 by snicks |
Was it good for you? "Sex and the City" mines box office gold
Sex and the City shocked Hollywood this weekend by proving the power of the female and gay male dollar at the box office. It grossed $55.7 million, which was twice the industry prediction. Not only was it the biggest opening in history for a female led movie (surpassing Tomb Raider), but it was the biggest opening ever for an R rated comedy, and the fifth biggest for any R-rated film. Predictably, the reviews were wildly mixed, with the movie scoring a middling 55% on the Tomatometer. Looking at a sampling of some of the reviews, a couple of interesting patterns emerge. First is how many male (and presumably straight) critics have to repeatedly point out that they're "not the target audience", as if to either apologize for not liking it, or if they do like it, to assure us to not to read anything "gay" into it. The other is how venomous some of the negative reviews are. Some of these critics don't just dislike the movie, to them it represents everything that's wrong with society. Here is a sampling of some of the most extreme views: The Globe and Mail - "This is a pricey handbag of a movie, uncontaminated by anything so crass as substance, filled only with the perfumed air of a culture at rest – concept blissfully free of content. Walking on high heels, our culture hits a new low." Film Threat - "privileged hags frantically trying to give meaning to their petty, grasping existence." EfilmCritics - "Here, the characters are simply not amusing or sympathetic by any means--they are snotty, snobby and shamelessly materialistic status seekers and rather than look critically at their stunning levels of self-absorption, the film celebrates their narcissism wholeheartedly." Brian Orndorf - "I loathed the film because it’s a lazy, mean-spirited commercial for cultural deterioration. Even the most outlandish of fairy tales have some sense of magic and a feel for limitations. “Sex and the City” exists on another planet, where materialism is a desired component of life and a woman is worth nothing if there’s not a man to love her" Orlando Weekly - "Is it any sort of inroad for a summer film to prove that ladies, too, can surrender to pummeling materialism, a blinkered emphasis on self-gratification and hollow objectification of the opposite gender? Plus, Darren Star and his “creative” crew must be laughing their sphincters loose knowing that their amoral fantasia has been welcomed as gospel by genuine urban women, instead of their obvious target demo: Iowan paralegals too tipsy and titillated to notice that the characters are actually semiotic stand-ins for gay men. We’re realists here. We know that nothing we might write could dim a fan’s enthusiasm for rejoining the continuing adventures of Carrie and Samantha and … uh, Dopey, and … uh, the Pink Power Ranger. And maybe that’s as it should be, because everybody has the right to indulge his or her particular pop-culture obsession in a state of unmolested respect. So knock yourselves out, skanks" Then there's the "critic" for The New York Observer, Rex Reed (yes, he's still around). His review starts out with "There’s nothing wrong with Sarah Jessica Parker that couldn’t be cured by wart-removal surgery", and just goes downhill from there. You can read his typically nasty review HERE.
Just keep repeating to yourself, it's only a movie ... it's only a movie. My favorite SATC review came on Friday's Today show, when legendary gap toothed supermodel and actress Lauren Hutton let loose with a stream of consciousness diatribe that started with "It's written by guys, who happen to be gay, who are sluts. That's what I think. Let's face it most men are sluts", and then veered off into something about hunters and gatherers. You can see that entertaining rant HERE. Anyone catch the movie? What'd you think? Submitted by on Mon, 2008-06-02 08:39. |
|
Welcome to AfterElton.com!
- Login
- Join Now!
News, Reviews & Commentary on Gay and Bisexual Men in Entertainment and the Media
hmm
Loved it
I loved the show and thought the movie was great. I wasn't really surprised by anything, it was like comfort food, exactly what we expected and wanted.
The themes of friendship acting as family were never more touching and strong. I've always thought the real "romance" of the series was about the friendships the women share, particularly between Carrie and Miranda. The fights and make-ups theyve had throughout the show have been far more intense than any with Big or Aidan or whoever.
I was also really impressed with Kristen Davis's Charlotte in the movie. I remember my friends always wondering why Charlotte was really friends with these women, noticing how she never quite fit. But here it all made perfect sense. She was the unexpected heart of the film.
Criticism of Sex and the City movie
WARNING: SPOILERS
Reading some of those criticisms, I have to ask myself if the reviewers actually saw the movie - or, if they did, whether they paid any attention to the actual plot. Yes, there are a lot of pricey designer clothes on display, and the beginning of the film could seem a bit like a love song to materialism... but if you watch the whole film, the whole POINT is that Carrie realises she was getting too carried away with the materialistic aspect, and allowing that to become more important than what SHOULD have been important, which is her affection for Big. She winds up marrying him at City Hall in a plain, non-designer dress, and then she and all her friends go to a fast food joint for their wedding lunch. It's explicitly saying that friendship and love are MORE IMPORTANT than material things. Ugh, stupid reviewers.
As for Brian Orndorf's claim that the movie says that "A woman is nothing if there's not a man to love her".... um, Samantha dumps her boyfriend and ends the movie single and saying that she is going to concentrate on herself... and that is presented as the right decision for her. So piss off, you idiot.
I honestly think that straight male reviewers just hate the fact that this movie features women who are over 30 (over 40, even), and not all conventionally beautiful. They would like to stuff all women like that in a bag. And then they try and cover up their animosity by pretending it's the MOVIE that isn't feminist.
So true. The way Samantha
So true. The way Samantha ends up single is a great improvement on the series finale where everyone seemingly had a man.
They managed to end her affair with Smith, without diminishing what they had. I loved the message that some loves were short stories, not epic novels but that didn't make them any less meaningful.
I second that
I can truely say that I had a splendid evening last night. I went with a friend who is the greatest SATC-fan I know. We had so much fun like all the other girls and women who watched with us (there were only a few men there to be honest).
I love how the movie really centered around the women and their friendship. And there were so many funny, cute, adorable... scenes that I am tempted to go back and watch it again. It was one of this feel-good movies that one really needs from time to time where you laugh and cry and leave the theater lighthearted. That's why I didn't read any reviews before, because I didn't want to spoil the fun;)
- Warning: minor spoilers -
Besides the scenes Locksley Hall mentioned I really loved how they celebrated Samantha's 50th birthday in the end and that it was always clear that the girls aren't 20 anymore. Also, Carrie's and Miranda's valentine's date just brilliantly highlighted how intense and close friendships can be.
--
It's a new dawn. It's a new day. It's a new life. And I am feeling good.
I agree that the movie was
I agree that the movie was trying to say that but the conclusion was really forced for me. Two hours into the film, Carrie blames Miranda for the collapse of her wedding day, even after admitting that she let the wedding "get bigger than Big". She shirked responsibility throughout the film and it drove me crazy. To be honest, the only one who I thought grew in the film was Samantha(and some would say she's an idiot for leaving Smith). Her growth was gradual and her ultimate decision to leave wasn't forced.
I'm a big fan of the show. I saw the film on Friday by myself and on Saturday with 8 of my friends. On Friday, I noticed every flaw in the film, including the overhead mic in one of the scenes. I found Carrie and Miranda, my two series faves, to be grating and unwilling to accept responsibility for their failures. The fringe characters were poorly utilized. Anthony, Stanford and Jennifer Hudson may as well have been props. I love JHud, but I found her character to be useless and the intention behind the character to be utterly forced. She conveniently popped in and out of the film to remind Carrie of the importance of love.
Before I'm crucified, I will admit to almost loving the film on the second view. I don't know that it was so much the film I loved as the people that I was with. My friends guffawed, cried and talked back to the screen throughout. They were less concerned with the plot and mechanics of the film than they were with revisiting old friends. It is so much easier to overlook the contrivances and flaws of the film when your best friend is roaring when Charlotte "poughkipsied(spelling) in her pants" is gasping when Steve admits to cheating, as if he said it directly to her.
Ultimately, I was thrilled to spend time with Carrie Bradshaw and company but the critic in me can't help but imagine what might have made this film as good as it could be.
Overhead Mic
Jezzus...what were the critics expecting?
Saw the movie and loved it. It delivered exactly what you'd expect SATC to deliver...it was like putting on your fav sweatshirt and sitting down with friends. The ladies were all fab and the story was true to the heart of the show.
I'm not sure what the haters were expecting from the show.
Citizen Kane, maybe?
Noone + nothing can escape harsh criticism from somewhere, truth be told.
Wow!
Those reviews went far beyond criticizing the cinematic quality of Sex And The City. The Orlando Weekly review was blatantly homophobic!
"Darren Star and his creative crew must be laughing their sphincters loose knowing that their amoral fantasia has been welcomed as gospel by urban women." Sheesh! Was this review written by James Dobson of Focus on the Family?
As an interesting (and disturbing) sidenote...
