Sex And The City Movie Sequel Spoilers
Posted by: Annika Harris
Filed in:
news
12:30PM, Tuesday March 31st 2009
If you’re a die hard “Sex and the City” fan and would watch Carrie and company no matter how much the plot sucks, then don’t click through. But in case your trying to decide whether to relinquish $10 or more to watch them beat this dead horse, we’ve gathered all of the rumors about the sequel that we can get our hands on. POSSIBLE SPOILER ALERT!
TheFrisky.com is part of the Turner Sports and Entertainment Digital Network
WinkyFace
wrote on March 31 2009 @ 01:07 pm: [report]
This sounds terrible. And they already did the whole “he cheated and it’s terrible but they really love each other and are MFEO” in the first one, with Miranda and Steve. Can’t they do something more original?
AgentBeryllium
wrote on March 31 2009 @ 01:17 pm: [report]
OK. They have said this in the last movie that someone would die. Is anyone dead. Nope. Why? Because they are still cashing in on that cow.
vanya
wrote on March 31 2009 @ 02:37 pm: [report]
Maybe they’ll all drive over a cliff together in a convertible?? Oh, wait… that’s been done already, in a much better film.
shoeluvher
wrote on March 31 2009 @ 03:36 pm: [report]
Charlotte’s having another baby??
Alabama
wrote on March 31 2009 @ 08:29 pm: [report]
For those of us who would have to pay $12.50, not $10, this sounds even less worthwhile! It would be such a shame if the memory of the show is tarnished further by a terrible sequel to the mediocre first movie.
40yrolddad
wrote on April 1 2009 @ 08:09 am: [report]
as seems to be my habit lately I’m going to offer an opinion that might not prove popular: I just saw the 1st 1/2 of the 1st one last night (up to rehearsal dinner) & I gotta say so far it’s a bit of a yawner. I’ve seen every episode of the series (most 2x or more) & we have the entire series on DVD so it’s not like I don’t know the characters/their stories (quite the contrary). SWMBO went w/her girlfriends so I missed it in theater & just happened to tag in on HBO last night. basically, it feels (to me anyway) like they toned it way DOWN from the show - almost like the edited for TV atrocities they ran on TBS. didn’t see the Steve cheating thing coming but other than that it’s been pretty boring/predictable (if anyone didn’t know that was Smith bidding by phone I have a bridge for sale).
hopefully it picks up from where I left off and/or the sequel’s better - sorry if this offends anyone…
sklut
wrote on April 1 2009 @ 11:02 am: [report]
The first one wasn’t HORRIBLE, it was just… a longer version of the show really. As an avid watcher and fan i’ll probably go see the sequel just because, well I don’t know why, but I will. It’s the type of movie you have to just watch and not think about. If you think about it you ruin it for yourself because it is pretty predictable.
40yrolddad
wrote on April 1 2009 @ 12:26 pm: [report]
it isn’t HORRIBLE (at least 1st hr hasn’t been), just disappointing as a screen adaptation of one of the edgiest shows in the history of television. I know this is comparing apples & oranges but when Trey & Matt made the South Park movie they completely took the gloves off/took no prisoners & the result was one of the funniest things to ever see the inside of a theater. Sex kind of went in the opposite direction - lots of “bling” w/the music & clothes (& apartment & closet) but the stories are seriously blanded down from the series…
Alabama nailed it: a mediocre disservice to a pillar of the golden age of HBO original programming - let’s hope David Chase has good $ managers & doesn’t end up needing a quick buck…
DancerNinja
wrote on May 20 2009 @ 07:36 am: [report]
I definitely enjoyed the show more than the movie. Some things are best at 40 min intervals. SATC is one of them. The show was like a gobstopper for my brain, and the movie was like a diabetic coma overload. Oh well, I’ll continue re-watching the TV episodes with my girl friends and I’m sure we’ll don heels and what not to see the movie out of sisterhood ritual.