Just a quibble regarding Steve:

He was not "barely employed"; he co-owned the bar with Aiden.

After reading your review there is no way I'll even rent this on DVD. Making Steve a cheater is so completely out of character that I'm disgusted. they might as well have made Aidan a woman-beater and Harry a pedophile.

I've always hated SATC for a lot of the reasons you mention. At best I found it inane--all these women seem to do is bitch about their love lives. Don't they have goals? I mean, goals besides "find the [nonexistant] perfect man." It made me, a poor college student who grew up a poor construction worker's daughter, unspeakably angry to listen to Carrie complain about how she was out of work and out of money, and in the next scene return to her posh New York apartment, which she doesn't share with anyone, with a brand new pair of $400 shoes, and then continue to complain about money.

I get fantasy. I dig fantasy. TV/movies shouldn't be about what life is really like (what was that Henry Rollins bit? "This week on Your Shitty Job: McDonalds!") But I like my comedy clever and quick and smart, and my fantasies fantastic, and all I ever saw watching SATC (I had a roommate who LOVED it) was the worst stereotype of self-absorbed, shallow women who are so drenched in privilege they can hardly breathe, but still moan about what they don't have. But I'm supposed to think it's funny, because there are sex jokes, and I'm supposed to think it's feminist, or "postfeminist" or whatever, because it's women who are making the sex jokes.

I have a higher threshold for Friends, and that's not saying much.

I always thought that the show painted an ugly picture of single women in NYC, as the characters often epitomized the worst stereotypes of shallow, beauty-obsessed, gold-diggers. Still, a lot of other shows portray male characters just as negatively. It's all about the ratings in the end.

I never understood the appeal of that show. When I want to watch four women gripe about their love lives, I'll watch The Golden Girls.

I agree with everything you said, Samhita. I kept shaking my head at these "jokes".

You know, another part of the whole Big and Carrie thing is his money. It's almost as if no matter how much he fucks up, a man who can put in that kind of dream closet is a catch and needs to be held on to.

I didn't see it, but my mom told me they gave Miranda shit for not getting a bikini wax before going on vacation and how that was probably the reason steve cheated...because she "let herself go."

I don't know if my mom's description of the scene was accurate, but if it was, WTF!

I love SATC, but I pretty much agree with your assessments here, Samhita. The Big-Carrie relationship has always been unsatisfying to me -- their relationship seemed to be consistently "in the closet," and this time around didn't change that (they were literally in a closet near the end, albeit a beautiful one). Not only that, Carrie is usually the one forced to compromise, over and over again, to make the relationship work.

I was also slightly annoyed by the way they characterized Stanford & Anthony as a happy couple without any explanation or storyline -- the last time we saw these two during the show, they absolutely hated each other. It was almost like they wanted to wrap things up too perfectly by throwing the two gay guys together, almost as a token gesture or afterthought, which I kind of resented.

I felt like a traitor watching the movie. Because parts of it I did enjoy... and other parts made me want to scream. After the credits rolled I turned to my pals, expecting a moment to vent... their eyes were misty. They'd gone ga ga.. while I'd gone GAG. When I mentioned a few things that bothered me over dinner (and cosmos) afterwards- they looked at me as if I'd grown another head (a head that spouts lies and anger from it's bitter anti-SatC mouth).
I liked when Char went all ape poo on Big and got him to back off. That was great. Girl friends get like that sometimes.
Ok... that might have been ALL that I liked.

Thank you thank you THANK YOU for doing a post about this. My sentiment exactly.

samhita, i share your love/hate relationship with satc. i wasn't expecting too much from the movie, so i wasn't too bothered by its more troubling aspects like the ones you mention. the samantha-gets-"fat" bit was really just ridiculous, but i agree, overall her storyline was really good and i'm glad some of the takeaway from the film was that het marriage isn't always the answer. i also do like that in the end it comes down to female friendships and regardless of the ridiculous man situations (coughBIGcough), these four characters do really care about each other and have fun together and it's nice to see that, instead of the usual women hating each other/competing with each other scenarios.

I totally agree with you. I couldn't believe how bad the movie was - the extravagance of Carrie's wedding and the amount of superficiality was excrutiating to watch.

