Lindy,
Hey, you made Arts & Letters Daily! Probably my favorite site for reading periodicals. Good on you.

Lindy, If only the writers had you on board to help liven up the script! Great review.

Movies are a place to escape into fantasy, guilty pleasures and yes, over the top, out of this world, completely fake scenarios. You take this movie and yourself way too seriously.

And though I respect that your job is to watch movies and comment on them good or bad, I would hope you leave the "jewyjew" comments out of your next article. It is hard to take someone seriously when they are making slurs against Jewish names and gay men.

#384
How does Abu Dhabi embrace feminism today? Why is sex trafficking so successful in that country? Why aren't gay men allowed to be open in public about who they are in Abu Dhabi? Or is that allowed in the free zone? I didn't go to see SAC2 to be educated about Abu Dhabi. Although it's true--Abu Dhabi probably threw a lot of money at that movie, which is like a big commercial for the place. I teach at NYU which has a partnership with Abu Dhabi to build a university there--I think Abu Dhabi throws a lot of money at the West to basically ignore the injustices that go on there in the spirit of mixing the two worlds--What a slick P.R. job! I think the movie is symbolic of how suspectible both cultures are to looking away from harsh realities in in the spirit of artificial good times! Fine food, designer clothes, exotic locales, "being among the locals" in the most sanctimonious kind of way.

And though I respect that your job is to watch movies and comment on them good or bad, I would hope you leave the "jewyjew" comments out of your next article. It is hard to take someone seriously when they are making slurs against Jewish names and gay men.

And though I respect that your job is to watch movies and comment on them good or bad, I would hope you leave the "jewyjew" comments out of your next article. It is hard to take someone seriously when they are making slurs against Jewish names and gay men.

I'm a woman of 52, have constant ever increasingly fab sex with partner of 30 years, no yams. Guess I'm lucky. However I found this review on the web and now I'm considering leaving him, job, home, children, country and moving 8000 miles to Seattle. Ace.

READING THIS REVIEW CURED MY CANCER, PAYED OFF MY STUDENT LOANS AND REDUCED THE GULF OIL SPILL BY 2,000 BARRELS PER DAY

lindy/savage 2012

Lindy West, you inspire me.

I'm on board with everything except "jewyjewsomethingsomethingblatt."
That one kind of hurt. All else: yay.

Don't you think you're contributing to the materialism and cynicism of our times in your sarcastic and acerbic tone? Vulnerability and sincerity- now that would be revolutionary!

YEAH! I just heard the Kermode mentions too! He's the best.

You are a gift from the God. A shameless, cunty gift from God. I love you Lindy.

LOL!!!!! Lindy, you are SO FUCKING BRILLIANT, I HAD to read this again!

Wasn't Sex and the City created during the filthy-stinking-rich-material-girls-rule-fuck-feminism-and-Dubya-hopes-it-hurts Bush era?

@426: Okay, okay. I saw the original 2008 SATC for decadent girlish escapism, too. But--agh--once, for me, is enough. Lighten UUUUUUP!! Your opinion sounds so uptight, progressive-hating Republican exaggerated and forced you make Sarah Palin sound sincere.

@426: Okay, I saw the original SATC for decadent, girlish escapism. But once, for me, was enough.

Lighten UP! Why the Obama bashing?
Or did you vote for Sarah?

@426: Why the Obama-bashing?

@426: Nancy, is that you?

Okay---the computer was being REALLY slow to post. Sorry for the redundency.

That was the greatest film review ever written. Lindy West, you are my mantra.

Lindy West, would you consider dating me? I am a ruggedly handsome man who lives on a twenty-five thousand dollar a year stipend in Baltimore.

So you hated everything about it long before you stepped in the theater. Why bother reviewing it? There is no movie that Michael Patrick King could ever write for these characters (that you LOATHE) that could ever satisfy you. So how much does your review matter? Let me be clear, not at all.

