Hollywood Bitchslap Forum Index Hollywood Bitchslap
Community Forum
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

you like explosions, we like shoes, get over it
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Hollywood Bitchslap Forum Index -> General Movie Talk
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
laura
HBS Monkey
HBS Monkey


Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 2640
Location: austin, tx

PostPosted: Fri May 30, 2008 7:39 pm    Post subject: you like explosions, we like shoes, get over it Reply with quote

OMG, people, stop making so much SATC-inspired social commentary!

Every week there's a new huge mindless action flick in the theaters, and people don't write grand essays about the state of males in the world (at least not to such notice), but the one time a big chick flick grabs national attention, there's a CRISIS WITH THE SHALLOW FEMALE POPULATION!!!!

It's a movie!!! And yes, girls like expensive clothes and shoes and have sexual fantasies, how is that surprising?
_________________
http://www.myspace.com/laurjane
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address
petersob
HBS Monkey
HBS Monkey


Joined: 06 Mar 2005
Posts: 890

PostPosted: Fri May 30, 2008 7:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

In the spirit of compromise, can we just agree to blow up Kim Cattrall?

(I shall proceed with the ducking)
_________________
"Happiness is a state of mind/Anytime you want, you can cross the state line"--Bob Dylan
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Jack Sommersby
HBS Monkey
HBS Monkey


Joined: 12 Dec 2002
Posts: 4440
Location: Helena, Montana

PostPosted: Fri May 30, 2008 10:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Aw, c'mon -- how can you knock "Lassie"?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pKZV1MSldJk


Last edited by Jack Sommersby on Sat May 31, 2008 4:17 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
MP Bartley
HBS Monkey
HBS Monkey


Joined: 16 Jul 2002
Posts: 1947
Location: Sunderland, England

PostPosted: Sat May 31, 2008 3:14 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Despite the fact I've been chuckling all weekend at Peter's review, I actually have some sympathy for your viewpoint, Laura. Having been in a relationship and then a marriage for 5 years, I have over time, seen pretty much every SATC episode probably. And, yes, there are a lot of funny, witty stories across the seasons - Kyle Maclachlan buying a cardboard baby? Slays me every time.

Now, I do think some of the obsessives who claim to be the real-life embodiment of Carrie and revolve their lives around the show and now the film are border-line mentalists, but I'd imagine there's a lot of women looking at their partners in the same way, when Rocky/Die Hard/Indiana Jones/Star Wars whatever got them ejaculating over every trailer.

But I think there's a lot of border-line sexist reviews out there (my God, women like sex? How dare they! That's our thing!), that counter every "OMG it's the most fabulous film in creation!!!" female review. And a lot of those reviews come from those who don't see the hypocrisy in salivating in whatever fanboy icon comes trundling along next. Horses for courses, and all that.
_________________
"We hate the French! We fight wars against the French! Did all those men die in vain on the fields of Agincourt? Was the man who burned Joan of Arc just wasting good matches?"
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
laura
HBS Monkey
HBS Monkey


Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 2640
Location: austin, tx

PostPosted: Wed Jun 04, 2008 5:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

http://efilmcritic.com/review.php?movie=16859&reviewer=369 grr
_________________
http://www.myspace.com/laurjane
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address
William Goss
HBS Monkey
HBS Monkey


Joined: 24 Oct 2005
Posts: 2019
Location: Austin, TX

PostPosted: Wed Jun 04, 2008 5:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Laura Kyle wrote:
The way I see it is there are two breeds of film critic -- the kind that judges a film upon its own merits, and the kind that prefers certain genres. If you belong to the last category and are not a woman, or gay man, you might pull out your own tooth before giving Sex and the City five stars.


So, by that logic, when it comes to this film, no one is allowed in the former category of judging this film upon its own merits, yourself included (who, I must note, couldn't even bring yourself to give the film five stars - how're those pearly whites of yours holding up?).

Laura Kyle wrote:
Sex and the City may not be your cup of tea, but that doesn't mean it's a threat to humanity either.


This part? Totally reasonable.

