SEXISM AND THE CITY
Why Carrie Bashing Is Considered Cool
This weekend sees the release of Sex and the City 2, the second feature film based on the smash HBO TV series.
Just a couple of years ago, Sex and the City opened to record numbers for a female fronted comedy, powered by hordes of mostly female fans for whom the TV show was a veritable lifestyle guide. The big box office numbers took many male journalists by surprise – prompting countless astonished headlines – as if the idea of women going out to see a movie on their own was somehow a new phenomenon.
Well now two years later the sequel is upon us. But this time the guys are waiting – ready to sneer, put down and patronize Sex – and its mostly female fans.
First there’s the reviews – currently 17% on Rotten Tomatoes – that’s barely better than the dreary Elm Street remake, less than the J. Lo stinker The Back Up Plan and equal to The Tooth Fairy. Really? Sex and the City is on a par with The Rock wearing fairy wings? Come again…
Then there’s the magazine and newspaper coverage. The Daily Beast asked if it was possible for a straight man to enjoy Sex and the City (I don’t know who this insults more – women, straight men or the gays?). Time Out New York leads with ‘How Bad Is It?’ on its front cover. And almost every review I’ve read has commented on how old the women in the film look – and how unflattering the photography is. The sexism and condescension just ooze of the page.
Now I’ll say in advance I haven’t seen Sex and the City 2 yet. It could absolutely be a dreadful film. But if it was I’d be surprised. The first movie was terrific in my opinion and the series barely put a foot wrong. Can the sequel, from the same director and writers, really be that bad?
Don’t get me wrong. I’m no fan of bad romantic comedies – and most of them are pretty terrible. Films like When In Rome, Leap Year and 27 Dresses with their desperate single girls and wedding obsessed plotlines are just hideous – and never funny. Honestly – if you found 27 Dresses hilarious you seriously don’t watch enough movies. But Sex and the City is a different beast – the writing is sharp, the women are strong and interesting – and it’s funny. Really, really funny at times.
But for some reason a lot of straight men feel incredibly threatened by the whole Sex and the City phenomenon – and just love to attack it. And subconsciously or consciously, I think much of the franchise’s criticisms come from a pretty sexist place.
Why the need to attack the age of the cast – when the likes of Liam Neeson and Bruce Willis are allowed to anchor action movies and always get the girl (seriously almost every Sex review I’ve read has mentioned the cast’s ages or looks or the menopause!).
Guys love to make fun of the ‘superficiality’ of the Sex and the City fashions – but how is this more shallow than another slow-mo fight sequence or endless CGI explosions? Fashion porn and fight porn – are they really that different?
When the Sex and the City girls talk dirty it’s crude and desperate – yet when characters in a Judd Apatow movie do it – it’s refreshing and frank.
And why are movies featured male camaraderie often acclaimed (The Hangover, The Wedding Crashers, Role Models, I Love You, Man) but a female fronted movie is almost always dismissed as a ‘chick flick’ (how much do I hate that term!) Seriously I lost count of how many people I know who went crazy for The Hangover last year – a film I found to be distinctly average, overlong and hugely obvious (I mean hangovers as a comedy device – is this the 80’s or something?)
But what do you think? Am I missing the point here? Are the critics spot on and their comments fair? Or do you think there’s a strong male agenda at work here that hates anything with a predominantly female fan-base… I’d love to hear your thoughts…
Latest update: Read new article : Sexism and the City 2 – Part 2
| Print article | This entry was posted by Richard Drew on May 27, 2010 at 4:40 pm, and is filed under OPINION, VIDEOS. Follow any responses to this post through RSS 2.0. You can leave a response or trackback from your own site. |
Sneak Peek: Glee ‘Original Song’
about 8 months ago - No comments
After a two week break, Glee is back tomorrow night – and it’s Regionals time once again! This week’s show promises to be pretty packed with LOTS going on! You’ve probably already heard about Kathy Griffin‘s appearance as a Tea Party candidate turned Glee judge – she’s certainly wound up the ultra-sensitive Sarah Palin (go Team
Vh1: Will The New Monday Night Line-Up Rescue The Network?