Surely you can separate rampantly materialistic consumer-friendly feminism (i.e. "empower yourself with a Venus razor!")from the real life women and men (lest we forget) who want to achieve some semblance of equality and respect, right? If you're looking to SATC for tips on how to conceptualize feminism or 'modern womanhood,'you've chosen a tough row to hoe. Besides the fact that there are many ideas of what feminism is out there, the most valuable kind challenges class disparity, racism, ableism, misandry etc etc and all the other sour candies together--it should recognize that we can't see them as mutually exclusive. If that kind of feminism was considered sexy, we wouldnt have seen the grossly xenophobic scenes in Abu Dhabi.

And yes, Sam has been drained of her wit and is a caricature of herself but it'll always be cool (and important) to see an older woman pursue her sexual desires. Why did you call her a prostitute? And not a "stud" or "playgirl" or whatever? Have you ever referred to a male character as a prostitute? Come on.

I'm as disappointed in the franchise as many people are but I do see a ton of sexism in the reviews about the movie that are over-the top. Yours was pushing it, and in a way that seemed a little too gung-ho. How can you critique the commercialization of feminism when your approach is so misogynist? Your review is very colourful (in that playground-namecalling fashion) but I doubt any real commitment you may espouse to stopping sexism.

If Theodor Adorno had a wicked sense of humor he might write cultural criticism this trenchant, witty, and well-wrought. Brava!

SATC has its problems, no doubt about it, but I don't think Lindy's reference to Samantha's aging pussy does much for women's rights either. People in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.

""This is an entirely inappropriate length for what is essentially a home video of gay men playing with giant Barbie dolls. But I digress."

Are you saying all gay men are the same?"

No. Clearly she is not. That's your inference. Not her implication.

And to see idiots saying it's somehow "unfeminist" to criticize this superficial commercial garbage is really a sign of "feminist" fellow travelers having their heads up their .... well, ass.

I disagree with the Barbie dolls bit though. The key to sex and the city is that these four characters are essentially gay men in drag.

"I always find it interesting that many people have forgotten that the series and the book that SATC is based on is essentially fantasy, with broadly-drawn (no pun intended) female archetypes."

I always find it interesting that many people have forgotten that the book and the series tore these women apart and said they were high class hookers who'd fuck you for a Gucci, while the series turned them into gay male icons, and wish fulfilment for sad women. I know women who have got into serious problems by believing the Mr Big nonsense, and waiting for their own (and believing they've found him). Ah well, they deserved it.

Sex and The City shows you that four women can be average looking, superficial, characterless fashion victims of no social merit whatsoever, and not much wit, and still have a constant stream of much more worthy men wanting to fuck them and/or marry them. It ain't so. But the fantasy suits some.

I am laughing so hard that I am in tears. You have justified this movie's existence since it inspired you to write this article. My husband said he might have to sue you if I die laughing.

fozzlebear (post 31). You spotted the imbalance. I do indeed despise 007 films in the same way, and yet do not hear such venomous reviews. I found Linda's brilliant review here when recommended whilst browsing Guardian.co.uk about something on another topic (not the one below). Although I agree with Linda's POV, we need as much ferocity at male dominated lightweight films.
Check out this article:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2…

I enjoyed 'The Hangover', after it had been recommended but because I had been warned about its dubious sexist humour (spelling correct. I'm British) I adjusted my critical levels accordingly. The film was only just a bit dodgy until the appearance of Mike Tyson at which point I felt uncomfortable. Why no outrage at that?

I think it was down to one thing: On balance that film was funny and laughed at its male leads' uselessness, whereas SITC2 sounds boring and self congratulatory. Smugness is the one unforgivable thing in a comedy.

An important detail about feminism: Significantly, it was the fight for LIBERATION, not equality (it was called 'women's lib', remember?). The question to ask might be: does this film depict liberated women? It is a shame that maybe the answer is 'yes'.
I don't think that the trailblazers were intending such an outcome forty years on.
But on the other hand, the 'Hurt Locker', directed by a woman, won the Oscar. It was weird, though, that this was such a big deal - when the issue might have been - how come it took so long!