Another thing that bothered me was Charlotte getting pregnant at the end, even though, in her 40s, that would be pretty unlikely. It's like they had to say that adoption "isn't enough", that a woman must have a biological child.

I don't disagree with much that Samhita has to say about SATC. Yes, the show has always lagged behind in terms of its portrayal of race. Yes its somewhat heteronormative. Yes the women are shallow and consumerist.

But despite all of that I loved this movie. I love the fact that this group of unique women remain friends through all of the absurdity of their privileged unrealistic lives.

I wasn't a huge fan of the fairy tale ending between Carrie and Big either. Or the implied "partnering" of the two gay men who we know from the t.v. show are nothing close to a good match. But the reality is that at least one character--Samantha--broke some new ground by not following the marriage and baby or man=happiness storyline.

Are there other movies or shows out there that have portrayed an older, self-aware, successful woman who willingly and happily ditches a decent man to embrace a single life while still being portrayed as sex-positive and not as a frigid, or alternatively, as a man-eating woman?

At least we can credit SATC with this.

Maybe it is the small doses that I take SATC in, but I would like to add Samantha's Girl Friend, not as a non-heteronormative story line but also a woman of color.

Two hours on the big screen? Sounds like Manolo Blahnik overdose.

Here here!

I can't tell you how disappointed I was by the movie. The character's usual sass and snark was completely gone -- it's as if the movie was just based on some stereotypes established over 6 seasons! What happened to the introspection? What happened to questioning life and love? Instead it just felt like they were wading through a thin plot.

Jennifer Hudson, while I LOVE her, barely got any lines. She barely tied into the plot, and I can easily see what you mean about her in a "Mammie" role. The men barely spoke either -- I think Steve won with 15 lines, most of which were "I'm sorry." In the show the men had personalities! Charlotte's actions in Mexico were deplorable.I don't think any of the four women talked to a Hispanic person except to order something! Even when my family vacationed shortly in Mexico, we still made conversation with locals and made friends. I also don't remember the tv show being as materialistic -- it really was a product brand in each scene.

Overall, I just felt it was poorly written, the characters were shorted and toned down, and there was a lot of plugging of brands and names. I did enjoy the show, but making a movie was a waste. I will always appreciate Samantha's character for having the wit to be sexual and unapologetic. I'd like to see another ground-breaking show about females that didn't include all heterosexual women -- as if lesbians and straight women never hang out together.

Ditto everything Maggie said; I couldn't have conveyed my thoughts on the subject much better than the way she put it. :) Especially the part about my being expected to find it funny and "progressive" just because it's a bunch of women joking and talking about and having sex. *YAWN* Frankly, I think sex jokes are one of the most unimaginative forms of comedy out there, simply because it's very easy to appeal to the lowest common denominator - make a sex joke and you'll get big laughs, no matter what, the more shocking the better! But I think if a writer had even a shred of creativity they would be able to come up with something that is funny that doesn't have to do with fucking in some way... IMO, think that's the mark of true creativity; if you can make people laugh - REALLY laugh - and still manage to avoid fuck jokes, then you are truly talented. I'm not saying there isn't a place for sex jokes, I'm just saying I'm getting tired of it being the standard in modern comedy.

/rant

Oops, got a bit OT, sorry about that folks... :) Sometimes we all need a good vent! ;)

I found the scene where Carrie gives Louise a Louis Vuitton bag as a Christmas present cringeworthy. Louise is overly enthusiastic and thankful for the bestowing of such a gift, while Carrie proclaims in the narration that the bag was "the best money I ever spent", which is more than a little bit patronizing. I also thought that Louise, while likable, was still the stereotypical sassy black side-kick, and it was totally embarrassing when Carrie said "boo-TAY" to her. It's not like she says that to Miranda or Charlotte...

That movie was horrible. I saw it with my mom while I was home for my sister's high school graduation. I especially hated Miranda's comment about following the white guy with a baby to find a decent apartment. I heard that line and was floored. All I could think was, "Did she REALLY just say that? REALLY?"