Laura Kyle wrote:
Let's not only talk about a male's interpretation of Sex and the City, but his misunderstanding of it as well. The film only showcases one stereotypically "promiscuous" character -- Samantha, and she's in a faithful, monogamous relationship in the film.

Miranda and Charlotte are married parents, and Carrie is engaged. So while there's a significant amount of sex, and talk about sex, there is virtually no sluttiness. Taking this into account, Sex and the City comes off as a mature sex comedy, not a brainless sex-obsessed romp.


See above.

Laura Kyle wrote:
Sex and the City is entertainment geared toward audience members with vaginas (and men who wish they had vaginas). And it's well-written, funny, and enlightening entertainment at that!

If I didn't feel the need to rebuttal all the testosterone-pumped reviews that preceded this one, I'd probably write a few paragraphs on the movie's inferiority to the TV show, for instance.

But the fact that Sex and the City has motivated rant after rant about the state of women in modern society doesn't make me sad about the state of women in society... but the state of men.


So, instead of defending a film by posting at least one complete paragraph on its actual merits, you have indeed posted a rebuttal, a rant - one with equally broad disdain and shallow remarks for the opposite gender, evidently driven by nothing more than a reactionary knee-jerk effort to rally against the majority opinion, all quality aside - and not anything like an actual review. In essence, had this film garnered positive attention (by - I dunno - being good), you wouldn't have posted a word.

You fundamentally agree with most male-written reviews, though - it's for women, and gay men, and no straight man out there, because no straight man out there would settle for this. This seems to be law. You're essentially saying that straight men aren't allowed to like it from the get-go, or that we'd all have to want to have vaginas of our own, so why be so grumbly when none of us do in fact like the film that we've been so eagerly excluded from?

Until you can bother to explain why the film is not "smelly dog shit" and instead "a mature sex comedy... well-written, funny, and enlightening entertainment" (and, to clarify, there is apparently no in-between), you've only succeeded at being the equal of every other male reviewer out there.

You go, girl.

P.S. Also, implying that one's opinions of Juno and Sex and the City must be mutually inversive is bogus at best. Plenty love both. Plenty hate both. And I'm certain that there's at least one sensible women out there who breaks that little mold of yours.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
MrTinkles
HBS Monkey
HBS Monkey


Joined: 04 Dec 2002
Posts: 689
Location: Portland

PostPosted: Wed Jun 04, 2008 6:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Not to jump all over Laura here, but, well, I'm going to jump all over Laura.

Quote:
However, if you belong to the first category [film critics who judge films upon their own merits] and still insist that Sex and the City is smelly dog shit, you've decided to ignore the film's target audience. And that's a big, unprofessional mistake.


Maybe we disagree fundamentally about what a critic's job is, but I think a film's target audience is hardly relevant. A review is a critic's description of his or her own experience with the movie. It doesn't matter whether I'm part of the "target audience" (which is often determined by the marketing department, not the filmmaker). The fact is, I saw the movie. My review is my opinion of it. It's not a prediction of what the general consensus will be, or whether the "target audience" will like it. It's a description of whether *I* liked it. And if I've done a good job describing the film, then the people who are in the target audience can determine whether they'd like it, regardless of whether I did.

Furthermore, "judging a film by its own merits" is NOT the same thing as taking into consideration "the film's target audience." I'm well aware that I'm not a woman, nor a SATC TV show viewer, and that no one expected me to like the film anyway. But I can still legitimately find faults with the movie -- judge it by its own merits, in other words -- and point out that it's extraordinarily long, that the story drags, that it's episodic, that it frequently shuts down altogether so that the girls can try on clothes, that most of Carrie's problems (except for the central one) are shallow, and that the Jennifer Hudson subplot goes nowhere and serves no purpose. Those are reasonable assertions for a person to make who is judging the film by its own merits, and they have nothing to do with the target audience -- unless the target audience just doesn't care when movies are too long and have unnecessary subplots. And if they don't, well, shame on them, not me.

