Singleton + Writer + Book Lover + Moviegoer = Screen Spinster

Welcome to the loneliest blog on the web. I have no words of wisdom to espouse. (why does espouse sound so much like spouse? Is that word trying to rub it into my spinster brain?) Anyway, I don't own a cat. Never will. I don't cook, nor do I sew or knit, but I do spin a yarn (tale) from time to time. I have no domestic talents, I am not a domestic engineer/goddess, nor do I want to be. I'll sometimes post my views on scripts, (mine & yours or theirs) movies, television shows and maybe theatre, along with my own musings usually in the style of a poem. So pull up a rocking chair, sit back as your cherry pie bakes and stay a while if you like.

Monday, May 31, 2010

My Opinion on SEX AND THE CITY 2, aka watered down material from a bygone era


Sex & The City lacks sex and the freaking city. A horrible film that is so badly written that my head actually hurt from hearing the dialogue. Where is the plot? Where is the structure? Where are the character arcs? It's so watered down that it barely has any resemblance to the HBO show, which was edgy and fresh. This version is just sad and dumbed down. And someone needs to tell the ladies that at a certain age, dark eyeshadows are WRONG! (I'm looking at you Horseface Parker)

I thought maybe I'd enjoy some Fashion porn, but most of the clothes were ridiculous. What man in their right mind would be at all attracted to what some of the ladies are wearing? No straight man or any self-respecting man is my guess. Samantha Jones actually wears a red jacket with huge shoulder pads marked with SPIKES! Yes! Spikes. It looks like a cross between Michael Jackson's thriller jacket and what Tina Turner wore in Mad Max beyond Thunderdome.


I am a fan of the show. I loved it. I still do. The first movie was fun and dark, but at least it had its heart in the right place. This sequel is pompous and arrogant on the part of the filmmakers who didn't even try to create a film that is witty and rewarding towards its core audience. Then again who is the core audience? The people who first watched the show on HBO or the people who watched the watered down PG version on TBS? And the wink wink nudging between the actors was vomit inducing. They'd deliver a line and smile and laugh as if they said something so hysterical that we, as the audience, couldn't possibly comprehend. Throwing us a bone is not the way to treat intelligent moviegoers.

There's a scene in the film where the ladies sing karaoke at a bar in Abu Dhabi. A bar filled with half-dressed Belly Dancers. They get up to sing "I am woman". Are you freaking kidding me??? "I am FUCKING woman?" Wow! What a great way to show us how progressive you are and how they are so backwards. Where's the subtlety? Where's the subtext? I am a moviegoer that doesn't need to be spoon fed an agenda. And thanks to Miranda's constant exposition on the rules and regulations of the Middle East. She was our own walking wikipedia page. Is the audience that dumb that we don't know shit about other cultures? I guess some people in the audience are.

And what is with Act One? A wedding? A gay wedding? With freaking Liza Minelli officiating and then dancing? I kept waiting for her to keel right over in her sequined dress. It's not campy. It's not fun. It was eye-rolling and head shakingly trite. Everyone knows that when one girlfriend has a best gay and her best gal pal has her own best gay, then that means those two gays must end up together! Even if they HAVE nothing in common. No chemistry. NOTHING. Marrying off Anthony and Stanford is a shallow and insulting move on the writer's part. Michael Patrick King, as a gay man, you should be ashamed at the cliché.

I was disappointed by SATC2, and I went in with low expectations because I just wanted to be entertained and return to characters I loved. I missed the 'sex' and the 'city' part. I wanted New York City! I wanted SEX (and not just Samantha's) I wished they had explored the motherhood guilt more and the idea of "be careful what you wish for?" and the whole Aidan thing felt off, I think maybe because it too wasn't explored. For such a long movie not much happened. And I wasn't a fan of how they judged or portrayed the Middle East. It felt off to me. Like it was the wrong movie or something. If you're going to explore such deep issues as the treatment of women in certain parts of the world then I say go for it. Write about it with humor and wit and respect. The plot was thin for my liking and some of the one liners felt like they were trying too hard. Also, I think they made the movie for themselves rather than for the fans. At least this one fan.

9 comments:

  1. First off, I would like to tell you that your review seems rather insulting. The fact that you not only drop the F bomb, but manage to highlight it with capitals is just ridiculous.

    I also wouldn't call myself a fan of both the series and the first film if you are willing to drop a personal attack on the lead actress who has carried you throughout this program, not to mention was it completely unnecessary.

    Another thing is that you clearly don't understand fashion if you are going to bash the costumes used in the film. Fashion was never about attracting men and has always been about expression and boldness in the case of harder fashions as used in S&TC.

    I would however agree with you about the marriage of Anthony and Stanford, however, I don't think it was that big of a deal. I think adding Liza was probably one of the highlights of the film and the entire wedding was meant to be fun and heartwarming.

    I would also agree with you on the lack of sex and city, it was rather upsetting that New York was hardly portrayed in the film, however, this is a film and not the TV series and things need to be changed up. The fact that they were in Abu Dahbi was solely for the female empowerment aspect of the film, and also I think that their karaoke scene was meant for fun and should not have been taken so seriously.

    One thing that bugs me however is that you insist that Miranda was a walking wikipedia adding facts about the country hinting that the audience was 'too stupid to know' what she was saying. But clearly you are not familair enough with Miranda as that is Miranda's character almsot entirely. She is a lawyer afterall.