about 9 months ago - 2 comments
Interesting times over at Vh1 these days… The former ‘music’ channel used to be a market leader with a clear brand identity and a stable of hit shows – remember Flavor Of Love, I Love New York, Rock Of Love and The Surreal Life. It was Celeb-Reality 24/7 and though the shows weren’t exactly ad-sales
Meet The Cast: Dancing With The Stars – Season 12
about 9 months ago - 1 comment
It’s time to get dancing again…! As you may have heard, last night ABC announced the cast for the upcoming Season 12 of Dancing With The Stars – and for once, I have to say I’m distinctly underwhelmed. I’ve talked about DTWS casting here on Remote Patrolled before and have often argued in the show’s
Toddlers & Tiaras With Tom Hanks
about 9 months ago - 3 comments
Finally some laughs on Oscar night! Following last night’s dreary Academy Awards ceremony Jimmy Kimmel presented his usual post show chat fest with some pretty A list names on board. One moment that’s sure to make the folks at TLC happy – Tom Hanks taking on long running docu-soap Toddlers & Tiaras as he coaches
Academy Awards 2011: James Franco and Anne Hathaway’s Opening
about 9 months ago - 7 comments
Oh boy! So remember how I was quite excited for this year’s Oscars – and a fan of hosts James Franco and Anne Hathaway? Well unfortunately the smile froze on my face about ten minutes into the ceremony when it became blatantly clear that the movie star duo just didn’t have the comedy chops or
Jimmy Fallon: If Puppies Could Vote – The Oscars Edition!
about 9 months ago - No comments
It’s Academy Award time again – and I for one am excited by this year’s line up of movies and the prospect of James Franco and Anne Hathaway hosting the awards (of course I reserve the right to change my mind AFTER the actual show!) But here’s a clip that’s certain to melt even the
First Look: Nurse Jackie – Season 3
about 9 months ago - No comments
The wait is almost over… check out the trailer for the latest season of the Showtime smash, Nurse Jackie. I came to the Jackie party rather late, assuming the show would just be another hospital drama or just more Scrubs style zaniness. But after zipping through the first two seasons last year I have to
Hall Of Fame: Roseanne
about 9 months ago - No comments
As you may have noticed Roseanne Barr has been back in the headlines recently with her Oprah appearance and the announcement of her upcoming new Lifetime reality show (which sounds dreadful). So we figured now was as good a time as any to induct Roseanne, Barr’s groundbreaking late 80’s sitcom, into our Remote Patrolled Hall
Ratings Roundup – 20th Feb
about 9 months ago - 1 comment
Winners and Losers From The Last 7 Days WINNERS PAWNSTARS / HARDCORE PAWN: To be honest it’s hard to find many winners this week, in what has been a pretty down week across the board for the networks. Sure The Grammy Awards on Sunday scored its best ratings for a decade (26.55 million viewers),
Quick Take: Glee ‘Comeback’
about 9 months ago - 5 comments
So this is how it’s going to be from now on? Glee – once a jewel in the Fox crown and one of the most promising new shows on TV – has now found its level. And it’s not good! Last night’s episode, titled ‘Comeback’, was flat in virtually every way and once again
about 1 year ago
Perhaps before blowing $10 of my hard earned moolah on the SATC movie sequel I would have agreed with more of your points, but after… I was left wanting a lot more movie than I got for the ticket price. Where the first installment was edgy, funny and managed to tie up loose ends from the series without feeling like a made-for-tv special, this one messed with the formula without anything all that good to show for it.
They pulled back and churned out this movie where no one really faces any real trouble. Samantha was slutty and crass without much of a hint of vulnerability. Lawrence of my Labia. Really? Carrie was whiny to the umpteenth power. Charlotte. Oh Chartlotte. I did not understand why this beautiful, well-off woman with no day job, who could count on the help and support of a husband and a nanny seemed so frazzled by two children. My single mother had three of us, a full time job, no nanny and I don't remember spontaneous, grating bouts of self-pity.
Miranda was the saving grace, with the exception of the hijab-is-a-tool-to-gag-and-oppress-middle-eastern-women speech.
In the series and the first film I also enjoyed the city, New York, if only Manhattan, the restaurants, the street scenes, the establishing shots, the setting. It was a character in and of itself, vibrant and colorful. In SATC2, the Abu Dhabi I was shown was so utterly lavish–a comped $20,000 a night luxury suite, full time butlers, a convoy of glittering luxury cars, catered lunches in the desert–I could not live really vicariously through their experiences because there's no way in hell I'll ever be able to afford the slice of life pictured in the film, not even a stolen glimpse of it.
