OMG OMG OMG I AM FREAKING OUT!!!!!

NOT!

Do we really need another movie about middle aged women trying
to get laid?

right on

Do we really need unnecessary sequels that studios keep shooting out...

no because we have no choice

It was huge hit, money-wise. So, to the studio, there is no choice but to make a sequel, whether we like it or not.

Menopause is a cold day in hell!

Please no. No. No. No. No. No.

Did I say No?

you're right, the show wasn't bad at all. the movie however was horrible. i checked out past the scene where carrie beats big with her bouquet of flowers. i think doing a sequel is a horrible idea.

I thought they did well getting a film out of a show about a mum, her two kids and thier pet horse..

I liked the TV show. BUT ANOTHER MOVIE?!?!? C'mon!!!

Oh, and who the hell would really hire Britney Spears? I thought the only way she could get work was in that Quentin Tarantino film he was talking about making...Pussycat Kill, Kill...or something like that. What happened to that anyway? Not being made? Or after Inglorious Bastards? Any news what-so-ever? :P

This is the last one of these I'll do. David, anyone can write about sales figures. I'd like to suggest you go start writing instruction manuals, and quarter sales reports for kitchen appliances. And really I'm not trying to be a total troll dick or anything. Clearly the chief aspect of film you're attracted to is the "outrageous" sums of money generated by production and sales. Wow, what an utterly simple way to dead end thinking and create nearly identical useless points of criticism every week.

a little dickish...

No disrespect to to you, David, but it is articles like this that always make me wish that /Film had its own dose of estrogen. To be fair, the site is called "/Film", not "/BoyFilm".

I value this site for the discussion it creates and provokes. I would love to see a valid discussion about why "SATC" did so well in theaters, rather than an "its not so bad" admission. Because that discussion is very interesting, and says a LOT about our society. Personally, I like the series, but was not crazy about the film. The marketing and publicity for this movie, however, was incredible. While /Film heavily covered Dark Knight promos and Cloverfield virals, I don't recall a single mention of NewLine's efforts for SATC. (They were considerable) I'm a little upset that now that a mention has been posted, all commentary is VERY gendered.

For that matter, speaking of The Dark Knight (which I love), in comparison, you've posted next to nothing about Mamma Mia!(which I love), a film which has bypassed TDK on several fronts numbers-wise.

Wake up, boys. You are the "male dominated entertainment press" to which David refers.

Andrea,

Ack! I had written this huge comment which accidentally gotten deleted! Don't you hate it when that happens? Let me try to recreate it...

Thanks for your comment, and you bring up some very good points. To be fair, I only started writing for /Film in earnest starting this fall, and I only recently discovered that SATC is not the pure female-pandering fantasy-fest I kept hearing it was. So basically what I'm trying to say is: had I started writing for the site sooner and had I known what I know now about SATC, the coverage of SATC and its marketing might have been different this past summer? Put another way, there might have actually BEEN coverage of SATC and its marketing :)

Additionally, I find it ironic that you are choosing my article to comment on regarding this issue. Out of all the writers on this site, I am probably the one that would most vehemently defend SATC against the intense amounts of scorn that is constantly heaped upon it by the male-dominated film enthusiast press. The comments about the movie this past summer were absolutely poisonous:

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/sex_and_the_city_...

But despite all this, you are absolutely correct about film sites skewing towards geek males, and I would be foolish to dispute you on that. I guess all I can say in response is that if you have any feedback about the site's coverage of films and their marketing, feel free to e-mail it to Peter (his address is above) or you can contact me anytime at davechensemail(at)gmail. From my own experience, I can say that I feel my coverage of a topic is at its best when it's about something I care about, but I try to cover other things that I think the site's readers will care about too.

P.S. To be fair part 2: Assessing what SATC's success says about our society is a challenging job in general. Do you remember this preposterous NYTimes article back when the film first came out? (i.e. even the NYtimes messed it up)

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/30/nyregion/30reax...

And Amelie Gillette's response to it:

http://www.avclub.com/articles/poor-people-enjoy-...