But I also hated the scene where Carrie gave her assistant the Louie Vutton (sp?) purse, and said something to the affect of, "It was the best money I had ever spent." As though her assistant is some sort of charity case just because she doesn't own a $2,000 purse. The entire scene just rubbed me the wrong way.

Agreeing with a lot of the criticism, but I actually didn't think it was as awfully consumerist as people make out. I think they had goals, the lawyer, the successful PR company owner, the writer, the gallery curator (who admittedly gave it up when married)... I always liked that they had great jobs and bought all their own stuff, their own places. Coming from a poor background, that's what I aspired too. Charlotte got a lot richer after her divorce.. but I was alright with that actually.

Ya know, I kinda liked SATC in its early days. Its many other faults aside, I was charmed by it as a celebration of being female and single and urban and professional. Charlotte was the only friend who seemed to have the happily ever after fantasy (and I think many of us have at least one friend like that). The others just seemed to be about having fun. They rejected the marriage, breeding, and suburbs explicitly. Which I thought was really, dare I say it, refreshing. But then, it changed. So I stopped watching. Won't see the movie, either. But I clicked through to this post, because I kind of mourn what the show could have been.

There's another good review of the film at the f-word:
http://www.thefword.org.uk/reviews/2008/06/sex_and_the_cit

I actually really enjoyed the film. Maybe it's because I was never really a fan of the show - from what I'd seen of it and heard about it when I was growing up I decided it was probably a bit tacky and stupid. So when i went to see the film (I guess I wanted to finally see what the fuss was about), the bad (i.e. glaringly unfeminist) bits didn't surprise or disappoint me, and there were genuinely enough good bits to leave me ultimately very uplifted. But I agree some of it was awful, and it DID surprise me that it dealt with race and class in such a problematic way - that 'white guy with a baby' line was bizarre.

Sometime after the scene where Charlotte crapped her pants, but still before they introduced JHud the fairy godmother, I began wishing that I had a time machine so I could travel back and slap myself for thinking this was a good idea. I thought that the preview for "Beverly Hills Chihuaua" would be the low point of my evening. I was horribly wrong...

I actually have been trying to process my feelings since seeing the movie last week. To say that I couldn't wait to see the movie is an understatement as I feel I was the shows biggest fan. I have seen each and every episode at least twice, and when I heard they were coming out with a movie I was waiting anxiously in the hopes that the way the season ended would be remedied by the brilliant writers that have blessed the show for years. Boy was I wrong...
I agree with the assessment of Carrie's character...by the end of the movie not only did I feel sorry for her I was embarrassed by her. Everything from the craziness she exhibited before they decided to move in together to the planning of the wedding to the extravagant way the girls dealt with this CONTINUOUS stream of disappointment Big offered in Carrie's life. The most touching moment was when Carrie and Miranda, both single and dealing with it, met on NYE to support each other.

What I loved the most about the show from the very beginning was the friendship the girls had with each other, and I just didn't feel that in the movie. I appreciate the comments made about Samantha and did enjoy the way her character arc came about, the fact that the girls took one look at her after she gained some weight and pretty rudely (not in a comedic way) addressed it was appalling. I found myself really questioning why I liked the show in the first place after seeing the movie because I was so disappointed.

The way the show bragged about the introduction of it's first female woman of color (aside from the short arc of Maria, Samantha's lover/artist/too passionate for Samantha girlfriend) and than to have Jennifer Hudson (a BRILLIANT ACTRESS that carried every scene she was in) act as Carrie's support savior was not a pleasant thing to watch.

All in all, it was disappointing and embarrassing for someone who was such a huge fan of the show.

Samhita, I like your analysis very much. In fact, I have never been a fan and I skipped the movie this time around.

But I have to say, practically speaking we should all throw our support on this film and other major movies starring women. Female friendships, older women, female sexuality, .... all of these are lacking in hollywood. We have so little and we are SO FAR from having different narratives of women. Even sex and the city characters are hugely outside the mainstream films and the people who decide what gets produced and what doesn't, still are so conservative that they even consider sex and the city a financial risk. We also saw how the media jumped on this movie's throat as well. So let's not forget where we really stand.