This is really effing hilarious, however, I don't understand why reviewers are so hard on this movie. It's clearly just meant for fluffy entertainment and scrutinizing it to ensure that it properly accounts for all of womens'roles in a third wave feminist culture is just plain stupid. It's like asking dancing with the stars to fairly represent all of contemporary choreography, and movement theory since the 1970s. Can't we just have a little fun.

This review was even more fun to read out loud to the GF. One problem, we laughed so hard that we actually considered seeing the movie for ourselves.

This reviewer is both hilarious, but also over-the-top so her comments can be written off. The movie is hilarious. I'm glad the reviewer could enjoy writing with such energy, but she is also part misogynist. I wonder if she dates men and has anything besides open relationships.

So what? Women in this film talked about nannies, their jobs and families -- and they are allowed to dominate the cast. So the reviewer disagrees with them all -- I didn't. I related. I think it's great the female characters didn't only talk to men or about men.

SITC2 had some scenes waiting to be realized, e.g., a highly-sexualized American woman, Samantha, finds herself surrounded by an angry mob in a Souk. Brilliant. In fact, the juxtaposition of the sexy women in Arabia was perfect. Why hasn't someone else joked around that barrier already?

The reviewer should spend more time making fun of the police who arrest kissers on the beach than the farcical film where Americans enter a culture clash. Make Love Not War. She should also spend some time with women in the Middle East.

Just for the record, Miranda doesn't quit her job to stay at home. She quits her crappy job and gets a better job.

it's just a movie.....for entertainment...relax.

@173: Bitchtar!!!!!
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
LOL!!!! You are a GENIUS!!!

Entry in a history book, 2100 AD. Feminism - a confused nihilistic political movement of the late 20th/early 21st century, which witnessed the developed world descend, for a period, into a hostile and malleable dolls house for the infantile, narcissistic, fantasies of large numbers of western women and their left wing supporters.

Entry in a history book, 2100 AD. Feminism - a confused,, nihilistic political movement of the late 20th/early 21st century, which witnessed the developed world descend, for a period, into a hostile and malleable dolls house for the infantile, narcissistic, fantasies of large numbers of western women and their left wing supporters.

Oh my god girl, why do you have to analyse the whole movie like that? I'm sure if you'd go over every movie like that, none of them would be worth watching. I think it was a very nice movie. It made me laugh, and it moved me as well. And that's really all I asked for when coming to the theatre. It's sex and the city, remember? Not some oeuvre by Steven Spielberg... Place your comments in the right context next time, got it?

this article is spot on vis a vis SITC2's portrayal of disgustingly hyperbolised, ultra-rich, inconceivably shallow female archetypes.

all this franchise does is highlight how easy it can be for the avaricious american movie industry to bastardise and invert any positive role models and ideals, turning them into superficial homunculi for the ignorant, the apathetic and the shallow to 'consume' and, where possible, emulate.

it pains me that there haven't been many movies recently with positive female role models(or male for that matter), so much so that it makes me wonder what's happened to feminism's representation within media?

perhaps it's become over-saturated by media hyperbolisation; it's now become a self-referential parody of itself, a simulation.

if we want to fight against these degrading representations of men, women and ideals, we ought to pay higher regard to those things which think outside the box and promote positive role models, rather than just continually buying into all the hype and celebrity worship.

let's start boycotting all the mindless, formulaic, stereotype-enforcing romcoms, action blockbusters and cgi films, and start promoting movies which can give us better role models - i'm not saying we should become the 'league of decency' et al, but i am saying we should certainly pay more heed to those films that adhere to a quality we can admire, emulate and discuss.