(I'll grant you that the target audience in this case probably doesn't mind the frequent shutting down of the story in order to play dress-up. But just because the target audience is willing to overlook huge flaws doesn't mean they aren't flaws anymore.)

I also see no connection between "Sex and the City" and "Juno," except that you wrote knee-jerk reviews of both of them that were more in response to other reviews than to the movies themselves.

Quote:
Sex and the City is entertainment geared toward audience members with vaginas (and men who wish they had vaginas).


This is probably just careless phrasing on your part, but do you really think that gay men -- the other part of SATC's target audience -- wish they had vaginas? I can tell you with some degree of certainty that this is not the case.
_________________
Film reviews, "Snide Remarks," and assorted merriment: EricDSnider.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address MSN Messenger
laura
HBS Monkey
HBS Monkey


Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 2640
Location: austin, tx

PostPosted: Wed Jun 04, 2008 10:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Tons of movies only geared toward straight men and they are welcomed with open arms and not torn apart, but a movie that's geared toward women is criticized for doing just that Goss.

And yes it was more of a feature that a film review and I don't care, ha ha.

Snyder - yes, we do fundamentally disagree about a film critic's role, but remember that I'm not necessarily frustrated at your review (haven't read it) but a lot of reviews I've read that rip the morals of the story apart and not the actual story. I agree with a lot of what you just said, that wasn't the point of my 'review.'

Guys are often willing to overlook pointless action sequences because they are well-done and what they came to see, I'm just expressing that the wardrobe changes in Sex and the City are the same way for women. Don't like it? Fine. But why the "offense" that so many critics have had? That's what I don't get. Crappy movie versus morally offensive movie.

I was exaggerating about the vaginas, you people can be so serious sometimes, seriously!

I am totally about the knee-jerk reaction reviews these days, they're a lot more fun. And honest, in my silly opinion.

Glad to have pressed some buttons!!! You sexist pigs. Smile
_________________
http://www.myspace.com/laurjane
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address
William Goss
HBS Monkey
HBS Monkey


Joined: 24 Oct 2005
Posts: 2019
Location: Austin, TX

PostPosted: Wed Jun 04, 2008 10:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

laura wrote:
And yes it was more of a feature that a film review and I don't care, ha ha.


Well, good thing we've never bothered to make that distinction on this site.

Forget it, Snider...

It's 'ginatown.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
petersob
HBS Monkey
HBS Monkey


Joined: 06 Mar 2005
Posts: 890

PostPosted: Wed Jun 04, 2008 10:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Of course, my review totally kicked ass, right?
_________________
"Happiness is a state of mind/Anytime you want, you can cross the state line"--Bob Dylan
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Alex Paquin
HBS Monkey
HBS Monkey


Joined: 16 Jul 2002
Posts: 1727
Location: Quebecland

PostPosted: Wed Jun 04, 2008 10:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

William Goss wrote:
laura wrote:
And yes it was more of a feature that a film review and I don't care, ha ha.


Well, good thing we've never bothered to make that distinction on this site.

Forget it, Snider...

It's 'ginatown.


Put down this man's name for the Worst Pun of the Year Award. Laughing
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
laura
HBS Monkey
HBS Monkey


Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 2640
Location: austin, tx

PostPosted: Wed Jun 04, 2008 11:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

sorry snider haha

didn't feel worthy of posting an official feature as i haven't done that in a while

calm down ocd goss, a feature-y review will not ruin the reputation of the site
_________________
http://www.myspace.com/laurjane
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address
Rob Gonsalves
HBS Monkey
HBS Monkey


Joined: 19 May 2006
Posts: 2042

PostPosted: Wed Jun 04, 2008 11:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Out of the three reviews you've posted here in the last fifteen months, two of them have been not so much reviews as rebuttals to other people's reviews. Why is that, I wonder.

Also, I wonder who is the "we" who likes shoes and the "you" who likes explosions. That's rather facile gender stereotyping, particularly since there are many women who have no use for the portrayal of women in Sex and the City and many men who want more from movies than explosions.
_________________
But I wish the public could, in the midst of its pleasures, see how blatantly it is being spoon-fed, and ask for slightly better dreams.