    Though there was a lack of sex, it was due to the fact that both they were in another country as well as the fact Samantha was going through menopause, which I believe was added to accomadate the older women who have grown attached to the series.

    As for the Aidan thing, I don't think any of us were really a fan of it. It wasn't very dived into, I'll agree, however it was necessary to show Carrie's confusion and how lost she seems. I feel like it was a useful plot tool, however, it could have been done better.

    All in all there are certain things I can agree with and other things I strongly disagree with. And I am rudely offended by you making a personal attack on Sarah Jessica Parker, it was completely childish and unprofessional. For someone who is trying to break out as a writer, you won't get far keeping this up.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I agree with the above comment. You used 'attack on the person' way too frequently. Your review was nothing but a fallacy and you have no real arguments for or against the film. The use of vulgarity, both in language and insult shows how deep your mind goes, and how easy it is for you to enjoy culture.

    That's my review of you and your review.

    ReplyDelete
  3. first off it's my blog and I can drop the fbomb if I want. It's also used in the film. And if you can't handle the word FUCK then why are you here or even watching a film like SATC2?

    A fan can be disappointed by something that is insulting. I like SJP. I think she's pretty, but she sometimes looks like a horse, especially when she wears the wrong makeup. And I like her for the fact that she isn't a cookie cutter wannabe.

    A fallacy? really? So my reasoning is wrong? How is that possible when it's my opinion? Your review of my review offers no insight into why you disagree with it. I attacked one person and made a joke about horseface parker. It's called being sarcastic.

    You want arguments....here's one...Samantha Jones plays an extreme character of the sexual variety, some would call her a slut, or is she just embracing her feminism? Whatever she is, she lives an EXTREME life and yet doesn't think she should be judged for it. Then in the same movie, there are women who wear the burka, another extreme way to live and yet somehow Samantha and the fictional characters created by the filmmakers are allowed to "judge" them. Both of these women live "extreme" sides of the spectrum. Therefore, neither one of them has the right to point fingers at the way the other lives, and yet they do. It's called hypocrisy.

    Another argument against this film and how insulting it is, is the way they treat their own characters. Again, sam jones is meant to be a successful businesswoman with brains and what does she do in her office made of glass windows? She has her underwear down to her ankles and is spreading hormones on her vagina while her assistant can see this? What kind of self-respecting businesswoman does this? Was this meant to be funny? Because it wasn't. It's disrespectful towards a once powerful woman who has now become a caricature of herself.

    If you want more arguments about this film then bring it on.

    ReplyDelete
  4. by the way, this blog is meant to be taken "tongue in cheek" but I can be passionate about things that stir my soul and I can be a "bitch" about it too. But let's remember that just because it's cyberspace it doesn't mean it's okay to comment and run. So come back and let's debate the merits of the film respectfully if that's possible.

    SATC2 has taken these characters from complex characters into caricatures, and that's what is so offensive to me.

    Also, I can't really understand why people 'defend' the famous so much and get 'offended' if someone 'insults' them. They don't know us, nor do they care about us. I heart Keanu. Always have since i was a teenager, but guess what? Everyone insults him and I never get offended because why would I?

    Are you offended by "horseface" because you think she's not? Or that, me being a woman, I shouldn't insult someone's looks? That could have merit if Sarah Jessica didn't sell her looks to make money? ie, perfume, clothing etc. She's put her "face" out there, and along with that comes comments. Good and Bad. She has a family, money, health and her career, she could care less if people call her horseface. I think she can take it. I also love what she's doing with Halston.

    And I think it's naive to think that those characters never dressed for a man.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Screenwriting Spinster is writing what I can't tell you how many people say in real life. I'm going to the movie tonight based on her review. I'll post mine at http://www.beatmagazine.ca/
    Why do people only comment when they don't like something? You can write nice shit for a year and no one says boo! Oops I swore too! Donald

    ReplyDelete
  6. Fucking A, Spinster! And fuck you fuckers who have a fucking problem with her fucking review.

    This is a blog. This isn't an official review site. Spinster can say whatever the hell she wants. I'll admit I was a bit shocked by the Horseface comment, a little below the belt, but that came from her feeling like the people behind this film hit her a little below the belt with their manipulation of the fan base.

    I'm probably one of the few males who owns the entire box set of the series, as well as the first film. But based on everything I've heard (and none of it good) I probably won't even rent this film.

    Sanford and Anthony got married. Fuck right off.

    ReplyDelete
  7. `i think some people got upset is because this review (a blog review) got picked up by an online magazine. But if the editor had no issue with the swearing then nobody else should. If the characters can swear then so can I :)

    oh, and I am not the first person to call her 'horseface' that term is all over the internet. I call into question the makeup she wears that makes her appear long faced. Sarah Jessica is now a corporation and as such her logo (her face) is out there to be mocked ;)

    but like i said i love the show, but the characters from that show aren't the ones in the movie.

    ReplyDelete
  8. As promised my review:

    http://www.beatmagazine.ca/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=544:sex-and-the-city-2&catid=39:article&Itemid=58

    ReplyDelete
  9. I thoroughly enjoyed your use of the fbomb. The movie was horribly written, in some instances horribly acted and wasn't true to the TV show.

    As for the sensitive folks who clearly don't understand what your blog is about, hopefully they won't be back to chastise you for sharing your opinion.

    ReplyDelete