''the surest way to corrupt a youth is to teach him to hold in high regard those who think alike, as opposed to those who think differently'' --Nietzsche

in the early years of SATC, when it was just a show, I do not remember it being so focused on how wealthy the characters were, definitely not nearly as much as the two films. I mean yea, Carrie had her shoe fetish and Samantha name-dropped but both films make the women seem extremely self-indulgent and materialistic. I loved the show, I thought it was very witty and well written even, dare I say, insightful on the trials and tribulations of interpersonal relationships in the modern age.I feel both films have really just put focus more on product placing and dropping the names of various designers (this isn't even done in a tasteful way). I think its really disappointing.

You have restored my faith in women.

Nice article, Lindy!
witty, bitchy and hyperbolically scathing - i like it. there's nothing quite like an outpouring of bile and vitriol aimed at something vacuous, gawdy and superficial.

i agree that whilst this movie no doubt served to 'entertain' a certain demographic, all it has really done is demonstrate its cultural irrelevance and insensitivity to the more tangible cultures that it attempts to deride.

perhaps the writers were trying to present Carrie et al as having become so lost in their own superficiality that they've become simulations of the characters they once were, homunculi even. perhaps the writers were hoping to create a self-referential parody?
seems unlikely though, doesn't it?

when we really think about it, this kind of movie serves only one purpose: to entertain. when it can't even achieve this, then what other purpose can it serve?

be honest, o fans of SitC, was this movie not awful? did you not lament the repetition of the same old sex gags ad nauseum, the predictability and the sheer vacuousness and arrogance of the protagonists and their vain attempts to amuse you in their quest to prolong their ailing libidos?

or maybe it was entertaining? i mean, sitc2's characters are, after all, more vacant, more shallow and more self-serving than ever!

they have no moral\cultural\social compass beyond that which they deem to be 'relevant', meaning that 'hilarity ensues' when they reach the fabled 'orient' with their overt sense of entitlement, their overwhelming narcisism and their obsession with cultural hegemony over the 'other' - perhaps their roles as feminists is understated as they are playing more important roles: as imperialists in gucci disguise!
*gasp!* - 'nobody expects the spanish inquisition!'

anyone who attempts to argue that the 'sexual freedom' and 'body confidence' of Carrie et al is in some way an argument for them to be presented as role models, has clearly been in either a coma for the last 20-40 years (or is too young to know any better yet).

feminism has many forms, but has never been in the form of megalomaniacal arrogance and the need to project self-confidence to peers by treating men as nothing more than a tool for sexual gratification and the occasional emotional\comic relief.
that's not feminism, people, that's misandry.

ultimately, SitC2 was rubbish because it did nothing to present the growth and consolidation of their independent personalities into a maturity that was appropriate for the kind of people that they are 'supposed' to be representative of.

hopefully the franchise has (finally) been relegated to cultural irrelevance due to the xenophobic, misandric and heinously superficial undertones of the latest instalment.

I thought I'd never say this, but after reading this review: I can't wait for SATC 3!

Congratulations and thank you - you said it for all 'normal' women. By the way you got a great plug on Dr.Mark Kermodes show: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uHeQeHstr…

Michele Aime

Wow, Lindy West. You're great. I have stumbled across you as I stumbled across Cindy Guidry, thank god you're out there. I was beginning to feel very, very lonely.

This was a magnificent piece of writing! I so enjoyed reading this! Thanks so much! You are one funny broad!

"for what is essentially a home video of gay men playing with giant Barbie dolls..."

fucking brilliant review Lindy

Sooooo, is it any good?

Well, actually, if you've ever walked around the fancy stores in Knightsbridge, London in the summer, you will see dozens of traditional Muslim women in burkas shopping for exactly the same hideously expensive, shocking clothes that the SATC women wear.

Apparently the wives of the wealthiest men in some of the strictest Muslim parties tend to hold private, women-only (so they don't need to wear the burka) parties. In these parties it is considered quite a status symbol to be wearing the absolute finest in Western high-end expensive fashions.

It really is quite a remarkable phenomena.

With the rest of the review I have no qualms.

