rooprect Before any of you accuse me of being a furry-legged feminist, I'm going to admit I may have furry legs, but I'm a guy. So stick that in your Bic and smoke it. I don't even know what that means.As my opening sentence might imply, I was offended by this movie because, unlike the groundbreaking TV series that spawned it, a series which didn't just flaunt girl-power but was actually a nice spin on human independence across all genders, Sex and the City the Movie is just a regurgitation of the age old Hollywood obsession with getting married as the pinnacle of human achievement. In other words, the entire plot centers around Carrie acting like a giddy (or depressed) schoolgirl consumed with nothing but the idea of marriage. Not even romance, I'm talking about just plain old walk-down-the-aisle marriage.Endless montages of wedding dress tryouts set to 80s music (not even the good stuff) are so laughably cliché, I thought for a minute I was watching the deleted scenes from Grease. The difference is that Carrie is not a beauty school dropout; we are supposed to believe (as it is repeatedly shoved in our faces) that she is a stinking rich, successful woman who ostensibly has the brains and ferocity to conquer New York City by herself, and yet when a marriage prospect enters the picture, she turns into a quivering, braindead reject from a George Romero flick.OK, but when life suddenly takes a downward turn for her, I sat up and thought: "Ok! Now this is where her character develops a soul." This is where the out-of-touch elite socialite comes crashing back to humanity and is forced to deal with the same problems that us regular schleps must deal with on a daily basis. Y'know, things like fixing our miserable lives by using our brains.Oh wait, she and her friends just throw money around, pay people to repair the damage and go back to shoe shopping like nothing ever happened.Are you familiar with the term "deus ex machina"? It's a theater term from ancient Greek days meaning "God on the machine" and it refers to a type of conflict resolution where some twit dressed as God is lowered onto the stage on a goofy contraption so he can wave his hands and fix the entire mess. Well, here the recurring moral of the story seems to be "Dior ex machina," or "rich people don't have problems like you worthless schmucks who wallow in trivial things like... bills."Building on that, let's take a minute to talk about how out-of-touch this movie is with social issues: the flamboyant gay stereotypes for comic relief, the use of a pit bull to denote a bad neighborhood, the token black chick introduced in the 2nd half (but note the segregated parties she attends, not the rich folk). This movie is so out of touch with real life you'd think the screenplay was a collaboration between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton. The amount of fur worn in this movie should speak for itself. Note: fur never looked good on anyone. Does anyone really think looking like a frickin grizzly bear hobbling down 5th Avenue is sexy? Sarah Jessica Parker and Kim Cattral look as dopey in fur as Orson Welles in that scene in Citizen Kane, only Kane was supposed to look stupid.10'll get ya 20, this was not written or produced by the people who gave us the TV series. It was a different crew of Hollywood goofballs who beat the series into the antiquated box office formula that's been around since the Stone Age. (Yup, just checked, different people altogether).In the end, I was so thoroughly aggravated by this movie, a total corruption of the TV series which I had enjoyed but am now starting to question, that I immediately wrote a letter addressed to Hollywood stating: "Dear Hollywood, I respectfully submit my request to punch Sex and the City. No, not just the people in it, I want to punch the entire collective entity." Now if you'll excuse me, I'm off to practice my left hook.

carolynfrmich After seeing this several times I still liked it. The plot is a logical extension from where the series left off for each woman and quite humorous, The characters are true and I liked Carrie's assistant as played by Jennifer Hudson. The dialogue is often very clever-funny, i.e. Mexicoma and Pokipsied (sp?) in her pants; the clothes are great except for the bridal bird in her hair, the scenery is fabulous and it all wraps up nicely. So why do so many rate it lower? In my opinion it's dismissed because it is a Chick Flick. Just as I don't enjoy films with people beating each other up or fake monsters, I get why some guys don't enjoy this movie that much but that does not negate its quality. Most people don't like foreign movies just because they are foreign. Doesn't mean they aren't good. So if you liked the series, fashion, clever dialogue, beautiful scenery and/or tidy ends then this is a good movie to watch.

Jordan Hunt 'Sex And The City: The Movie' takes place four years after the female foursome finally found themselves and each other in the heart of the Big Apple. While they've moved much further apart in terms of location, as friends they are as close as they ever were.Discussing her legal rights to a penthouse apartment John Prescott, aka Mr. Big, pays for as the couple's home, Carrie casually agrees with John to marry in order to protect her own assets. The wedding is planned to be subtle, but Carrie's minor celebrity status rouses the city of New York, and the ceremony soon exceeds anything remotely near subtle. As the big day looms, Carrie and John's relationship is once again put under enough strain to push to them back to the breaking point.The scene is set for a soul searching character drama worthy of any great episode from the series, but at this point in the character's arcs, their behaviour and actions all too often seem regressive. Carrie and Miranda receive the lion's share of the plot threads, but Carrie still hasn't learn to read between the lines, and Miranda forgets the pain she suffered when she nearly lost her partner the last time she alienated him. Samantha and Charlotte don't face as much strife, and therefore remain more true to the development they achieved during the series' run. It simply becomes hard to sympathise with these characters when we watched them learn their mistakes throughout six years, only to endure the pain of watching the girls repeat them. That being said, is this necessarily a negative? My overall opinion of the show, without prompting accusations of sexism, is that it wasn't really a proponent of feminism so much as it was a depiction of the mistakes women repeatedly made when it came to men. Bearing that in mind, the movie essentially does honour the characters well.The fashion the show was noted for is given is its own starring role in the movie, with an extensive wardrobe of expensive couture and famous names. Though this does skew its demographic more towards females exclusively, it certainly is fascinating to look at.'Sex And The City: The Movie' doesn't quite break the television adaptation mould of playing like a (severely) extended episode, but if it was an episode of the beloved show, it would certainly be among the most acclaimed.

mylo2222 the 13th labour of hercules.so, i'm guessing the reason they made this was for money; why then, in the name of all that is holy, did it have to be 140mins. i could, if summing up all my courage, take 87mins, but 140???????? really?????? what did they have to do that needed that long? get in the product placements, talk about shoes, eat some ice-cream and we're done. i checked my watch after 11mins and felt my heart sink, after 17mins i was ready to throw myself, in sweet sacrifice, at the screen just to make it stop.hell does not scare me: i have spent 140mins somewhere far more tortuous.