- Iris Barry, Let's Go to the Movies, 1926
----------
Shoot him again. His soul is still dancing.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
William Goss
HBS Monkey
HBS Monkey


Joined: 24 Oct 2005
Posts: 2019
Location: Austin, TX

PostPosted: Wed Jun 04, 2008 11:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

So if you dislike a poorly made flick with an exclusive target audience, you're a guy...

And if you decide that contributions to this site, however sly or insightful (or not), shant be posted on the faintest whims with any equivalent degree of flippancy, you're OCD...

Come on, hat trick!

Gosh, it must be nice to solely post with a determined "you people..." slant that almost always applies to the majority of forum frequenters, often in order to rustle up some petty ado, lest these boards grow too restless now...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Rob Gonsalves
HBS Monkey
HBS Monkey


Joined: 19 May 2006
Posts: 2042

PostPosted: Wed Jun 04, 2008 11:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Sex and the City did not get favorable treatment.
_________________
But I wish the public could, in the midst of its pleasures, see how blatantly it is being spoon-fed, and ask for slightly better dreams.

- Iris Barry, Let's Go to the Movies, 1926
----------
Shoot him again. His soul is still dancing.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
William Goss
HBS Monkey
HBS Monkey


Joined: 24 Oct 2005
Posts: 2019
Location: Austin, TX

PostPosted: Wed Jun 04, 2008 11:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Rob Gonsalves wrote:
Sex and the City did not get favorable treatment.


Hmmmm. A most curious theory, Dr. Watson...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Alex Paquin
HBS Monkey
HBS Monkey


Joined: 16 Jul 2002
Posts: 1727
Location: Quebecland

PostPosted: Thu Jun 05, 2008 2:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Full disclosure: I won't see the film. And I don't recall having seen a single episode of that television series.

Nonetheless, what I have heard about it (namely, the franchise in general) is that if it had been men exhibiting the same callous attitude towards women, it would have been taxed with misogyny a long time ago.

Furthermore, I thought that its stock-in-trade glib superficiality had all but perished with the collapse of the Twin Towers. So imagine my surprise not only to find out that the series continued until 2004, but that a film was made out of it four years later. What next, a mockumentary wherein our protagonists spend an hour discussing Manolo Blahnik with Imelda Marcos?

Already the reactions about the show are polarized at Jump the Shark: http://www.jumptheshark.com/topic/Sex-City/Sex-City-General-Comments/1769 . I just imagine the reactions to the movie will be more of the same.

But please carry on. I like a good controversy.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
brianorndorf
HBS Monkey
HBS Monkey


Joined: 13 Jun 2005
Posts: 287

PostPosted: Thu Jun 05, 2008 7:18 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Laura, Logo agrees with you:

http://www.afterelton.com/blog/snicks/was-it-good-for-you-sex-and-the-city-mines-box-office-gold?&comment=42534

Also, I consulted with my wife, and I was assured that women do not have sexual fantasies.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Collin Souter
HBS Monkey
HBS Monkey


Joined: 13 Jul 2002
Posts: 859
Location: Prospect Hts. IL

PostPosted: Thu Jun 05, 2008 7:48 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

What an interesting discussion to wake up to.

I can't say I hate the show. In small, half-hour, bite-sized chunks, the show sometimes worked. Occasionally, it had something interesting to say about sex, being single and relationships. I kinda liked the Miranda character and the guy she eventually ended up with. And I'm pretty honest with myself in that I can attribute the same criticisms of SATC with Entourage, which is basically a male version of SATC. Shallow characters, materialism, promisuity, loose morals, etc. Heck, Entourage even has an entire episode dedicated to shoe shopping!

But I like Entourage more. Is it because I'm a guy? Maybe. Or maybe it's because the writing is sharper and has a little more to do with the film industry than relationships and I'm a sucker for that stuff.