...on IMDb, even before the movie was released, nearly 300 "voters" had given the film a mean score of 5.4--and, of those, the large majority were young men giving it a 1 vote. It's incredible how threatening this film is to straight men.
Check out my blog: http://radicalsexy.blogspot.com/
Sex and the City
love love love this film
Ugh
Other than the Orlando homophobic rant, I have to say that all of the reviews sum up my opinion about this series completely. I absolutely hated this show, and I hated that people assumed just because I was a gay man, and one who lives in New York, that I watched it.
To me, this show encapsulated everything that is wrong with this country, and the fact that is just accepted that the girls were stand-ins for gay men says something about how America sees gay men, or gay men see themselves that is just very very sad.
www.thebittersuite.blogspot.com
Sex and the Critics.
Let me preface my comments by stating that I am not the target audience for most of these reviewers. In other words, I am not an oddly overly sensitive straight man who feels like he must write desperate paragraph after desperate paragraph justifying why he likes anything even slightly less over-the-top masculine than, say, a commercial for the U.S. Marines at halftime on an episode of Monday Night Football hosted by Rush "Feminazi" Limbaugh and the ghost of Steve McQueen.
Nor do I belong to the set of reviewers (not as well represented in the examples here) who prefaced their negative reviews with frantic insistence about how much they looooooved the t.v. show Sex in the City but who don't seem to have much of a clue as to who these characters are, nor how they were represented to us in the past decade. These women like over-the-top fashion? Noooo way! They're kind of materialistic? Get out! One reviewer I read supposedly loved the show, but was surprised the movie was so much of a romantic comedy. You don't say! (I guess it's kind of like how I felt when I went to see the new Indiana Jones flick and discovered it wasn't a holistic treatsie on the benefits of terpsichorean therapeutics).
I loved the film Sex and the City. Not only does it maintain the vibe of the show, it builds on it, and it sure is better than 2/3rds of the other romantic comedies out there. For a supposedly light romantic comedy, it sure gets depression right (when was the last time your average romantic comedy stops for several minutes and has the main female lead silently look at her sad, ravaged face in the mirror in a brave and deliberately unflattering image of its star? I sure don't remember that in 27 Dresses.) And as Locksley Hall wisely points out above, the movie is kind of about moving past mere materialism. Compare this film to something like The Devil Wears Prada, which a lot of critics thought was simply divine, but which is a far less complicated (and far less funny) take on the constant themes of Sex and the City in its view of women and (particularly) gay men (Stanford Blanche easily kicks Stanley Tucci's character's ass).
But don't worry. As the quality of movie reviewers has been steadily declining in this country for the last decade or so, many film reviewers' memories decline even faster. Sex and the City did major box office this weekend, so don't be surprised if, a year or so from now, when reviewing another romantic comedy, some of these same critics don't complain about how "it's no Sex and the City." That is, after they've gotten through assuring us for a few paragraphs about how much they're the wrong audience for this movie, and would much rather see one about Rambo drinkin' beer and fighting terrorist zombies in a Monster Truck at the Playboy Mansion.
I thought it was hilarious
This will certainly go down in history as
The greatest epic product placement film ever made. LIke Carrie says at the out set, women move to New York for "Love and Labels". No one does it better than Sarah Jessica Parker. Even though her Nina Ricci dress at the film's New York premiere was a stunner, it was also a great gaffe because it had been worn previously on several other women, like the godless lesbian Lindsay Lohan. It clearly took Sah Jessica to make the gown a stunner.
i loved the movie, and i blogged about it
i personally adore SJP - she's charismatic, beautiful, intelligent, sophisticated, witty, and glamorous. i love all 4 gals, really. the movie was a delight, and was utterly entertaining. it was frickin' long, but it was like watching an entire season of the show in one sitting, which i've practically done anyway, thanks to DVD's. overall, it was a gratifying and moving experience for SATC fans everywhere.
AND... i blogged about it! i do a video blog called "daily freak show," and for today's episode i interviewed the enthusiastic women and gay men who flocked to Hollywood's Arclight Theater to see the SATC movie during its opening weekend. here it is:
http://www.dailyfreakshow.tv/episodes/29-damiana-goes-to-sex-and-the-city-opening-weekend
btw, i'm the "lady" in the grey tweed coat ;)
xoxo - michael
Loved it
I took seven friends to see it, even one who hates fashion and stereotypically gay things, and she loved it, as did the rest.
A perfect way to say goodbye to the characters.