Hill Country News: Serving Cedar Park, TX

‘Sex and the City' not as great as the series

My husband I have little in common. I often appease myself with the whole opposites attract thing, but in reality, we are complete polar opposites. Still, occasionally we find a few things we both like and/or agree on. The famed HBO series “Sex in the City” was one of a handful of shows we both enjoyed and we would watch it together - religiously. He was pretty upset when I told him I planned to take my best friend to the screening of the “Sex in the City” movie which brings Carrie, Miranda, Samantha and Charlotte back, getting fans up-to-date with the four New York City socialite friends. I had to tell my friend that her seat would go to my husband. My male critic friends chided him for wanting to come to the screening and still, my man smiled, took his seat and watched eagerly. While both of us enjoyed it for the most part, we agreed (another small wonder) that it was not all we hoped for.

Based on the book by Candace Bushnell, the long-running series astutely focused on four New Yorkers who ideally represent different types of women: cutely curious Carrie (Sarah Jessica Parker); perpetually man-prowling Samantha (Kim Cattrall), brainy; brittle and all too caustic Miranda (Cynthia Nixon) and conservative, super optimistic Charlotte (Kristin Davis). Fans of the show know the series ended with all four ladies either married or in settled relationships, and the movie picks up several years after that point. Because time has passed and the gals' relationship struggles were a major focus of the series, the overall dynamic has changed.

The ladies are older - Samantha turning 50 and Carrie in her 40s - and as we all know, things change as we age. Now Carrie is preoccupied with her upcoming marriage to longtime beau Mr. Big (handsome Chris Noth); Samantha valiantly resists her nearly uncontrollable nymphomania as she struggles to remain faithful to her hunky, super busy soap star boyfriend Smith (Jason Lewis); Miranda contends with her completely non-existent libido, her biting attitude and Steve's straying (David Eigenberg); and Charlotte is as should be nearly euphoric with husband Harry (Evan Handler) and their adopted daughter.

I have twice mentioned Miranda's scathing attitude in the series. She was always the naysayer and pessimist in the lot, so I shouldn't be surprised that this carries into the film, but she really is like acid on bare skin on the big screen, so much so that I liked the movie less than I might have otherwise. It doesn't help that Steve is a sniveling, spineless man - this, too, augmented in the film. The other ladies fall pretty close to the mold set by the show too, leading us to several of the issues that are the movie's focus. True fans completely understand why when Samantha tries to live in a world totally different from what is truly “her” she is nearly driven crazy and why Charlotte fears that her absolute happiness will suddenly end. Carrie, too, is every bit true to form, especially as she plans her trendy wedding - complete with a “Vogue” cover shoot in various designer gowns.

Former Idol contestant and Oscar winner Jennifer Hudson joins the cast as Carrie's assistant Louise and she is wholly unnecessary, and truthfully, without call for her to belt out a song, it becomes all too obvious she needs more polish as an actress. As the final credits roll she can be heard singing a song from the soundtrack.

The movie makes a few missteps like slow, dragging bits and some silly unnecessary gags in poor taste. Like a ridiculous running gag of a dog - Samantha's new companion - that humps everything in sight and a scene in Mexico where the girls are on Carrie's un-honeymoon and the over-careful, pristine Charlotte suffers an embarrassing case of Montezuma's revenge. Why resort to tasteless when you have a pat formula for mature humor? I don't get it.

I loved seeing the memorable characters and the stars certainly look like they enjoyed being together again. When I screened it, the audience - mainly women - appeared to relish the familiarity and fun of it all, even when it lagged badly in the middle of its nearly two and a half hour running time.

“Sex in the City,” rated R for sexual content and nudity, entertained me more than it disappointed, but it did not match my expectations. I hoped for more, so I am placing a C in my grade book. On one hand it was nice seeing the ladies again - all near my age - and to find out what happened next. On the other, I wish they had done a slightly better job getting there.