Don't blame fags because SJP and Bushnell's target audience buy into this consumerist bullshit. It's women who waste their money on ugly handbags and over-priced shoes and shoot their faces full of botox until they look hideous. Trying to pin it on fags is just reinforcing the sexist idea that women are victims and can't make their own choices. If some queen of a stylist makes a buck off of these stupid rich bitches and laughs his way to the bank then it's just funny. The faggots joke is on straight society: watching and laughing as straight men and women play their idiotic power games over and over, primping and plucking and self-tanning their privileged asses until their a whole new kind of ugly.

Congratulations!
1. Great, entertaining writing
2. 500 comments. Pretty amazing

Apart from a few vaguely amusing comments in your third paragraph, this is a truly terrible, not to mention offensive review.
I'd be the first one to say that SATC2 isn't a great movie, but it's certainly not offensive.
I'll tell you what is offensive, your horrendous comments.
For example;
"Charlotte Goldsteinjewyjewsomethingsomethingblatt" - I think you ought to think before you speak, as that for me, personally is more offensive than anything in the entire movie.

"cloth and feathers that hang from Carrie et al.'s emaciated goblin shoulders" - the most sad thing about that comment, is even if you use the name 'carrie' in that sentence, you're still talking about SJP, and unnecessarily offending the way she looks. So much for women standing up for each other, i feel sorry for those with you as their friend.

Lastly, if you are seriously suggesting that you, and the majority of women in the western world, and even many in the east, do not care about looks, style or fashion, then you are seriously deluded. It's not shallow to dress well. Being a vapid cow and writing offensive and ignorant reviews, does.
It also doesn't make you a shallow person to occasionally obsess about someone you love/have loved. Or, perhaps, you've never got to that stage. It wouldn't surprise me.

I, for one, appreciate good, acerbic, biting wit. This may be the most favorite review of anything I've ever read anywhere. This is my first time seeing your work, and it surely won't be the last. I actually laugh-snorted some diet coke out of my nose at my desk while reading this. Bravo!

@465: Spoken like a true pre-historic male chauvinist pig. Could this be to make up for some form of insecurity on your part---like a small dick?

@465: Uh, PeterC, in just what history book did you find this ultra-WRONG-wing male chauvinist definition of feminism?

Stop reading Wikipedia. It causes penis shrinkage and cancer in laboratory rats.

Or CAN you read?

There is nothing funnier than a well written rant and this is hilarious! I have no intention of seeing the film -don't think I'm exactly the target audience- but I had to read it following Mark Kermode's comments. Brilliant!

HAHAH!!! Brilliant review; I can't think of anything I'd like to do less than watch Sex & The City. Never seen it & never will.

hi,
first time reading your blog. you should say what you mean.....LOL
you're terrific. it's a great style, the content is irresistable, and you take no prisoners. i, too, have started a blog, and i hope someday, to spin yarn as well as thee, oh rapunzel.
thanks for the chuckle of my day. i'll wait for the video.

you are so funny. my favorite quote in your review was: "

It is 146 minutes long, which means that I entered the theater in the bloom of youth and emerged with a family of field mice living in my long, white mustache."

lady, you certainly can turn a phrase. i laughed until i had to change my depends.....
keep it up, girl.

My first response is to Edensnow, (Comment #491) I love you!!

Dear Stranger:

Several years ago you launched an attack on two city councilwomen. The way you went after these women in such a misogynistic-lets-hide-it-by-pretending-we're-groundbreaking journalists made my skin crawl. From that time I have refused to even touch your paper. I won't even pick you up to wrap my breakables when I'm getting ready to move to an apartment. If I had a choice of wrapping my Limoges tea set with a copy of the National Review or the Stranger, I would choose the NR. Sure, they are fascist craphounds, but they don't hide their disdain for women. Your periodical however, poses as a liberal, stick-it-to-the-man, when in reality you're all nothing more that pro-crypto-stick-it-to-the-vaginas-fascist craphounds.

