Review: Sex and the City 2

Miranda, Carrie, Samantha and Charlotte. Middle age has never looked this stylish and sexy

Sex and the City 2, just like its predecessor, is one end-less commercial for haute-couture and the kind of lifestyle to be found in the Lifestyle of the Rich and Famous“. The wealth and materialism exhibited and glorified is nauseating. It is so nauseating that you cannot possibly take it seriously. The girls are obscenely wealthy, have equally obscenely wealthy life styles and there is not one person in this movie who is real or even gives a resemblance to the term “from planet Earth”. It seems like in the world of Sex and the City, there are no ordinary people – everyone is a page out of Vogue magazine.


Carrie (Sarah Jessica Parker) has exactly what she wanted with Big (Chris Noth), who somehow lost his spunk ever since he confessed his loyalty to her at the end of the series. He is docile and quiet and acts like a neutered, obedient pet who just nods agreeably. It is kind of pathetic actually. Carrie herself has not accomplished anything really. All she seems to have been doing over the years is shopping and going to movie premieres and high-society parties.

Charlotte (Kristin Davis) is the same spoiled, preppy brat who makes cookies in vintage Valentino skirts and can always find something to whine about, even when she – both objectively and subjectively – got everything most people could only dream of.

Miranda (Cynthia Nixon) has lost a lot of her edge and cynicism, which made her interesting and endearing and instead she has turned into Charlotte. Urgh. The only one who hasnt changed and still has the morals of a pornstar after a 600 man gangbang, is Samantha (Kim Cattrall). But she too is annoying at best and has turned into a caricature of herself, juts like all of the characters.

A lot of the thoughtfulness, wit, and vulnerability we got to know and love all these years is missing. It seems like the writers just picked a few top themes (like fashion, shoes, the extravagant life-stlye, the man-chasing etc) and blew them up into gigantic circus-sized objects and written a story around them. Everything and everyone is faker than the silicon and Botox drowning Hollywood.

The thing is, Sex and the City was always a champion for the single gals, about the power of single, successful women who know what they want and are not willing to compromise it so they fit under some label. Yet in what has become the conclusion to their stories, they all got a man (except for the one who never wanted one) – and did what they had to to finally fit under the label; which basically tells me that all the talk about not needing a man and being an independent woman was just that: talk until the waiting period is over and they all have a man, so that life and happiness can finally begin. Yipeee…

That being said, I must admit I dont understand people who dump on this movie, somehow expecting depth, a plot and character development. This movie is about materialism and the best clothes, friends, houses, china and vacation spots a man’s cold hard cash can buy. Even the writers admit that no real-life person could afford Carrie Bradshaw’s lifestyle and couture choices. Four dollars a word in a 250 word column and shopping Manolo Blahnik’s at 600 a pop every week? The producers and writers never made a secret of that. Michael Patrick King in the DVD commentary for Season 4 said they often show close-up shots of the shoes because they know that’s what the audience wants to see – straight or queer.

A harem of style

I watch it for the sheer aesthetic pleasure of it all and so should anyone else. It is entertaining, like a fashion show and as a fashion aficionado myself, I was delighted with the fashions, styles and coutures presented. If you expect some awesome movie with an intellectual story and believable characters, or a message even, then skip this one. The audience for this movie are funky women who love fashion and gay men who love watching these funky women sport these fashions. This movie is not social commentary of any kind or is about anything really. Its superficiality and materialism, the main protagonists of this movie, are hidden under nothing but a thin veneer of fake and misplaced emotional struggles by a bunch of narcissistic, vain and vacuous individuals.

, , , , , , , , , , , , ,

  1. Leave a comment


Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: