IMDb user comments for
Sex and the City (2008)

advertisement

Filter:

Best Chronological Prolific Authors Loved It Hated It Hide Spoilers:

Page 1 of 34:

[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11]

Index

340 comments in total

---

198 out of 345 people found the following comment useful :-
Critics need to move on..., 30 May 2008

Author: Aluísio Parondi (nem.freud.explica@gmail.com) from South Burlington, Vermont, USA

...or at least try to be original?

Saying that "Sex and the City: The Movie" is just for the fans is unnecessary (like it was made for another audience, right?). Who else except die hard fans of the show will be crazy for this movie?

Is it predictable? Yes. Is it just a longer episode of the TV show? Yes. Is it funny? Depends. If you like the show, you'll laugh; if you don't, you won't. Simple as that.

It doesn't try or pretend to be art-house material or an Oscar contender (except for the costume design, of course), but it's definitely good entertainment and a pleasant couple of hours with buttery popcorn and a Red Bull. 7/10.

---

110 out of 188 people found the following comment useful :-
Disappointing as a movie and TV Show as Movie, 30 May 2008

Author: andrew-nagel from Rhode Island, United States

*** This comment may contain spoilers ***

I took my girlfriend to see this movie last night at the 12:01 showing. She is a huge fan of the show, has every season on DVD, and has seen all the episodes multiple times. I have watched 30-40 episodes I would guess and I would not say that I love the show, but I do find it entertaining and never dreaded my girlfriend pulling out the DVDs to pop them in. So going into it I was there 75% for her and 25% because I genuinely thought it would be an entertaining movie even though it would never make it into my top anything.

So with the set-up in place, the movie itself was very disappointing for both my-self and my girlfriend.

First looking at the movie in comparison to the show itself, the movie simply felt flat by comparison. The show is full of frank and snappy discussion which manages to come across as both very real and hilarious at the same time. Really the show was built on the interactions of those four girls and those interactions simply fell flat in the movie in a way I never saw them fall flat in the show. Like I said I am only a casual fan of the show and this was apparent to me, it was even more apparent to my girlfriend who is an extreme fan of the show who also found it lacking.

Second looking at the movie as a movie independent of the show, this is where the movie really fails. Rather than feeling like a movie which typically has a cohesive plot which spans the breadth of the film with smaller sub-plots which spring up along the way, the movie felt like a series of a TV show in which there is an overarching story arc, but the action is based around the individual episode plots. The latter works in a TV show because episodes by their nature are disjointed, you need to be able to make the individual episode plots stand well on their own or the show will fail. In a movie the result of the latter is very disjointed storyline and plot.

Third the "secrecy" surrounding this movie really led to big disappointments for both of us. Given all "secrecy" one would have assumed that a cursory knowledge of the show and a simple watching of the trailer would not be enough to grasp the entire plot of the movie. Unfortunately such an assumption would be wrong. There were a number of plot twists which would have been great were they actually twists, sadly the producers decided that releasing ALL of them in the trailer would make for a better movie, it didn't. The only rational I can see for stupidly releasing such information while you build levels of pretend security is to drive up ticket sales with the reasonable thought: "if this is what they are showing us in the trailer who knows what will be in the movie!" Fourth, did the producers decide that strong powerful women would be a threat to the movie going public or something? With the possible exception of Charlotte (although she showed it at times too) these women are all strong, powerful and independent. In the movie Carrie spends the majority of her time first planning her wedding like a giddy school girl and then mopping around for the rest of the movie. Who is this woman because she is not Carrie Bradshaw. Samantha has gone from a strong sexual figure who may have finally found love to someone so whiny and needy you don't recognize her at all. Miranda remains a strong figure but rather than it being portrayed in a good way, it comes across more as her just being a bitch.

Fifth some random complaints… This movie felt way too much like an ad at way too many points. I know that fashion and all that is supposed to be a part of the story of these women, but was there any need of a 5 minute Mercedes-Bens ad aka "Fashion Week" right smack in the middle of the movie? What the hell happened to Stamford? The banter between he and Carrie is one of my favorite parts of the show I don't know that he said more than two words to her the entire movie.

Why was Charlotte even in the movie? It felt like they made it most of the way through filming and then realized they had forgotten all about her so they threw her in got her pregnant and hoped no one would notice she really didn't have much of a part since a pregnancy is so big for her. It might have worked to only as I said above as something that might have constituted a surprise to the movie going public is had to be disclosed in the trailer.

On the subject of characters who really served no purpose why was Jennifer Hudson in this movie? She was amazing in Dreamgirls so I don't blame her for the one dimensional token character, but somebody deserves some blame. I can only guess that she was there in response to criticism of the series as being too white, but is the best response to such criticism really inserting a character who is so obviously a token it's painful? Again on the subject of pointless and forgettable characters, I know this movie should be primarily about the female leads, but that does not mean that all the male characters should be so flat that cardboard cutouts would perform just as well in their place.

---

70 out of 110 people found the following comment useful :-
The movie did NOT do the show justice, 9 June 2008

Author: ameli-1 from United States

I am a big fan of the show. I am one of those people who have seen every episode at least 4 times, and some of them around 10 times. Even so, I still watch the reruns, and I was really looking forward to the movie.

So, it is really upsetting that I have to give it such a bad review. I went to see it with the best of intentions. I really wanted to love it. Unfortunately the movie has nothing to do with the wittiness and character of the series. Even putting aside the wooden and/or exaggerated acting, you fail to recognize the characters who where transformed into caricatures, pathetic versions of themselves.

There were very very few lines that gave a glimpse of the old clever dialog, and they all got lost in a mass of cheesy lines about love and friendship that you even rarely anymore encounter in the corniest of Hollywood's chick flicks, and toiler humor that you only expect from movies like Harold and Kumar. OK, maybe the comparison to Harold and Kumar is a little unfair, but really I had never expected Sex and the City to rely on fart jokes for comic relief.

People comment that those who rate this movie badly are either men, or just not fans of the show. From my perspective the fans of the show should be the ones most disappointed by the travesty that was this film.

We grew to love the show because of its honesty towards sexual issues, its shocking but clever dialog, and its characters who, however unreal with their designer obsessions, uncontrollable spending and lack of real jobs, remained true to their personas regarding sex, relationships, commitment, independence.

The show was about sex. The movie is about love, and treats the subject from the weakest, corniest and most disappointing standpoint.

This movie is a fake Fendi. Dropping 15 designer names in one sentence, showing bulging men's underpants and orgasming at the sight of huge closets, Sex and the City does not make.

As for me, I will keep watching the reruns and pretend this movie never happened.

---

105 out of 187 people found the following comment useful :-
please tell me it was a bad dream, 1 June 2008

Author: zafulotus from United States

*** This comment may contain spoilers ***

It was so awful it defies description. If you are really a "true fan"... you will leave quite bitter and feeling used. The movie literally contains plot lines that revolve around poop and fat jokes. Literally. Poop jokes and fat jokes. Oh, and a petulant 40 year old who responds to being disappointed by/in her partner by cutting him out of her life for a year and looking to her friends to be her mommies. Mature.

SATC was on my last year in high school through my college years and into my mid-20s. Needless to say, the show meant a lot to me in those formative years. I've since grown up to be a feminist and professional and look back fondly on the revolutionary nature of the series. Even in its moments of fluff and vanity, there were redeeming aspects to the self-reflection and (sometimes reluctant) self-reliance of these women. No, it's not perfect... but it was challenging and eye-opening in its milieu. To then go see this movie is an insult. Much like as I did in my late teens and early-to-mid 20's, I expected a mature movie that examined the lives of these 40-somethings in a way that would offer some insight (and wit) into what I might come to expect in the years to come as I get older, live with my partner, maybe get married, maybe have babies, maybe adopt, maybe leave a partner, maybe face infidelity, etc... something that honored the promise that it was a smart movie that gave these mature women something to sink their acting chops into...

Instead I got a wedding farce; a humping dog; stock black, Jewish and gay characters that literally made me feel ill; 4 women who don't know themselves any better than they did 4 years ago, 10 years ago; and, oh yeah, POOP JOKES AND FAT JOKES.

SATC the TV series WAS a cultural icon, a touchstone, a movement.

SATC the movie promotes itself as a vehicle for creating another socio-cultural rupture. Instead its witless.

---

25 out of 37 people found the following comment useful :-
One, 2 June 2008

Author: matt75-1 from Los Angeles, United States

*** This comment may contain spoilers ***

This movie was such a disappointment: so disrespectful to the series, the characters' original complexity, and women's complexity!

I was particularly let down by the script. First of all, the jokes were not funny. From the 'Saint Louise from St Louis' to Charlotte's Mexican incident, everything was so unlike Michael P King's style. Then the plot: predictable (Samantha's ring/ Smith being the guy getting it to her; the password of Carrie's email folder being 'love' like on the key chain...) but most of all characters were out of their 'tv series' parts. Especially Carrie: hitting Big with the wedding bouquet and screaming at him in the middle of 5th ave, really?!? Planning a honeymoon in Mexico, really (btw, the guy greets them with 'welcome to Mexico', that's …'broad' and silly…)?!? Telling Miranda 'you ruined my wedding', really? That dinner scene seemed like out of an episode of The Hills….

I personally also found Jennifer Hudson terrible: she already won the 2008 Razzie to me (altough I should check if Sharon Stone is coming out with a new movie...).

In general, if you think of what you saw in this movie without the affection you have for these characters, you must admit this is a terribly corny romantic comedy.

Think of how wonderfully touching and poignant some episodes were. Like the one when Miranda finally took the courage to tell her feelings to Steve... It was titled 'One', and it was indeed a fully satisfying, beautiful episode.

This movie is just a 1/10...

---

27 out of 44 people found the following comment useful :-
Ugh. What a shipwreck., 2 June 2008

Author: donnapaz from Texas, USA

*** This comment may contain spoilers ***

Like many of the others, I am a huge fan of the series (I own all the DVDs and have watched each episode multiple times).

The translation to big screen just.doesn't.work.

There was so much melodrama and fake crises! The male characters were like shadows of themselves. Big was like an avuncular sugar-daddy at the beginning and devolved into a limp-wristed dweeb by the time he thwarted Carrie.

And Carrie was a shrill, melodramatic idiot who ultimately gets what she deserves. What intelligent, independent woman in her right mind would go back to the jackass who screwed you over multiple times? Why can't she just be independent? That always bothered me about the series finale.

Miranda seems melodramatic and overreacts to Steve's indiscretion -- which comes out of nowhere and feels like a poorly timed plot device.

Smith, who is starting to weather like Clint Eastwood, came off as way-too-casual when Samantha gave him her decision. He acted like such an airhead surfer-dude, which was never apparent in the series.

Stanford and Anthony were like caricatures of themselves. Oh, we have a wedding, let's work in the flaming wedding planner! And didn't he and Stanford dislike each other? Why were they palling around like best girlfriends?

I thought it was curious that Carrie's friends all showed up to help her pack her apartment, but they were nowhere to be found when the unpacking was being done. What kind of friends are those?

The only redeeming acting came from Kim Catrall and Kristen Davis. They are totally comic pros and I enjoyed their schtick, even if it was silly. They at least pulled it off. As for Parker and Nixon, they acted like a couple of shrill witches when scorned. Ugh.

---

93 out of 179 people found the following comment useful :-
somewhat disappointing, 24 May 2008

Author: doujimasan

*** This comment may contain spoilers ***

if you're familiar with the term "fan service", this film pretty much embodies it. it's quite obvious the script meetings started with compiling a list of things that the fans of the series will want to see, and the plot (term used liberally for the sake of the argument) was drawn up to include as many of these as possible. the list, I imagine, goes along the lines of: wedding!!! dresses!!! reasons to get dressed up!!! relationship drama!!! shoes!!! purses!!! shopping!!! fun at an exotic location!!! cute babies and dogs!!! hot male nudity!!! fashion show!!! gay kiss!!! fabulous interiors!!! etc., etc. so, it kind of has it all, in a shallow, superfluous manner. the plot, however, is barely-existent and thus the whole thing never really takes off. I suppose the unappealing "in the end, we just want your $$$" undertone isn't helping, either.

besides the drama coming off as really far-fetched and feeling fake as well as out of character(s), the whole thing is overflowing with gratuitous product placement and blatant label-worshipping. sadly, there isn't any trace left of the wit and irony of the show. and I have to say that the film's version of what female friendship is like, with all the stilettos and drinks and fake enthusiastic squeeing, made me feel incredibly alienated. I don't know anybody who lives like this, and if I did, I wouldn't hang out with them.

the writing is not very good at all. there's enough material here for another season of SATC, but it's handled in a superficial, sketchy manner. lots of underdeveloped ideas. also, there are some genuinely funny lines, but they're few and far between inferior-level stuff, and there are some incredibly clumsy, exposure-laden bits of dialogue. ("Thank you for watching Lily while I went to the doctor" ...I suspect 15-year old fanfic writers can do better than that.) as for the visuals, most of the film looks either good or very good, however the cast looks increasingly middle-aged, including Samantha's "hot younger man" Smith (no wonder, really, as he's close to 40 IRL). occasionally stunning (Charlotte's vampy black bridesmaid dress), but middle-aged. and Jennifer Hudson alone isn't enough to freshen things up.

I'd discuss performances, but there isn't anything to discuss. I've seen all of them doing a better job at some point during the show's running. it kind of shows they realize they aren't working with great material.

---

41 out of 76 people found the following comment useful :-
Lack of Sizzle in the City, 31 May 2008

Author: ChristianDiorScientist from Ontario

*** This comment may contain spoilers ***

It was okay... I expected more but it was only just okay.

Many others have already commented that the movie was more like a double episode and that is exactly what I was thinking as I left the theatre. Yes I laughed out loud (mostly when Charlotte Poughkeepsied her pants) but the élan was gone. With the exception of Charlotte most of the characters came across as uncommunicative, pathetic, losers -- bitter old maids who just looked desperate with too much make-up. If I had just watched this movie without investing all those years in front of HBO, I would be totally bewildered as to why I should care about any of these women or their loser or invisible boyfriends (two come across as losers, the other two are invisible). Rather than revisit all the characters and develop them in some way we are introduced to new characters instead. We didn't need the psychiatrist or the personal assistant - why were they there? Isn't that what friends are for? I thought the whole point of this series was that these women could always rely on each other when all else went wrong. Nope, apparently you hire a PA and go see a shrink...

I really would have liked to have seen more of some of the regular characters, like Harry, Anthony, and Stanford. I also would have liked to have seen a LOT less of the biggest star in the film - fashion. There is just TOO much fashion - it has become a character in the film, and its not that interesting to watch on screen. The clothes became over-the-top statements. Carrie wears a studded punk belt with her first three outfits in the movie but then leaves a pair of brand new Blahniks in a closet for 6 months without a second thought -- this is not a fashionista... despite her wearing a big bird costume covered with black net to a fashion show in the middle of February, Carrie continues to don her ratty old vintage fur coat that she has owned for over a decade. The film is unsatisfying. If you are looking for a follow-up to the final episode -- a 'where are they now' kind of thing, then you won't be happy - its more like a continuation of the same crap three years later. THe single most frustrating experience of the entire movie is the build-up to the big wedding let down. It all seemed so manufactured - a pure invention of the writer. Where was the slow tension build-up, the wedding slowly getting out of control scenes that scare Big. Nope, nothing is mentioned until its too late.

You know, I came here to write a review for my 6 out of 10 rating, but I am going to re-vote the movie to a 4 now. The longer I think about it, the more I don't like what I saw.

---

50 out of 94 people found the following comment useful :-
Product placement at its best. Same can't be said about the movie, 29 May 2008

Author: thebluebasil from Singapore

*** This comment may contain spoilers ***

The only positive thought that ran through my mind after watching the gala premiere of the film is "Damn, that new Mercedes Benz GLK is fine."

As a series, Sex and the City was like a sliver of pan fried foie gras - cruel, taboo, but delicious. The movie, however, was as flaccid as Spam; it was entirely unsuccessful in its attempt to achieve thorough character development/portrayal in a couple of hours.

Think of it this way, if you cringe at the thought of FRIENDS coming together to make a movie, SATC is exactly the same. There's simply too much history within the series that can be sufficiently revisited/covered in the movie.

We get it, you have a lot of clothes, SJP and minions. But then again, even those Blahniks couldn't save you from being convincingly labelled as the world's unsexiest woman, could they? A reed thin plot, horrible ending and one dimensional acting adds up to quite a big boob at the cinemas this summer. To quote Heidi Klum, "you're eizer in, or you're out." I think you know where I'm going with this.

---

13 out of 21 people found the following comment useful :-
Racist and Boring, 13 June 2008

Author: katstar1982 from United States

*** This comment may contain spoilers ***

I used to complain about Sex and the City during its original incarnation on HBO because it bored me to watch people spend unfathomable sums of money on shoes and unremittingly prattle about love-d*ck-and-shopping (and nothing else, ever). I irritated its disciples when I asked them how Samantha, though admittedly the most interesting character on the show, wasn't crawling with STDs. Or why all the women had to be filthy rich and emaciated. They'd always say the same thing: "It's not supposed to be realistic. It's a fantasy."

Oh, okay, I get it. Sex and the City depicts the kind of fantasy world where no one has anything to worry about except for satisfying every possible selfish impulse because there are no poor (or even middle-class) people, virtually no brown people, and no 'uppity' gays who want more out of life than to be accessories on par with a pair of flamboyant Manolo Blahniks to straight girls.

Still, despite my contempt for this bigoted fantasy, I was frequently, begrudgingly, seduced into watching and following most of its central story lines back in its HBO heyday. Truly, the show was that charming.

The movie on the other hand, was like an episode on steroids, sans the charm. For example, its implicit racism, which was once marked by the flagrant whitewashing of New York City, was upgraded to the more overt variety. Here, Jennifer Hudson is Carrie's servant (i.e. personal assistant), a character that exists to do Carrie's every bidding, no matter how menial. Hmmm, did anyone among the cast or crew ever stop to think that this contrived relationship wreaked of a racist tradition in Hollywood, which relentlessly limited African American actors to images of servitude?

Of course Carrie's 'happy slave girl' from St. Louis (they had to go all the way to St. Louis to find a Black girl by the way, because there aren't any in Carrie Bradshaw's New York) comprises only the tip of the Klan-hood shaped iceberg. There is also the scene where Miranda is apartment hunting in what is apparently too ethnic a neighborhood, so she opts to "follow the white guy with the baby" in order to find a suitable residence. And there was the bit about Charlotte accidentally drinking the water in 'savage' Mexico, which culminated in a brazenly unfunny crap-and-fart joke.

All 76 racist moments aside, the movie just wasn't entertaining. It was extraordinarily predictable excluding the part when the poster-child for anorexia nervosa that is Carrie asks a healthy looking Samantha how she let herself get so fat. I'll admit that surprised me. But only because Kim Cattrall looks exactly the same as she ever did. Meanwhile, Sarah Jessica Parker starves to death, becoming more gaunt and skeletal by the minute.

Other points of contention include but are not limited to: Carrie's post-jilt depression, which was tired, creepy and ego-maniacal. Samantha's out-of-character abstinence in face of the opportunity to hook up with her sexy manslut neighbor. The incredible amount of screen time that was wasted on advertising famous designers, including an awkwardly placed and paced fashion show. Etc.

I suspect that the droves of women who liked this film (and thus, make me ashamed to call myself a woman) had decided they would like it before even seeing it. Because empirically, this film sucked.

---

---

Page 1 of 34:

[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11]

Add another comment

---

Related Links

Plot summary	Ratings	Awards
Newsgroup reviews	External reviews	Parents Guide
Official site	Plot keywords	Main details
Your user comments	Your vote history