilers here, but there's some pretty smart subtext going on in a couple of scenes; for those who have seen it, I'm thinking particularly of the scenes with Miranda and Steve, and Samantha's Valentine's "treat" for Smith, which captured so much of her conflict over losing herself to that relationship in a few pretty brilliant lines.

Look, the bulk of the series (and the movie) is the moments in these women's lives where they're gabbing over drinks on a night out with the girls. Listen in on any "girls' night out" conversation among a group of smart, professional women, and you're likely to hear them talking about exactly the kinds of things Carrie and Co. talk about in the show.

Girlfriend talks are about letting your guard down, pouring your heart out, getting a little silly. If you based your judgment on any group of women out with their friends on that brief moment of time, you'd be judging superficially and making foolish assumptions about who they are as people based on a snapshot. God almighty, if I judged half my film journo colleagues based on the shit they say after a few drinks at a film fest after party, I'd think half of them were brainless morons. Thankfully, I know better than to do so.

Point is, do the SatC chats over cosmos that mean that's the ONLY thing about these women? That they don't read literature, watch smart movies, think about life and aging and other serious shit? Of course not. That's like looking at a hot, well-dressed woman out with an old guy and assuming she's a slut who's after his money. Maybe she is, or maybe she's his daughter. Maybe the guy at a roundtable with the bad hair, low thread-count shirt and galumphy man-toes hanging out of his flip-flops is a schleb, maybe he's a really nice, brilliant and interesting guy. Judge a book by its cover, you might never know.

And I find it enormously interesting that Jeff, who posts here regularly his snap judgements of people based on their haircuts, toes, weight and clothes judges the SatC women as being shallow, dim-witted 15-year-olds because they talk about fashion and men. Pot, meet Kettle.

comment #33

Kim Voynar says ...

LYT, You're right, and my comments weren't directed at those guys. My husband is one of them. :-)

comment #34

George Prager says ...

"Walter, have you even seen the film? I'm not going to give away any spoilers here, but there's some pretty smart subtext going on in a couple of scenes; for those who have seen it, I'm thinking particularly of the scenes with Miranda and Steve, and Samantha's Valentine's "treat" for Smith, which captured so much of her conflict over losing herself to that relationship in a few pretty brilliant lines."

Let me rephrase Kim's question:

Walter, have you ever been fucked up the ass? I'm not going to give away any spoilers here..."

comment #35

MarkEbner says ...

Do any chicks on this board gives good skull?

comment #36

MarkEbner says ...

Do any chicks on this board give good skull?

comment #37

Walter Sobchak says ...

Walter to Prager... now THAT was funny...

comment #38

redmond says ...

I'm a huge fan of Jeff's, but I find it bold of any man to even try and encapsulate why woman enjoy Sex and the City. Many posters here hit the nail on the head, it's like a woman trying to encapsulate why we enjoyed Transformers or Rambo (The original. Fuck the new one.). There are gender differences that words can never describe. Like the feeling a woman gets when she buys a new purse. Or the way we feel when we ogle a new flatscreen at Best Buy. It's primal shit that no one will ever fathom.

In the meantime, I watched a large majority of Sex and the City the show to see if it would help me understand women. It did just the exact opposite - and they knew it would too! Please just tell me what you want! FOR THE LOVE OF GOD!

comment #39

redmond says ...

Sidebar: Yes, I'm married.

comment #40

JKane says ...

The enormous success of SATC, following the similar successes of Devil Wears Prada and First Wives Club, proves two things yet again: Women want fantasy films -- in which the heroines are stylish types who triumph -- every bit as much as geeky young guys want their superhero movies. And Hollywood, run largely by men, doesn't feel comfortable providing them.

As for the (minor) crticial backlash against the film as shallow, narcissistic, materialistic, etc it tells us more about those making the charges than it does about the film. SATC is being "HIillaryized" by some critics, i.e. derided for doing the same thing the guy flicks do, providing fantasty pleasure, simply because it's women, not men, running the show this time.

$70 million is an enormous opening. In a saner universe it would lead to more of these less expensive female vehicles and less of the bloated, very expensive comic book summer flicks. My motto? Less Marvel, more Prada!

comment #41

JD says ...

This may be meaningless, but the movie is currently scoring a shockingly low 3.8 with imdb users. Opening weekend votes are usually from a film's target audience and therefore they tend to get lower over time. So maybe this means nothing... or maybe it means the movie is totally tanking with its core audience. I've already talked to 2 die-hard S&TC fans who loathed it. And Jeff, it's worth remembering that the show wasn't endorsing the characters' attitudes so much as it was sending them up. This doesn't seem to be the case with the movie.

comment #42

D.Z. says ...

"The single biggest negative for the image of African Americans over the last 15 years was their widely reported elation when O.J. Simpson was found not guilty."