We MUST find a balance between our ideals (most of which might still be considered radical) and practical ways to gain equality step by step and one day at a time. this is why I still support this film while being totally uncomfortable about it.

I liked most of the movie, even though I found the central plot overly fairy-tale-ish. And it was good to see Charlotte steal some scenes. :-)

What I really didn't like was the "you're fat" scenes with Samatha. I literally cringed at that. 10 lbs = fat? Huh? Are they trying to tell us that we all need to be a size 0 to be happy and that weight gain equates to unhappy? And the scene really was unnecessary in this movie.

I was disappointed in the movie, too, mostly cause it just wasn't a very well written movie and took away from a very good finale. But a couple of things:

-As to the "follow the white guy!" line, I think Michael Patrick King was poking fun at gentrification. Like an extremely example of a reality, the fact that white people move in droves to minority neighborhoods and like take them over. So I think it was a self aware line.

-Come on. Jennifer Hudson is a bad actress. Great singer. Beautiful lady. She can't act. She got an Oscar for her voice. So I really don't get the requests for more Hudson. Though I can't say I disagree with your assessment of the stereotypical character.

-As for the Stanford-Anthony match, I'm not sure they were completely implying they ended up together. And even if they were, the writer is a gay guy! Come on, he's not pulling some "all gay guys end up together" shit. And accusing SATC of heteronormativity is a little disingenuous. How many show on TV feature more gay characters? And in positive portrayals? How many shows are RUN by a gay man? Very few on all counts...

Knowing that a woman's favorite show is Sex and the City is like having a window into her personality, except that window looks out onto a drainpipe, a dumpster, and some scattered garbage.

I admit I loved the movie, but I had to ignore all of these problems, and they were huge problems.

One of my biggest problems though was that at the rehearsal dinner, Miranda said to Steve "I changed who I was for you"... and they never dealt with that at all. That seems kinda big to just ignore.

I loved the movie. Of course it wasn't perfect, but I can deal with imperfections.

I laughed out loud at that assessment tofu.mon.amour! I might quote that.

I'm surprised that no one talked about being offended as a writer, or even as a literature person, at how horrific Carrie's writing is. I always cringed during the shows when they showed her working on her column as her prose and manner of writing are so sophomoric. I seriously doubt a writer of that caliber would be employed at all, let alone make enough money to afford $600 Manolos.

One thing I always liked about the show--and envied--is the idea of friendship. Yeah, it's unrealistic, but hello, it's TV!! Okay, I like looking at the eye candy clothing and styles, I admit, even though it's something this size 14-16 will never fit into.

Jennifer Hudson was the "magical Negro," a loathsome plot device where a black person comes in, heals or teaches the white main character a lesson, and disappears. Can't writers come up with a more original plot device?

I have to say I enjoyed the movie, but then I enjoyed the show.

I totally agree with all of your points. The one that got me some is the fact that they were all, in their own quiet way, blaming Miranda for Steve cheating on her. Just because she wasn't as willing to give Steve sex doesn't mean he has every right to go out and get it somewhere else, and all this does is instill the notion that men are nothing but big oafs that only think with their little head in their pants and not the big head on their neck. It's demeaning to both genders in how this was portrayed.

I totally agree with all of your points. The one that got me some is the fact that they were all, in their own quiet way, blaming Miranda for Steve cheating on her. Just because she wasn't as willing to give Steve sex doesn't mean he has every right to go out and get it somewhere else, and all this does is instill the notion that men are nothing but big oafs that only think with their little head in their pants and not the big head on their neck. It's demeaning to both genders in how this was portrayed.

Samhita, I completely agree with your analysis. It is refreshing to come here and read some people who have many reservations about the movie and the show.

That said, Samantha's line "I love you, but I love me more" is my new mantra.

AMEN.

I loved the movie, and here's why. The thing that I always loved about the series is the friendship between the ladies. In fact, I resented that Jennifer Hudson had more of a role than Charlotte- especially since JHud can't really act (sing? Yes. Look great? Yes. Act? Really?). I have always loved the friendship and love between Miranda and Carrie, and I enjoyed the fight and make-up between them. I think it is kind o fascinating that Carrie was so much more willing to forgive Miranda than Big- but it makes sense- in the show, there was a fantastic episode where the girls search for their soul mates, and realize they are soulmates and men are just the cake icing. I totally got that from the movie, too, and I think strong female friendship is so important to show on television.