And the butlers. I know this is a private pet peeve. I've recently finished proofreading a friend's thesis on the plight of third country nationals working in the emirates so his research was perhaps too fresh in my mind when the four full-time butlers were introduced.
They are almost like pretty scenery in their black turbans. Of course they don't mind slaving away all day long, catering to the smallest, frilliest needs of our SATC foursome whilst being marginalized and paid crap wages, heck, they'll even kick back pithy comments about love for our heroine to ponder over.
about 1 year ago
I have always been a huge fan or SATC, when I started watching it my husband was a little apprehensive, as most men might naturally be, but then he got into the story line too and actually enjoyed watching it because it was a good show. I've seen every SatC episode there is, and love the show. I was first in line to see SatC the first movie, and although I thought it was a bit long, I really enjoyed it. So of course I was there on opening night of SatC 2 excited and ready to see it. Now let me tell u as a 24 year old girl who is a huge fan of the show, I thought the movie was not good at all. It was wayy to long, it completly went away from everything that was SatC, it did seem like it was trying to hard with the jokes, and the "city" (seeing New York was one of my favorite things about the show) was barely in this movie. My thoughts leaving that theater were, my back hurts, I feel like I've been sitting here for 5 hours, and what a dissapointment. And to remind you again this is coming from a 24 year old girl who is a huge fan of the show, the "target audience". So I would understand what you're saying about the critics and the 17% rating on Rotten Tomatoes, if this movie had lived up to the first or to the series, but in my opinion, this was just not a very good movie at all and I think it probably has less to do with sexism and more to do with the fact that this movie probably deserves most of the reviews it has been getting.
about 1 year ago
I loves the early series of SATC but I hate what it became – Shoes in the city. I'm glad the actors did really well, and it it nice to see older women looking good on TV, but those two things do not make a good film. Infact, the fact that that's ALL it has to offer is what makes people so fed up. You can dress a turd in a designer gown, but it's still a turd (I also feel like that about Oceans 11, 12 and 13 by the way). As a woman, I've got as much right to well written, well acted thought provoking or at least funny and interesting cinema and don't see why I should be expected to act as a cheer leader to anything less?
about 1 year ago
So you haven't seen the movie but you're pontificating about it.
Critics regularly criticize and have criticized for a long time men "of a certain age" playing roles they're too old for. Look up reviews of "Charade," for example.
about 1 year ago
You're right and you're wrong. Right) There is a lot of sexism going on. Wrong) The movie and acting are dreadful, the writing is dreadful and any self-respecting actor would be embarrassed to be in this movie. Don't they have enough money? Why wouldn't they demand a better script?
about 1 year ago
i'm a man and i think that you're right in many things but the problem with the film is the high expectations. and the hangover is crap as well as this film. bad comedy with brainless humor.
about 1 year ago
This is an awful article! Critics aren't panning the film because of the age or gender of the cast but because it is genuinely ridiculous.
1. You mention the age issue: I have no problem with watching these 40 something ladies onscreen. It would be interesting to see how each of them are maturing and dealing with new stages and issues in their lives. What I do not want to see though are fully matured ladies refusing to act their age, and constantly whining about how things aren't good enough for them. Someone who has been through something as traumatic as breast cancer-which was so wonderfully portreyed in the TV series-would not be doing idiotic things to her body just to stave off menopause.
2. The female/sexism issue. Does being a 'liberated' or 'emancipated' woman mean that you can act as vulgarly as you like? Does it mean that you have a total disrespect and disregard for other people in the world who may think differently to yourself? I come from an Arab country myself, and many of the females I know would be horrified at the prospect of behaving the way these women do. That is not to say that I think their way is wrong. They are products of their own culture while we are products of ours. In the US, women value different ideals to those that we value. I am not restricted by any man, but more by myself. I do not dress in a way that is revealing not because I am afraid to, but because in my opinion, I prefer to maintain my body for my own eyes and for the man who loves me.
The film has been crtiticized for making a mockery of our Arab culture, let me ask you something. Do we come to New York and expect our values and ideals to be imposed on the American society? Then why does the film have these women come to our country and believe that only their way is the correct way.
You cannot judge the entire muslim culture by the few stereotypes you see in popular culture. Neither I nor any of my friends or relatives have been beaten or mistreated, but films like these pander to the caricatures that are painted of us, and it is insulting.