I'd say white Americans who overlooked the NYPD getting away with sodomizing and shooting random black people (not to mention those skinhead thugs in Texas who hitched a poor brother's neck to their truck) came off worse. Plus, they voted for a guy who went to a college which banned interracial dating and who turned New Orleans into a giant trailer park, too.

comment #43

cjKennedy says ...

Awwww...Sex and the City is bigger than Rambo. Let's all go to a strip club and reclaim our manhood!

comment #44

George Prager says ...

D.Z.'s post is like having a shit fart after an orgasm.

comment #45

cjKennedy says ...

Here's a tip George, don't eat laxatives before sex or read DZ's posts...ever.

comment #46

Griff says ...

I wonder if SATC is the new century's "Pretty Woman," a film women will inexplicably love and one that makes straight men shrug. PW is vile...of course Julie will fall for the gorgeous Richard Gere billionaire. Of course it's true love, not a thing mercenary about it.

comment #47

David Ehrlich says ...

@ kim voyner -"And I find it enormously interesting that Jeff, who posts here regularly his snap judgements of people based on their haircuts, toes, weight and clothes judges the SatC women as being shallow, dim-witted 15-year-olds because they talk about fashion and men. Pot, meet Kettle."

possibly the most concisely accurate sentence (or two) that i've yet encountered on this site.

comment #48

K. Bowen says ...

For the record, I've allways described The Devil Wears Prada as the female Top Gun. Talented, overconfident young woman in a glamorous fantasy industry, being taught the lessons of their job from a demanding older man/woman. You have the rival who becomes the friend. The helpful sidekick. The romantic interest who knows some of the ropes. It's a very similar blueprint.

comment #49

K. Bowen says ...

Oh, and over on my blog, I'm taking suggestions for a name for this type of film - the female oriented movie that's more about female bonding than getting the guy. CJ has already suggested fem-com. Click if you're interested. .

comment #50

Ogami Itto says ...

Oh, and over on my blog, I'm taking suggestions for a name for this type of film - the female oriented movie that's more about female bonding than getting the guy. CJ has already suggested fem-com.

How about shit-com?

I don't care how much SATC makes, or if there's a sequel -- we're all entitled to like whatever films we want no matter how awful or trashy others may find them -- but a noticeable difference between those who like superhero/action movies and those who like SATC is that no reasonable person would argue that IRON MAN or TRANSFORMERS is anything other than entertaining trash, at best.

comment #51

Ogami Itto says ...

I'd also like to thank D.Z. for injecting some of his important social commentary on race into a thread about a movie based on an HBO sitcom.

comment #52

Mgmax says ...

To get back to Jeff's original point about whether SATC will have a second week... I kind of suspect it will be like that Howard Stern movie a decade go, everyone who was interested went immediately, everyone else was never ever gonna go.

That said, what it mainly proves is, as several above said more or less, is that H'wood is so determined to satisfy the young male audience that it's a frickin' cultural phenomenon any time they do anything else, and even a fairly vapid example can be a big hit among the starved female audience. I'd be more inclined to blame them for their crappy materialistic taste if I could think of the ten other intelligently female-oriented movies they passed up for this one.

comment #53

calraigh says ...

Mgmax, you've basically hit the nail on the proverbial there with the most intelligent comment made here.

comment #54

George Prager says ...

"Oh, and over on my blog, I'm taking suggestions for a name for this type of film - the female oriented movie that's more about female bonding than getting the guy."

CRIES AND WHISPERS, INTERIORS, PATTY HEARST?

comment #55

actionman says ...

It was a fun movie. People need to stop taking this shit seriously.

comment #56

zoey says ...

SATC is simply an R-rated Apatow movie for women mid-twenties and older.

comment #57

Undercover Brother says ...

SATC turned out to be not just a one weekend event, but merely one day. On Saturday, when most movies experience a big uptick in business, SATC saw a large decline. It was already behind the man with the fedora again. On Sunday things got even worse. That $70 million projection has been readjusted down to $55. That's a big friggin' adjustment. Nothing to shrug at by any means, but the audience for this film burned itself out in one day.

comment #58

btwnproductions says ...

Love it or loathe it, that SEX and THE STRANGERS pulled in big numbers means that there's still a considerable audience for R-rated fare. That's cause for celebration.

comment #59

lizriz says ...

Wow, dude, what did you find more offensive, the themes of forgiveness, or the pesky concepts of love, marriage, and parenthood? (Sarcasm, clearly)

I didn't go in a huge Sex & the City fan, because I've never had HBO, but the movie was really, really well written. Sure, the fashion stuff is over the top, but beneath that, just truly awesome and true-to-life observations. Of course, I think women are full human beings and beauty knows no age.

If sheer quality has anything to do with legs, this film will have legs. And btw, 30% men in my audience, and clearly appeals to both sexes. The male characters are really well written.