I'm a man (lynch me now) and my girlfriend was initially a big fan of this show, i never liked it for obvious reasons, and eventually she even stopped liking it.

I think it was mostly the fact that, for most, the show was only 'good' because of its 'feminist message' which was mostly how fresh and exciting it was to see women as sex-loving, sex-joking, free spirited people, as if no one knew that could be true.

It was lauded as some great vision when shows primarily focused on the men - yet, pretty much identical with its sex and jokes and whatnot - like Duchovny-staring "Californication" are somehow lesser versions. They are somehow disgusting and sexist and awful shows, just because its a man.

The more i heard about the show, and the movie, the more i have to think that this is entirely want it was based on. "oh, look how edgy we are". To me, it came off as horribly sexist. The women were all free spirited and liberated and classy and all the guys were were momentary distractions, but if its a show with guys doing the same thing, somehow its an awful travesty.

Sexism goes both ways

"Knowing that a woman's favorite show is Sex and the City is like having a window into her personality, except that window looks out onto a drainpipe, a dumpster, and some scattered garbage."

I am not a sex and the city fan but I find this comment really snobby, dismissive, and ignorant.

Last time I checked us feminists were not supposed to put women down.

Secondhandsally, just wanted to clear up about the scene with Miranda unwaxed: while Samantha is shocked to see (and they do show it) some hair coming out of Miranda's suit, which of course is totally unnecessary, I don't think she implies that it's why Steve cheated. I think Miranda was just feeling really upset about his affair and jumps to this conclusion herself. But I did see the movie a little while ago, so I might be wrong.

I also wanted to add a redeeming factor for the movie: it bashes the big wedding culture. Carrie lets the wedding get so big, carried away by her friends and the people around her and her own willingness, that it gets way out of control. She and Big discuss this at the end, and they decide on city hall.

I just have to say I really don't apprecite tofu's comment about looking out the window. I don't see how mean spirited comments like that have any place in a community like this one. It really bums me out to see stuff like that here.

As for the movie, I liked it, even for all its flaws, for the reasons Unitari stated. I never watched any of the show though, so this is my only experience with SATC. I agree with everyone's complaints about the racism and class issues. Although, I thought the comment on the white guy with a baby and the water in Mexico were sort of poking fun at themselves. I can see how others may not see it that way though.

Sex and the City was basically trying to showcase the different dating patterns. If you don't trust me then try this quiz http://www.mydatingpatterns.com/
and you will agree with me.

Can someone explain what the issue with the "white guy with a baby" line was? I don't really understand.

I have to say, I watched SATC a lot with my wife. And it could be funny, sort of.

But I never was able to get into it. I'm a writer and seeing Carrie Bradshaw never seeming to worry about deadlines and somehow getting paid for what, one column a week made me cringe. If I had met a reporter like that where I work I'd want to slap them silly whenever they moaned about their relationships.

When I think about it, though, what kind of disturbed me was the same thing that made me think Friends and Seinfeld weren't funny. New York is white and everybody seems to live in nice apartments on these shows. Nobody seems to do anything, and all the jokes are about -- nothing. (Seinfeld was a master at this).

SATC also had some things that made me wonder what it was saying about women. For every time they showed Miranda at her job -- an image of a powerful, competent woman -- we got Miranda seemingly unable to negotiate her life because she was a powerful, competent woman. I never did understand why she liked Steve at all-- he was a jerk.

Same for Carrie. Mr. Big was a complete tool, and the show had her dumping the only guy who ever treated her like a person. It made no sense.

Yeah, it celebrated the friendships of women, but in such a narrow way, I thought. But maybe because I grew up with many strong women and none ever resembled the ladies who lunch in the slightest.

I admit, my favorite part of the show was spotting locations. I loved seeing restaurants we'd been to or tried. Or spotting local neighborhood spots. That was fun.