Thanks for your thoughtful reply, David. It was not my intention to criticize you personally (sincerity is sometimes hard to get across thru the sarcasm-rich "inter-tubes"); I commented on your post only because it's an issue that didn't really seem relevant to any of the other posts, and your thoughts about SATC got me thinking. Which is actually a testament to you, sir.

I'm actually not a big fan of the film itself, but I find it absolutely fascinating. You're absolutely right about the analysis of the NYT and Gillette's reply. But to think that a film designed to be a commercial success, with no chance or illusion of Oscar potential (and no abstinence promotion, thank god) created this kind of discussion - therein lies the fun!

I mean, I could talk my personal faves, (Lynch and Hawks) all day long, but I'd probably be chatting them up with other film geeks with similar opinions to my own. Sigh.

My comments get deleted all da time.

"Mamma Mia!(which I love), a film which has bypassed TDK on several fronts numbers-wise. "

and this is where you lost me...

-Biggest movie EVER in theatres in the UK
-Record for DVD sales, there too
-Biggest opening for a musical (granted, a category for which TDK was not eligible, but important given the diminished "natural" audience size for a musical film)

TDK still has a bigger worldwide gross, but when you compare the percentage of that gross that came from the opening weekend, to the opening weekend for MM, the results are astounding. Obviously, this does not make one or the other a better film. But in terms of the significance of this for MM, it means that the movie was able to track consistent numbers, and make a helluva lot of money over a long period of time. Relatively quietly.

That's all. Again, not comparing the style, content, or even commenting on the quality of either film.

Are you really comparing Mamma Mia to TDK?

I mean.... really?

I can see it. The Dark Knight was basically Mamma Mia without all the dancing.

You obviously know that I was not referring to the respective plots or styles of the two films. I'm talking impact alone.

I mean, in Britain, MM is now the highest grossing film of ALL time.

In the US, studios (in addition to slots such as "superhero blockbuster" and "stoner comedy") now carve out a "Meryl Streep" spot in their yearly releases. For a female actor, this is HUGE. While several male actors can command this, Streep is literally the only female with this kind of influence. Talk about gender disparity.

(and let's be honest, didn't you think all through TDK, "if only Christian Bale was dancing?...: ;) )

For all those "masses" clamoring for a Crossroads 2, I give you this.

"So it's a show about 3 hookers and their mother?"

If Britney Spears joined the "Sex and the City" movie, I seriously believe that the film would become another huge success (possibly even doubling the box office gross of the original)... and it would attract a new audience as well.

Truth be told, Sex and the City has a very large following, and I would argue that most of the people who saw the movie thought that it very well handled the transition from tv to movie. Fans were interested in knowing what happened to the characters, plus, since the show started airing in syndication, it gained a whole lot more viewers/fans who also wanted to see the storylines play out as well.

The reason why Britney Spears would be perfect for the film is because, as with the characters on Sex and the City, most of the (female) population is obsessed/fascinated with Britney Spears in one way or another. So to see her in a movie about sex, friendship and fashion would be something that would interest people. (Plus, face it, whether on the big screen or the small screen, Britney Spears always equals ratings gold.)

Plus, I think the first Sex and the City movie nicely tied up all of the characters' storylines, so they kind of need (someone like) Britney Spears to freshen-up the story and to give people a reason to pay money to go see the movie.

'Sex in the City' the movie wasn't THAT bad...I saw it with a female friend and some of it was funny...on another note, I would give my middle nut to get with (the non-crazy) Britney Spears...

HOT picture of Britney!

thanks for posting :)

It's not exactly a recent picture.

And about the movie...
Well i guess let the HBO executives have their fun.

While my interest ends at the words 'Sex, City, Britney', there is no denying this combination would probably ensure another theatrical hit for the potential film... which says a lot. Maybe Brits could play a whacked out crazy Mother who struggles to raise her kids properly while sucking copious amounts of c*ck. Wow, I'd almost go see that.

It would be a very smart move...shes on her comeback trip! If nothign went wrong with her career untill the movies release SOTC2 will yeah undoubtly gross more than the original.

Chicks like her give women a bad name.

