05.31.08
Review: “Sex and the City”
The more things change, the more they stay the same.
The moment aficionados of this mega-hit television series and pop culture phenomenon have been waiting with bated breath for has arrived, and it is a solid bet that few will be disappointed but none will be gasping for air either, because while things have been altered, they are still very much the same. Continuing with the theme of “Looking for Love and Labels,” only this time the perspective is a more mature one – which should by no means be translated into a loss of savvy or sass – there is a definite undercurrent of growth, of the emotional and logical variety, learning that logic and love are two ingredients that do not mix in the tangy cocktail of life.
“Sex and the City” feels like a light and breezy catch-up lunch with four remarkably well-adorned friends that drags on a bit longer than expected or intended, but when in the company of characters whom you have known for years, with whom you have shared every slip up, break up and the make up sex that followed, any shorter a running time and one would feel cheated. That being said, it would be asking too much for a non-fan of the concluded HBO series to identify with exactly why the film is an absolute pleasure, and it is even stranger that people who have never taken the time to watch the series are ripping apart a film they have no intention of seeing. “Sex and the City” is no doubt for fans of the television show, who are able to accept that priorities can change, people can age, and sag, as well as future fans of either sex, and if you don’t think you fall into either category, don’t bother – it will fly straight over your head.
When the series ended in 2004, there was always rumouring that a film continuation was on the cards, leaving fans intrigued and chauvinists irate. When rumours no longer sufficed and news broke that all the speculation was indeed true, the very thought that Carrie (Sarah Jessica Parker), Samantha (Kim Cattrall), Charlotte (Kristin Davis) and Miranda (Cynthia Nixon) would slap on their designer couture and New York-born cosmopolitan savvy now that they have aged and four years have passed since the shows finale was one of intense curiosity. How would the story continue? Where would it end up? How much more could be told about these women who have seen and done it all, figuratively and literally. Suffice to say, writer and director Michael Patrick King would have to pull of something either unexpected or retune the formula that worked well on the small screen.
Instead he created a curious blend of the two, stuffed with more wardrobe changes than the models themselves have to endure during fashion week – but then the film does span over a six month period, so numerous changes of clothing makes complete sense. What is more, the women were not only allowed to act their age and embrace all the difficulties women of that age actually face, but were given enough space to challenge the ideas of who or what they value most, and that one can never put a price tag on life-experience.
Following a quick recap of sorts of certain happenings in the television show, to give a little insight into who these women are and what makes them tick, we are given a fresh new opportunity to get carried away. Of course, those of us who followed the show have the advantage of knowing all the baggage of the characters before the film opens, but the film was written in such a way that it is more accessible for those who did not. The film picks up with New York City’s best-dressed columnist, Carrie Bradshaw, who is now a contributor to Vogue magazine. Well-known for her realistic insight on life and love of the modern female go-getter, we are given the impression that she has done some growing since we last saw her. Growth into maturity.
She and Mr. Big (Chris Noth) are thinking of settling down for the final time, waving goodbye to their turbulent history. Carrie is by no means losing her fierce independence, she is still very capable of standing on her own stilettoed feet, but sometimes love can overpower logic, sometimes you have to let go of that relentless fascination of trying to put a label on everything, let alone clothes, and it gets her all confused. She should be allowed that, she is the rock in the fabulous foursome, and an occasional slip up of the spirit should be allowed, but under the heavy scrutiny of the big screen lighting, somehow it is perceived that because the Carrie we knew is not exactly the same as the Carrie in the film that the film hits a weak spot. That is as preposterous as assuming that a feministic film does not deserve to stand alongside macho films at this time of year.
In fact, each character is settling down into maturity, Charlotte is happily married, but far from fully domesticated, and it is a pleasure to watch her revel in the duties of motherhood. Miranda is finding it difficult to balance her job, her son and her sex life, and it is the latter that she attends to the least, causing her almost perfect marriage to split at the seams. Samantha is, gasp, missing the vibrancy of the New York lifestyle and her relentless self-obsession, which never borders on anything less than hilarity, is taking its toll on her relationship with Los Angeles toy-boy soap star Jerry ‘Smith’ Jerrod (Jason Lewis).
As with any change, comes a certain level of discomfort, and it is not until the woman take their metaphorical designer gowns off and examine the naked truth that there comes a point in anyone’s life where alterations are entirely necessary, even if it is only to get things back to the way they were before. Where each of the characters, including Carrie with the help of her assistant and protégé of sorts ‘Saint’ Louise (Jennifer Hudson), end up is not in the least bit unobvious, it is still a Hollywood production, yet it is enjoyable watching them discover just the right paths and still managing to strut down the cracked sidewalks of New York City, just as they did the first time we met them. At the end of the day, they will always have something to celebrate; the everlasting power of friendship and doing things for yourself on your own terms without dismissing the help of those closest to you and the conclusion of a particular chapter in each of their lives, and toasting to those still to come.
Fatac Rating: ***½
Sex and the City. Written and Directed by Michael Patrick King, based on characters from the book by Candace Bushnell. Costumes by Patricia Field. Edited by Michael Berenbaum. Starring: Sarah Jessica Parker, Kim Cattrall, Kristin Davis, Cynthia Nixon, Chris North, Candice Bergen and Jennifer Hudson. Running Time: 145 minutes. Age Restriction: 16 NLV. Year: 2008. Rating: 3.5 out of 5 stars. [B]
Miranda Wilding said,
May 31, 2008 at 9:47 pm
Yay, Nicky!!!!
