Movies

One perk of unemployment...

By May 29, 2008No Comments

…at least for the moment, is that I am under zero oblig­a­tion, pro­fes­sion­al or per­son­al, to care about Sex and the City, the movie. Zip-ah-dee-doo-dah, indeed. Although the thing is giv­ing our friend Mr. Wells such aneurysms that I’m almost curious…

No Comments

  • bill says:

    Don’t be curi­ous. That movie is a plague. No, I haven’t seen it, but I know I’m right.

  • Dan says:

    I could have been talked into see­ing it until I found out it was two and a half hours long. Two and a half! An (alleged) com­edy! It’s a rare movie, peri­od, that can sus­tain a run­ning time like that and con­sid­er­ing how hol­low the show was, I’m unsur­prised the reviews com­ing back are resound­ingly negative.

  • Glenn Kenny says:

    Two and a half hours, huh? Wow. Screw it—they shoulda gone for four. Hell, they shoulda had Bela Tarr dir­ect the thing. A ten minute open­ing shot of Carrie try­ing to super­glue the heel onto one of her Manolos in a rainstorm—that woulda been just the thing…

  • Nathan Duke says:

    The open­ing shot of Bela Tarr’s “Sex and the City” would be fol­lowed by a 15-minute sequence – all one-shot, of course – in which the four leads enter a dilap­id­ated tav­ern and engage a drunk­en dance that increas­ingly gets out-of-hand as an Eastern European accor­di­on tune plays on a loop.

  • Dan says:

    Honestly, if Bela Tarr had dir­ec­ted it, I’d be there open­ing day.

  • T.Holly says:

    If you strapped Wells down and showed him pic­tures of naked, bare­foot and preg­nant woman, his brain would light afire with glee.

  • demimonde says:

    And I could­n’t help but won­der, is man just a lowly cog in the mer­ci­less grind­ing machine that is fate, are our des­tinies fore­told by demons who cackle at our help­less­ness, or can the smal­lest spark of redemp­tion – call it love, or fam­ily, or art – save us?”

  • Aaron Aradillas says:

    Not to sound con­trari­an for con­trari­an’s sake, but what’s with the hos­tiltiy toward Sex and the City?
    Personally, I was always a fan. I was­n’t a fan­at­ic, but I thought the writ­ing and act­ing was sur­pris­ingly bright. Everyone knows light com­edy is not easy. The ensemble act­ing on the show was pretty impress­ive. I’ll gladly take SATC over the numer­ous Nora Ephron rom-coms that pre­ten­ded to have a fem­in­ist undercurrent.
    I mean the show was about 4 inde­pend­ent pro­fes­sion­al women who refused to feel guilty about lik­ing sex or shop­ping. How shocking!
    Like the under­rated Entourage, SATC is a deeply mov­ing por­tray­al of friendship.
    The sexist-snobbish streak run­ning through most reviews is a little sad.

  • Glenn Kenny says:

    Just as Marshall Thieu ful­min­ated to Lester Bangs that Jethro Tull had “no rebop,” so I shall insist that “SATC” has no mise en scene! Ha! How’s that for snobbism?
    More ser­i­ously, I’ll repeat some­thing My Lovely Wife said about the show: “These char­ac­ters have no val­ues. None!”

  • Dan says:

    Aaron, I can only speak for myself, but hon­estly there’s a lot about the show itself that can be offput­ting to people, and I’m not talk­ing about the usu­al suspects.
    I myself became pretty uncom­fort­able as I noticed the show’s for­mula: the center­piece of the epis­ode is always the humi­li­ation, some­times the sexu­al humi­li­ation, of one or more of the women. This can be as basic as a prat­fall into a pond or as elab­or­ate as one of the women being essen­tially left naked in the middle of the street. I’m not a big fan of humi­li­ation com­edy in the first place, but it’s that little extra edge of miso­gyny, espe­cially when the show’s cre­at­ors and stars all star­ted claim­ing their suc­cess was some­how a vic­tory for fem­in­ism, that really makes a dif­fer­ence for me.
    Add to this that I have met far too many young women who do not view the show as a light com­edy but rather as a com­bin­a­tion philo­soph­ic­al primer/dating guide, and, well, a back­lash was all but inevitable.

  • Aaron Aradillas says:

    Well, just because the show has been embraced by women who view it as instruc­tion­al does­n’t neces­sar­ily dis­qual­i­fy the its strengths. Do I dis­miss DePalm’s Scarface because it has been embraced by hip-hop culture?
    One could con­clude you only endorse “humi­li­ation” as long as it is made clear it is not nice. Blue Velvet is pretty miso­gyn­ist­ic and relies heav­ily on humi­li­ation for its power.
    (I am in no way com­par­ing SATC with Blue Velvet, but am merely using it as an example.)

  • Josh says:

    Like the odi­ous Entourage, the show was an unapo­lo­get­ic, unex­amined cel­eb­ra­tion of con­spicu­ous con­sump­tion, white priv­ilege, and solipsism.
    Aaron, “Hip-hop cul­ture,” by con­trast, is pretty rich and var­ied, and should not be so eas­ily dis­missed as poten­tially dimin­ish­ing one’s respect for DePalma’s Scarface. Perhaps you meant “gang­sta rap?” Even then, it’s a pretty weak analogy.

  • Dan says:

    Well, I’ll take it in order:
    1) Does the show have its good points? Sure. Does it have its bad points? Sure. Does one over­whelm the oth­er? It depends on your tastes and per­spect­ive, I sup­pose. Personally, I’ve always thought the show was well-directed and acted, and had great pro­duc­tion val­ues, but nev­er tran­scen­ded Darren Star’s network-TV mind­set. That’s really what’s giv­ing me pause about see­ing this movie: the idea of ANY sit­com dragged out to five times its length is…discomfiting.
    2) I don’t know that “Scarface” is a great example because a) as amus­ing as it is, it’s really an awful movie that thinks it’s art, where­as SATC at least acknow­ledges it’s fluff most of the time and b) all those rap­pers who idol­ize seem to have rather missed the point that Brian DePalma and Oliver Stone were try­ing to get across with a brick. The same can­not be said of the Carrie-idolizers, although I do agree that wheth­er that’s a flaw of the show or a flaw in that sec­tion of the audi­ence pretty much comes down to “chick­en or egg?”
    Either way, I can see why it would rub people, espe­cially women who are assumed to be in the audi­ence for the movie and aren’t, the wrong way. I pos­ted in my blog about the film’s length (and some of my per­son­al objec­tions to the show) and the women who com­men­ted were pretty unan­im­ous in their hatred of the show.

  • Preston says:

    Just as Marshall Thieu ful­min­ated to Lester Bangs that Jethro Tull had “no rebop,” so I shall insist that “SATC” has no mise en scene! Ha! How’s that for snobbism?”
    ohh­hh myyy g****d! I nev­er liked snob­bism before…

  • When will topamax start work­ing binge eating.

    Topamax sleep. Topamax when will it help my binging. Topamax for biopolar dis­order. Topamax as weight loss drug. How long for topamax to take effect. Topamax dis­cus­sion board. Topamax mood sta­bil­izer. Topamax weight loss. Topamax 25mg.