Haven't seen the film because I never watched the series. Never watched the series because it bore about as much resemblance to life for a writer in New York as it did to a Vin Diesel movie (sorry, but even columnists don't make anywhere near enough money to afford a single *picture* of a Manolo Blahnik, let alone wear those hideously uncomfortable things on their feet).

Your take on it is interesting. I also saw some strength in the idea that when the women denied their true selves, their lives were miserable (ie - when Samantha tried to be the woman waiting at home for her man or when Carrie was convinced that she should have a big extravagant wedding rather than the small simple affair that she really wanted in the beginning - remember the vintage dress).

I felt it was as if Carrie and Samantha tried to conform themselves to an external expectation of what they 'should' be as women and it came around and bit them on the ass. It was only when they took a look inside and asked, "What the heck was I thinking?" that they got the happy ending they wanted (one with a partner and the other on her own). The same kind of theme was woven into Charlotte and Myranda as well, but it wasn't played up as much in the movie.

I like SATC. It's a fun, fluffy little show. I don't think that everything I watch/read has to fit my ideals, and though I laugh/roll my eyes a lot, it doesn't bother me that the women on the show are obsessed with men, clothes, etc.

I think the movie shows a little bit of the happy ending's "dark side". The show ends with all four charachters in monogamous heterosexual relationships, two of them with children. The movie twiddles with this image a bit (with the possible exception of Charlotte's life, though she didn't end up with the storybook hunk she always envisioned).

I guess my main issue with SATC is that it doesn't show the "path up" for the four main charachters. We meet them at the height of their career/financial success. Granted, given their blithe ignorance of the monetary issues most people face, I doubt any of them were raised in homes any poorer than middle class, but they each have good jobs and wealth of their own. Honestly, the money bit bothers me more than the "roles of women" bit. The extravagent lifestyles (someone already brought up Carrie's "brush with poverty" when she can't afford to buy her apartment, which contains $40,000 of shoes), rather than their stereotypical relationships to and with men, are what make me most unable to identify with these women.

All that said, SATC is fun to watch, and I don't think my enjoyment of it means my mind is a trash heap.

Neopopulas:

"I'm a man (lynch me now)"

For that comment, I would like to politely direct you to a blog called "Finally, a Feminism 101 Blog." For you convenience, here is a link to eloquently explain why what you just said was ignorant: http://finallyfeminism101.wordpress.com/2007/03/10/faq-why-do-you-feminists-hate-men/

"I think it was mostly the fact that, for most, the show was only 'good' because of its 'feminist message' which was mostly how fresh and exciting it was to see women as sex-loving, sex-joking, free spirited people, as if no one knew that could be true."

Yes, this is correct. A lot of people still do not believe that women can be sex loving, sex joking, and free spirited people. There are also a lot of people who do not think that women are ALLOWED to have these characteristics, which probably explains why the media calls the characters ugly and slutty.

"It was lauded as some great vision when shows primarily focused on the men - yet, pretty much identical with its sex and jokes and whatnot - like Duchovny-staring "Californication" are somehow lesser versions. They are somehow disgusting and sexist and awful shows, just because its a man."

The show Californication is bashed by groups of conservative, anti-sexers, the same people who typically vilify shows such as SATC. Shows are typically called sexist if they degrade a member of the opposite sex, not for simply showing sex.

"The more i heard about the show, and the movie, the more i have to think that this is entirely want it was based on. "oh, look how edgy we are". To me, it came off as horribly sexist. The women were all free spirited and liberated and classy and all the guys were were momentary distractions, but if its a show with guys doing the same thing, somehow its an awful travesty."

You just re-affirmed sexism in the media by admitting that the idea of women being sexual beings is "edgy." The reason why it is edgy is because women are usually portrayed in roles supporting male lead characters.

I am not sure why you think that the men in the show were momentary distractions. The show went into great depth with many of the male leads, i.e. Aidan, Big, Steve, Harry. Yes, most of the men have had shorter roles, but that is because the lead roles were females and the show is supposed to be from their point of view. When a show is considered "edgy" because the main characters are female, there is obviously a problem.