My friend sent me a link of this review and before I knew it, found myself on your website reading this offensive, trainwreck of a movie review. To be opinionated myself, I didn't like this movie as much. There were parts where it felt like the script was still being crafted the night before shooting the film started. Some of the one-liners weren't even campy bad. It was, however, good enough, that I didn't mind sitting in a movie theater for over two hours. And do you know what makes Sex and the City a success each time it airs an episode or movie? Those women and their unbreakable bond.

It's not about the sex, Mahnalo Blahniks, Jimmy Choos or vintage Valentino (yes, Charlotte is my favorite dresser, ha), it's about the bond between four women who work every god-damned day to preserve their sanity in a male-dominated workforce; try to find a lasting relationship; or a worth-your-time, passionate encounter. And when all of that seemingly goes to shit, they know they have three of the best friends on the planet...who will be there. No relationship, job or other distraction takes them away...for long...from their "soulmates." That is what Sex in the City is about and SITC II scored again in terms of projecting positive relationships among women.

How many of us have left our job for the day thinking: Shit, I gotta win the lottery, or ended a date thinking: no personality, 12 hands, and funny nosehairs; or expanding your passion and energy when engaging in sex and thinking...I was good, but he/she just laid there. Why am I doing this again? And just when you think you will eat too many ice cream cones or buy 28 boxes of Girl Scout Cookies, you remember your friends...and fortunately, their telephone numbers.

As a man, I am proud, pleased, honored to write my dearest friends are women. Never, ever has it occurred to me to label them as my fruit flies, fag hags, or other ridiculously offensive, misogynistic terms. they are my equals...my support system. I sincerely hope I have provided them with as much love and support as they have shown me. I have heard much discussion about their vaginas and some times I still blush, but I don't revile them. How many fucking times does a man, gay or straight, talk about his dick...way more than women discuss their vaginas, trust me. Samantha Jones takes 48 "vagina" vitamins a day. Who the fuck cares? How many commercials, millions in research are devoted to keeping a 78-year-old fart as hard as when he was 15?

And never in 1 million years would I write such an offensive, hideous review such as this. It should be a review, not a rant. First we have a movie where a beautiful, mature actress belts out she is fifty-fucking-two-and-I-am-going-to-rock-that dress!!! She is also admitting that as one marches ever closer to the door marked "Exit", she is beginning the menopausal phase and has turned to Suzanne Somers for advice. And that advice is a shitload of yams and hummus wrapped in the form of vitamins. She's not moaning her fate of getting older. No, she is like: give me the facts, please. What can I do to make this transition nicer, more pleasant?

...And the scene where she tells the girls they're soulmates...that is fucking awesome and that simple little line summarized the entire season and movies...it was sublime.

But you, Mr Blankenhorn, didn't even get any of that out of the movie. All you saw was too much talk about menopause and the lubrication factor of vaginas. No wait...you saw this as yet another opportunity to slam it to the women...The entire point of the movie went right over your head. Well, you are working for the perfect periodical because everything feminine or positive flies over your headquarters at Shitbag Towers.

To summarize, The Stranger is still nothing more than shitbaggery disguised as a news periodial. I'll continue wrapping my teacups with the National Review.

My name is James Bryant and I will continue NOT reading his hideous periodical.

I watched it. Always like SATC and still enjoyed it... but the barbie dolls comment is spot on. maybe thats why I like it so much. Abit of 'unrealistic escapism' is always fun, if not exactly intellectually challenging... everything doesn't have to be you know.

This surely ranks up there with Rodger Ebert's review of "North" as a truly great movie review. Thank you Lindy West, thank you.

Ohhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh, YEAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!
I LOVE being post #506!!!!!

I HAD to read this yet AGAIN!!! Lindy, you ROCK!! LOL Hilarious!!!

And YEAH: if THIS is what a modern woman is supposed to be like, then veil me and sew up all my fucking reproductive holes, too!

EXCELLENT SUMMATION OF THE GRAVELY HOLLOW TWADDLE.