I enjoy American TV programmes and films, and respect the American people for who they are-why cannot you do the same for us?
about 1 year ago
Check this article out. http://www.thewrap.com/blog-entry/we-need-womens-…
about 1 year ago
Thanks for all the comments guys!
I shall be seeing the movie later today – and honestly I'm expecting it to be disappointing!
But I stand by my point – that a lot of the coverage of the film has been fueled by sexism.
Check out Peter Travers at Rolling Stone – he gives the movie 2 stars out of 4, says it's a letdown but the review is fair and constructive. Travers is a smart critic and most times on the money.
But look at many of the other reviews, summarized on sites like Rotten Tomatoes or simply Google 'Sex and the City 2' – the vitriol and sheer nastiness directed at the film is stunning…
about 1 year ago
You’re so right and thank you for putting this out there. Ageism with regard to women is rife. In the media, any woman over 40 who looks good has ‘for her age’ tacked onto the headline. It’s absolutely infuriating and yes, men can play romantic leads, action heroes etc well into their 50s, even 60s, while women struggle to get decent roles beyond the age of 30. Perhaps it’s down to a strong male agenda, I don’t know – but I think if we want to turn the tide it has to start with women. If you read an article on the internet about, for example, Jennifer Aniston, the amount of negative comments put down by members of the public about her face, figure and personal life are often overwhelming and are frequently written by women. I don’t think men in the public eye have to deal with anything like this level of criticism and, sometimes, cruelty but it’s kind of worse in a way that women would consent to be a part of it. The media encourages us all to look at women in the public eye with the same overly critical eye that we often take to ourselves and, in my opinion, it’s got really out of hand.
about 1 year ago
I watched the first film two days ago with my wife and stepdaughter, presumably in preparation for going to see the sequel.
My wife was very offended, complained throughout and asked me what people see in it. My 18 year old stepdaughter seemed to agree with my contention that it was overlong and UBER shallow (the *single* minority character rents fashionable clothes to be "of that world" & reconnects with the true love that once spurned her only after receiving a Louis Vitton purse. blechhh) but she was still raring to go for SATC2 – go figure / kids / ours is not to reason why. She dragged my wife to SATC2 tonight. Cha-ching.
I explained to my wife that the series was actually quite funny and had a lot of character. The movies appear to be prime examples of poor translations when it comes time to "amp up" the franchise to validate the big screen vs. small screen treatment. Not extensible, IMHO. It's a shame. The series was repetitive but not overlong, nowhere near as shallow and most importantly: very funny.
Not sexism. As has been pointed out earlier, men aren't taking cues from action films on how to live their lives or what to aspire to. It's escapism. SATC is escapism too but it's more rooted in the idea of sisterhood, (supposed) empowerment and "having it all." The idle thoughts and creeping self-doubt/hatred that these characters are driven to (when they are so well heeled by the standards of most Americans) is enormously frustrating for most men and for women who reason through things in their lives and don't seek the "next best thing" in order to feel fulfilled.
I enjoyed the series and honestly can't understand how the apologists can get so worked up over the twice cinematic trashing of its merits.
about 1 year ago
The movie was not bad because of the portrayal of women. It was bad because it was bad. It had no plot, lacked substance and it destroyed four awesome female characters. I am a lover of the show and I didn’t think the first movie was that bad. But this sequel can easily be described as “cringe worthy”. I honestly think the writers just didn’t know where else to go with the characters so they send them to the desert to be as crazy as they can be but it made them look like caricatures rather than root-worthy representatives of the female sex.
about 1 year ago
To answer the question in your last paragraph…yes, you're missing the point. The wife dragged me to this (she's a BIG fan, me…not so much) and we both uniformly agreed that the movie was a cartload of donkey balls.
My guess is you should have actually seen it before suggesting that its panning stems from anti-feminism, because, as important as I agree that issue is, you've only succeeded in embarassing yourself by suggesting it as the reason for this films critical mauling. It is in fact just crap.
about 1 year ago
I agree with what you're saying but the movie actually wasn't that good, and I love the show and the first movie. It is a double standard that older women in movies tend to be criticized while men are usually praised.
Unfortunately, while comments on appearance and age in SATC2 are annoying to hear, the comments about the movie itself (the plot, the drama, etc) are pretty accurate. Halfway through the film, it seems like Carrie, and mostly Samantha, lose their common sense and the strength that makes them so lovable as characters. There's a fine line between Samantha's sexual freedom and downright lack of respect for another culture, and she definitely crossed that line. The movie just didn't have the same feel as the series or the last movie.