Also, I suggest you read the comment in Feminism 101 about why it is inappropriate to go onto a feminism blog and complain that shows are sexist against men. Here is the link: http://finallyfeminism101.wordpress.com/2007/10/18/phmt-argument/

Samhita; I really like your take on the movie. There were some parts of the movie that were obviously frustrating and backwards i.e. The girls admonishing Miranda for not waxing and Samantha for gaining weight, Carrie taking back Big even though he treats her like crap, Louise taking back her boyfriend who dumped her for no apparent reason, Carrie and Louise claiming they came to NYC to "find love." As a feminist, I spotted these problems immediately. What I did not spot, were the ignorant racist comments made through the entire movie. I am really glad you pointed these things out. Because of my privilege I never would have noticed them.

Oh, and I just noticed. Not only does Charlotte eat pudding, but she wears a grey hoodie too! "It's that 'I have a Masters but then I got married' look."

Yeah, this was definitely a moment of me laughing at the film.

I had been waiting for someone on the site to write about "SATC," so Samhita, thank you. I agree with all of the criticisms against the film lobbied above (particularly in regards to Hudson, class and privilege in Mexico, white guy with the baby moment, etc.) And can we talk about Charlotte's cute asian baby girl as accessory with her $3000 cupcake purse? She was obviously disposable as she was not even featured in the scene after the "real" biological baby arrives. Bad decision, directors.

However, I do think that the movie succeeded better in satirizing itself than the series often did (white guy with baby moment for example) and I was pleasantly surprised that Big finally developed complexity as a character. The series finale INFURIATED me with regards to him, and although they ended up together in the film, real questions had to be asked for the first time. And in the end, the posh wedding and the shoe closet escape them because they are not what was important as well as actually strangling the relationship, and I appreciated that in a show where the price tag was so often the bottom line.

In terms of the rampant consumerism, in the movie, the moments like the Vogue shoot, etc. felt more like set pieces of film fantasy rather than graspable or normal as they were often presented in the show. The film reminded me in terms of fashion of a 40's era romantic comedy (which of course were also rampant with sexism, classism, racism) but that still feels better than "Gossip Girls" with sex and consumerism presented with no beauty or intelligence.

Speaking of "Gossip Girls," I was reminded by this film and my re-watching of the series afterwards how complex although infuriating "SATC" was as a series and media text. Four viewpoints on abortion with no judgment? Female friendship as the focus and not a temporary alliance? Frank and self-reflexive depictions of female desire (even if not reckoned with intersectionally)? In the world of Paris Hilton and Hannah Montana today, Carrie and Co. seem like relics of a more intelligent pop culture moment.

Then again, I went to find the Fergie single that opened this movie afterwards and was revolted to hear that the lyrics concerned choosing between labels and love, but ideally having both. After throwing up in my mouth a lot, I was reminded that we can't confuse the object ("SATC") and how it's marketed with what we do with it. And judging from the comments thread here, and the conversations I've passionately participated in over the years because of this show, I still raise a glass to those ladies, even though my middle finger may also be pointing due north.

Samhita,

Right on! You have eloquently put into words everything my friends and I vented about after seeing that abomination of a movie. It makes me want to stop watching my SATC DVD's, but maybe I can kind of divorce myself from the movie, pretend it was all a terrible, terrible dream instead. Here's hoping I can dodge all the movie posters around the city :)

samhita

In the one comment about how miranda dumped the rich black man for the poor white guy u sound like ur playing into the whole oppression olympics thing....like how could a rich white girl date a poor guy....food for thought

I, too, have a love/hate thing with this show and film.

But I had a different view on the Big/Carrie jilted wedding. Carrie initially wanted to get married in the "no-name" dress, much to the horror of her label-hungry friends. They persuade her to go designer, which in turn makes her feel like she has to go all out, when she and Big only wanted a small affair.

I felt that marrying Big in a courthouse was a good move for her in that she rejected the frivolous consumerism pushed by the show, and had the wedding that made the couple happy. It was like a pure start as spouses, reinforcing the point that pomp and possesions don't matter, it's the two people in love who do.
And I also found it strange that in a film taking place in New York had a serious lack of people of color. And I was surprised that since the show was so gay-friendly, they had two gay characters that previously loathed each other kiss, as if they should be paired together simply because they both like men.