I have zero interest in the living infomercial known as Britney Spears and other "pop" artists. What possible contribution would an "actor" of her caliber contribute. If your talking about asses in seats then we're obviously not having a meaningful conversation. Britney Spears in a film is the same thing as firing a 22 pistol into a nuclear blast. Its not going to make any lasting impact. Her abilities to help this "mint press" "S.A.T.C." make more dough (since this is the only way we're approaching this film today) are over rated in my opinion. Its people like James above and Chen here and Mason, that perpetuate the treatment of film as product to be discussed in such plastic terms and idiotic circle jerk fiscal theorizing. It ultimately serves no purpose for helping us, the audience, get better and consistent, films of quality.

What possible benefit does this have for you and I, if we allow conversations like this to go on and on and on. Its like talking about an edition of a new line of cars, "now with leather seats". Sure its easy to equate film to product because we are inundated with advertising on a daily basis but is it not healthier to perhaps take a harder course and discuss the film from a narrative standpoint, or to create an article on its use of film design and aesthetic. Rather than using flat blank terms like, profit and grosses, that in actuality only benefit but a small room of people in Burbank somewhere shouldn't you be more concerned with the films widest amount of impact, potentially reaching billions, and its quality as art/ story. Don't you realize its easier to talk about bland virtues of earning potential? Could it be to much to ask that we begin approaching film as a critically worthy art again. Or should we just shut our minds off and pull out our wallets. I don't know what another 30 years of more bloviating waste concerning nothing more than sales this business can take.

The math shouldn't be your focus. It neutralizes any importance this young art has. If you don't believe me take a look at music, the constant pecking over figures isn't helping things along there either.

This is news? This is nothing like news because it confirms nor denies that Ms. Spears is going to be in this film. News must be slow again.

I didn't even realize there were words on the page. Hot picture!

But yeah, Britney should've been a flash in the pan (she can't really sing, and I'm not so sure about her acting). I hope she pieces her life back together so that the paps wouldn't be interested in her anymore and focus on Lindsay Winehouse Hilton.

They make a sequel? God please kill them before it's too late.

I agree, they shouldn't be thinking of sequels, they should just be happy they recouped their original budget. I'm sure it would cost so much money to get Britney Spears to even make a cameo appearance.

I guess money well wasted.

ah yet another shitty film for girls and gays to fall over for.
great!
do we really need more stupid girls of fugly old women looking for a rich man to live off!?!

Sex and the City doesn't really stand on its own as a film, but having watched the entire series (HBO knows their shit) I can firmly say that the film worked as nice extra-long episode after the show was over.

It's quality entertainment for anyone willing to invest time in it. Yes, it focuses on sex and emotions, but these are concepts that should not be foreign to anyone considering themselves human. If you're too macho to check it out, you're missing out. There's a lot of fun to be had with this series and its characters.

I could be guilty of being one of the many to judge a book by its cover but when I gave it an honest try I found a lot of entertaining material to indulge in. If there's a Sex and the City 2, I'll be there.

My wife will be excited and the sequel not Brittany.

I don't believe that Britney Spears would be a draw for those in the demographic of SATC. I can see the idea Parker is tossing out there as workable for a sequel storyline, but choose an actress not a pop star, who thinks she's an actress. Personally, I have no desire for a sequel I thought the SATC movie was awful and painstakingly long. I love the TV show, but like other TV shows made into movies, it didn't work. Yes, yes the numbers disagree, but that doesn't make it a good film.

well for the haters, you are all not being forced to watch but as to britney's fans, as in millions of fans, we would like to see her do this film because she's a good comediane. We would always support her. That film sequel will be blockbuster. :D

Sarah jessica parker, that's a brilliant idea to include our lovely britney in your SATC sequel. I hope britney will accept it and find time for the shooting of the movie. So that these haters will eat their words. I hate people judging other people. The only person who has the right to judge is someone who thinks they are perfect. Nobody's perfect in this world. If you don't have anything nice to say just shut your f**king mouths. Leave britney alone .. if you don't want her in a show or movie then don't watch it. You're not being forced! :p

Menopause or menopauza symptoms can be a real problem for middle aged women. The body suffers a lot of modifications and because of other problems like urinarry stress incontinence this can prove to be a very hard period for any kind of woman. Luckily there are products like the Zoft gum or similar which help reduce these simptoms but overall it's a tough stage in any woman's life.