As always, the fashion was amazing–and if people are getting worked up over that, they just need to realize that it's like another character in SATC. To criticize the film based on fashion is just ridiculous–of course the clothes and shoes are superficial, but who cares? Without it, Sex and the City wouldn't be Sex and the City. I'm glad I saw the movie but it was disappointing, like many of the reviews say.
about 1 year ago
I object to criticism of the movie based on the age/ appearance of the actors, but I have to strenuously disagree with the idea that the characters were the least bit interesting, ever. If I wanted to write a piece of misogynist propaganda, it would come out looking quite a lot like SatC. Most women I enjoy talking to are appalled by it.
about 1 year ago
"Now I’ll say in advance I haven’t seen Sex and the City 2 yet." – then why did you write this article? you have no idea how good or bad the movie is and you rush out to defend it.
So this is written by a male who thinks sex and the city is funnier than the hangover? ok. i guess that's a matter of opinion but one i don't think most people share. and because we don't share it, we are sexist.
comparing the creators of sex and the city to Judd Apatow is quite possibly the biggest insult to Mr. Apatow that could be leveled his way. Apatow uses clever writing and relatable stories to reach his audience. there is absolutely nothing relatable about the four women from sex and the city. unless of course you're rich, live in new york, have 2000 pairs of shoes and complain and drink constantly. Apatow also accomplishes, in 2 hours, what an entire series and feature length film couldn't and that is write fully realized, three dimensional female characters who aren't superficial, fashion obsessed sex hounds. SATC isn't empowering women. it's dumbing them down and stereotyping them unlike anything else. at the end of the first movie what was it that made Carrie so happy? a giant closet to keep all of her clothes in and a blue pair of shoes… how touching.
i've never heard of a girl who didn't like Wedding Crashers, The Hangover, or Role Models – shit, even Anchorman. in fact, i hear girls quoting those movies constantly. so the question isn't "why do men tear down female dominated movies" but "what are male dominated movies doing better that helps women relate to them as well?" or "what can the creators of SATC learn from other comedies in order to make their films better as a whole"
as far "ageism" goes (great, another PC term we must dance around now) i hear all the time "George Cloony, the sliver fox!" a nickname tied to his age. you hear all the time "Brad Pitt over 40 and looking good!" it's a superficial business, get over it. and no one bashes on Meryl Streep or Helen Miren or Michelle Phifer or Nicole Kidman because they have actual talent and more often than not attach themselves to good, well-respected material. The girls of SATC get bashed because they are terribly unfunny. (just like the blogger's "27 dresses" comment) If you think the "adventurers" of these characters are funny then you just haven't seen enough movies. The Ladies on "FRIENDS" we're funny. Anna Faris is funny. Julia Louis Dreyfus, Sandra Bullock, Sarah Silverman, Tina Fey, all funny. Disliking SATC doesn't make anyone sexist. it makes them realists. because it's garbage. (yes i've seen 3 episodes of the show, and yes i've seen the first movie) I just named 10 women who men can not only tolerate but will pay their own money to go see. it has nothing to do with sexes. it has everything to do with the intelligence of the material. for every guy who likes sex and the city i'll find you one girl who doesn't.
about 1 year ago
You’re so right and thank you for putting this out there. Ageism with regard to women is rife. In the media, any woman over 40 who looks good has ‘for her age’ tacked onto the headline. It’s absolutely infuriating and yes, men can play romantic leads, action heroes etc well into their 50s, even 60s, while women struggle to get decent roles beyond the age of 30. Perhaps it’s down to a strong male agenda, I don’t know – but I think if we want to turn the tide it has to start with women. If you read an article on the internet about, for example, Jennifer Aniston, the amount of negative comments put down by members of the public about her face, figure and personal life are often overwhelming and are frequently written by women. I don’t think men in the public eye have to deal with anything like this level of criticism and, sometimes, cruelty but it’s kind of worse in a way that women would consent to be a part of it. The media encourages us all to look at women in the public eye with the same overly critical eye that we often take to ourselves and, in my opinion, it’s got really out of hand.
about 1 year ago
Oh, and if there was a male agenda tearing down things with a "predominantly female fanbase"… why isn't Twilight being all torn to shreds? It's doing very well. It makes lots of money and the reviews are no more or less critical than any other franchise.