Even though I’m not going – and it ain’t my style – I’m glad you loved it.
“…learning that love and logic are two ingredients that do not mix in the tangy cocktail of life.”
Absolutely, baby boy. I could riff on that one sentence for a book or two. That’s how unendingly true it is.
Speaking of the more things change, the more they stay the same…
Indeed….
glimmer said,
May 31, 2008 at 11:16 pm
nick you’ve turned into a review monster. your last 2/3 etc. have been beyond impressive. when i get some energy i may babble about the satc chaos i saw last night. i didn’t see satc but i did see ‘the fall’
wow that movie is pretty damn…uh over rated. i bet satc was better. :)
Matthew Lucas said,
May 31, 2008 at 11:17 pm
YAY you loved it too!
I only had two real problems with it. For one it’s a bit two long, and two, I kept watching Jennifer Hudson thinking “this woman is forever and always an Oscar winner. That’s a little depressing.”
I liked her character, but she’s not a very good actress. She needs to stick to singing, a talent that she very much excels at.
The script gets a bit iffy toward the end, but hell who cares. I was loving it.
glimmer said,
June 1, 2008 at 1:08 am
matthew how long was jennifer in the film ????
Matthew Lucas said,
June 1, 2008 at 1:57 am
Not very much. I think they realized she’s not a very strong actress and didn’t give her much to do. Her lack of training and acting knowledge is glaringly obvious. Everyone I have talked to about it has agreed with me, and we all love the movie.
Craig Kennedy said,
June 1, 2008 at 7:54 am
Glad it lived up to your expectations Nick and even though I’m not excited to see it myself, I’m kind of glad it’s making a crapload of money.
Nick Plowman said,
June 1, 2008 at 8:10 am
Last night I first gave the film 3 and a half stars, then 4, then back to 3 and a half, and then 4, and now I have changed it again. What the hell is wrong with me? SatC is not a 4 star film, I loved it, but it is not.
Miranda, I have known these ladies since I was 7 years old, of course I could not understand what the hell they got up to at that age, but over time I have stuck with them and know almost every line of every episode by heart, so there was no way I could miss the film. But I respect those who are not interested, its all good.
Why don’t you write a book, seriously, I am willing to be you’d make tons of cash…because you are really great.
glim – Thanks!!! Can I tell you a little secret? These past few reviews I have focused more on what I want to say over what other people want to hear, which is sort of what it always has been, but now I am embracing it full on.
I have not seen “The Fall,” but I am a fan of Lee Pace, just as Miranda is, so when I see it, I will be sure to let you know.
Matt – Oh how flawed the film was! It had a pace that was so NOT good for a film without ad breaks etc…Jennifer Hudson made me cringe once or twice, but some of the time I really, really loved her. St. Louise….You know? I will always have time in my life for that girl, no matter what. Love the film I did, no doubt about that.
Craig – I would not expect you to really want to see the film, nor would I expect you to take anything away from it when you do see it – and I get it, I totally get it. I just hope that all the money does not make them want to do ANOTHER film, which is what I have been hearing, that would be awful, but we’ll see.
olongapoboi said,
June 1, 2008 at 9:14 am
I think you changed the rating often times because even if the movie is not an Academy Award or Emmy Award material, it still satisfied you and it is still susbtancial to see.
SATC movie might lack in terms of the sensefulness and predicatability of how the story will go, but as long as it is lavish with how it was presented makes you really consider giving it something higher than its supposed to receive. Many thanks for the eye-opening unbiased review.
BTW, im a big fan in Saudi Arabia. Unfortunately they do not have theaters in here. I used to watch the series when I was still in the Philippines and Im very anxious to see it in the big screen. So far the best that I can grasp out of it is the reviews I search here in wordpress. Ive been blog hopping in some 4-5 pages already. Its fun to read peoples thoughts. cooool. :) hehe :) JUST DROPPED BY. :)
Nick Plowman said,
June 1, 2008 at 9:21 am
It’s a damn pleasure, glad you stopped by.
It sucks that you won’t be able to see it for a while, it is as lavish and satisfying as could be expected, and a must for any fan with a good head on their shoulders.
My review didn’t spoil any of the details, like most others, but if it made you want to see the film more, I am glad. From one fan of he show to another, I honestly hope you can see it as soon as possible
Daniel said,
June 2, 2008 at 11:13 pm
You know by now that I’m not planning on this one, Nick, but I definitely understand its appeal to fans of the show, and your enthusiasm around it. I’d rather people have fun with this than with The Strangers.
glimmer said,
June 3, 2008 at 3:30 am
matt/nick do you think jennfer has improved acting wise vs what she did in dreamgirls ???
Matthew Lucas said,
June 3, 2008 at 5:50 am
No, she’s pretty much the same. In fact she was better in “Dreamgirls” because she got to sing. Here, her lack of acting experience and expertise is painfully apparent, and she doesn’t have a mask of singing well to hide behind.
Nick Plowman said,
June 3, 2008 at 6:13 am
Dan – Yeah, I know you ain’t planning on seeing it, an unlike a lot of people, at least you don’t completely trash the film/television show in the process, so thank you. I had tons of fun.
Glim – I agree with Matt that she has not really improved, but then again, she really did not have much to work with in “SatC,” perhaps her upcoming films will prove me and Matt wrong in the long run, but for now, the girl best be sticking to singing.
I am a huge fan of hers either way, I just loved seeing her on screen, no matter how good/bad she is.