And I did not think that "fat" Samantha was chubby in the least. I spent that whole scene confused because I didn't find her fat one bit. I felt that was mean-spirited. "Oh no! If Sam's a size 8, then she won't fit into those thousand-dollar dresses that designers make for models posing as hangers! Diet! Purge! Liposuction immediately!"

I enjoy watcing Sex and the City - but I don't think it's much more than entertainment. I don't think there's anything terribly feminist about the show (except for occasionally bringing up the stud/slut double standard). I don't find it in any way realistic. For one, I've lived in NYC and made more than Carrie and never had any where near her lifestyle). I don't even think it's realistic in that the four women would all remain constant friends - and have the same degree of intimacy with each other through the years (friendships, like romantic relationships do change and evolve over time). Nevertheless, I think it's an entertaining show. I don't think it's terribly ground-breaking or teaching us any lessons on feminism.

As for the women having nothing to talk about but men, well it's a romantic comedy. And, yes, when I reflect on my conversations with female friends men are, of course, not the only topic, but I don't think this show is striving for realism. It's a romantic comedy. And if I'm watching a romantic comedy, I'm much more interested in hearing about Charlotte's problem with her boyfriend than Miranda's new Blackberry.

The only thing that I find sort of realistic about the show is how unlikeable the Carrie character is. She seems to me to be self-centered, self-indulgent, melodramatic and she should know by now that Mr. Big is an a**hole. So, the fact that she's not perfect makes her a little more real.

Anyway, those are some of my thoughts on the show. I haven't seen the movie - maybe I'll rent when it comes out on dvd.

Jennifer Hudson was the token black girl, I knew that as soon as they said she was going to be Carrie's assistant I can't believe she even took the part.
Most television shows and movies are made out of white casts or black casts because white people tend to hand with white people and blacks tend to hang with blacks. Sometimes it is better to see it this way than to have the token black girl in a white cast or the token white guy in a black movie especially if it is a crappy part.
Heteronormative?
You do know this is a show about heterosexual women, and they did have many LGBT plot lines.
I don't understand your comment about Miranda not picking the rich handsome black guy over the jobless (he owned a bar by the way) white guy. She was in love with him should she have picked the black guy because he's rich and handsome?
"to stay hopeful of my own feminist fairy tale ending" Now the real question is why is it in the feminist fairy tale ending the woman ends up alone. I think women do need to find the strength to say "even if I end up alone I'll still be okay" but there is nothing wrong with wanting to find someone special and spend the rest of your life with them.
I am a big critic of SATC and I hated that Big and Carrie ended up together but I think the one reason SATC was so popular was because of the friendships between the girls.

P.S. I haven't seen the movie but I knew was gonna suck balls before they even started filming because hollywood execs don't seem to understand that great tv show does mean great movie. I'd much rather stay home and watch my dvd set.

It would be nice to see a movie marketed towards females that didn't involve upperclass lifestyles.

I'd love to read a review of Ever After, that Drew Barrymore produced and Starred in.

As re-claiming fairy tales goes, I think it did a good job.

By the time I had the opportunity to watch SATC on TV, I had already had a Mr. Big in my life and found it too painful...that and I can't relate to shopping sprees and such... It was never a show for low income, single mother, artists, with no child support- even though the characters are my age- I just couldn't get into it.

what irked me about the film was the overt glorification of "labels". I don't remember them playing SUCH a central role in the series, nevermind being referred to en masse as "the labels" in Carrie's voiceover. What I liked about the fashion of the series was that, yes, they looked glamourous/rediculous, and yes you could look at the names on their shopping bags if you wanted, but the characters were too busy with their lives to waste narrative time on the actual designers. The whole thing with the Louis Vuitton bag was fatuous, and plays up to the more shallow influences the series has had on modern women.

Samantha was also my favourite character in the film. Not only is she true to herself, but she is incredibly loyal - the wink she gives a devastated Carrie when she's feeding her gives away so much of her dedication to her friend.