And the Titanic is still one of the best performing films of all time… and that was the quintessential "chick flick." So, I'm thinking you're going to be very disappointed with SATC 2.
about 1 year ago
Richard, first off, traditionally all sequels fail to live up to the original, so lower scores should be expected here. Why are they so low? Maybe the movie sucks? Maybe the themes and presentations that were OK years ago, seem inappropriate today. I mean with the economy being awful, to see a bunch of super rich chicks who haven't figured out how to be happy in marriage and life when money isn't an issue… doesn't make sense. Sure, you can argue marriage is hard, life is weird, bla-bla-bla… but they could certainly afford a good therapist. With all of their resources, the "problems" that are being presented in the film [based on what I've read in reviews] are ultra-superficial.
But to your question of why men seem to attack female fronted movies… it's probably a passive aggressive reaction to how women today abuse, manipulate and control the men in their lives, whether they be husband, boyfriend, father or son… or maybe like everything else us straight men think is stupid [like slow drivers or opera] we simply feel the need to say so. And, just like women do, whenever something seems too popular it comes under a greater level of criticism [remember when J.Lo and Ben Affleck were an item?... man they were hated on].
So, is it sexism to dislike sex and the city? I don't know, is it sexism when my wife says batman, rambo, star wars and video games in general are stupid?
By your logic, it would seem to be. But your logic is faulty here. It's just a matter of taste. Would you call me racist because I don't like Indian food? Is my wife racist because she doesn't like hamburgers? No. It's a matter of taste. Taste is determined in part by culture, but more than anything by physiological make-up and the bodies natural distribution of chemicals and hormones which direct moods, perception etc.
I'm kind of curious what cultural or physiological slant is altering your perception to see sexism instead of distaste?
about 1 year ago
Wait, this was written by a guy? I'm a little shocked. But seriously, I'm not a huge fan of SatC so my opinion probably shouldn't matter on this subject, but maybe the movie's being panned because it isn't any good. I've seen a couple episodes of the show and clips of the first movie, and even though I didn't care for it I understood why people like it. However, after watching a clip of the sequel… this just looks bad. But if you like, more power to you. Watch it, love it, drag your boyfriends or girlfriends or whoever to it. This is America and that's your prerogative.
about 1 year ago
This has to be the biggest pice of bullshit that supports, not deters, sexism. It works both way people. The whole comparison between a 'chick-flick'(a good of term as any) and action films as a huge flaw in your opinion. Most men, view thrillers as fluff, not a guide to how to life your life. If this know what this was, or I should say what it became(at one point it most of done something positive, something). Somehow listening to 40+ women living luxurious, then bitch about how bad their life is. A reality check is in call for. I would love to go on and on and on, but I have better things to do. I don't have time to logically disprove ever statement ever made on this, as stated before, pice of shit. There is more things wrong in this then Hitlers Mein Kampf.
about 1 year ago
I'm not planing to see this movie (the last movie I saw was "Mongol" which will tell you a lot about my taste in film) but I've enjoyed watching reruns of "Sex and the City"on late night TV. I don't really relate to these women but they're certainly amusing and I do love looking at pretty clothes. I think your article is absolutely spot-on. I really hate the idea that these women are dismissed as over-the hill hags when they're good-looking and glamourous. So, the plot sounds really silly, but why condemn these actresses for the dreadful crime of aging when some unattractive old coot like Woody Allen is still celebrated for pursuing young women? I ain't buying it, and I'll bet a lot of other women won't either.
about 1 year ago
This is an awesome article! What's up with all to hate really! I couldn't say it better! I even considered writing an email to Rotten Tomatoes because they had bad reviews way before the movie was released. There are many haters out there who just hate the movie because it has all female leads that are "older" than most actresses in romantic comedies. They do not understand how much pleasure the fans get from every movie and turn the movies into big celebration of fashion and friendship! Uggh!
about 1 year ago
YES! Thank you Richard!. As a "woman of a certain age" it bothers me a great deal that there aren't more women who look like me on screen (age-wise, don't even get me started on color) and the ones we do see are oftentimes relegated to superficial or support roles. I say more power to the SATC girls… and who says you can't still get your groove on at this age??
about 1 year ago
Haven't seen SATC2 yet but you make some very good points. Brad Pitt and George Clooney are the same age as the SATC cast and no one mentions their ages or thinks they can't carry a film.