Having said that, I couldn't stand the SATC movie. There have been 25 minute episodes that had more substance than a 145 minutes of this entire film. I tried looking at the movie from someone who hadn't seen the show before and I couldn't think of any reason why anybody outside the fanbase should find these characters interesting. I really don't think it's a sexism thing. I just don't think a lot of people can relate to not having a big enough closet for shoes, which is the first big dramatic shift in the film. Sorry, but I need more if I'm going to latch onto a character or story. That's not to say I can't connect with a materialistic storyline. There's a Christmas movie I really like about a boy who wants a BB gun. So long as it has good writing and engaging characters, I'm fine with it. SATC has neither.

"But the movie is about firendship," which is the defense I keep hearing from women. So was The Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants. I liked that movie and it sure as hell wasn't aimed at me.

Still, I'm glad you wrote the rebuttal, Laura, and helped get the borad jumping again. But yeah, I would have liked it if you discussed what made the movie good instead of just saying why the reviews made you mad.
_________________
Chicago Film Critics Association
Nick Digilio Show, WGN Radio, AM 720
myspace.com/breakupdate


Last edited by Collin Souter on Wed Jul 23, 2008 6:00 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Rob Gonsalves
HBS Monkey
HBS Monkey


Joined: 19 May 2006
Posts: 2042

PostPosted: Thu Jun 05, 2008 7:48 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

From what I understand, the show was a bit more satirical about the ladies' empty, materialistic, man-chasing values than the movie is.

I would also take issue with the retro, binary "only women and gay men will like the movie" theory. "Women"? All women? Lesbians don't exist, I suppose. (Ironically, Cynthia Nixon is a lesbian.) Some lesbians, I'm sure, will enjoy it. Others won't. Some hetero men and women will like it. Others won't. Some gay men will enjoy it. Others won't. Some bisexual men and women will enjoy it. Others won't.

The objection to the film, as far as I can see, aside from its oft-cited narrative and pacing problems, is that it reportedly glorifies a certain kind of heedless, consumerist, very white urban lifestyle. (Yes, Jennifer Hudson is in the film, but from what I gather she's essentially a token and her storyline goes nowhere.) As I said in another thread, to present this as a fantasy for women is sexist in itself. Not to mention classist and racist.

Though I suppose the fantasy may be not so much about "shoes" as about having the luxury of worrying mainly about finding the right shoes and whether the well-endowed rich fellow will commit to you. It looks like kind of a bubble universe. Most women worry about far graver things, especially at the moment.

I just wish a truly feminist film that would inspire women to throw off those old, tired passive princess fantasies would be equally popular and lucrative. Perhaps a Sex and the City sequel would explore what happens when the ladies lose all their money and fancy clothes and have to make do from insufficient paycheck to insufficient paycheck like the rest of us.

It's very weird indeed when the only thoroughly popular pop-culture creation I can think of in the last twenty years or so that has consistently dealt with the specific worries and issues of working-class women was Roseanne. (And when that show nailed it, it really nailed it, particularly in the early seasons.) That show, until it completely jumped the rails and the shark near the end, found humor and humanity in reality. Shoes? Yeah, maybe finding halfway comfortable shoes to wear for a nine-hour shift spent on your feet, if you could afford to replace the old falling-apart ones that week, since the car has broken down and you have no idea where the money's going to come from to deal with that.
_________________
But I wish the public could, in the midst of its pleasures, see how blatantly it is being spoon-fed, and ask for slightly better dreams.

- Iris Barry, Let's Go to the Movies, 1926
----------
Shoot him again. His soul is still dancing.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Slyder
HBS Monkey
HBS Monkey


Joined: 12 Jul 2002
Posts: 1541
Location: Ogden, Utah, USA

PostPosted: Thu Jun 05, 2008 10:32 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

laura wrote:
Tons of movies only geared toward straight men and they are welcomed with open arms and not torn apart, but a movie that's geared toward women is criticized for doing just that Goss.

And yes it was more of a feature that a film review and I don't care, ha ha.

Snyder - yes, we do fundamentally disagree about a film critic's role, but remember that I'm not necessarily frustrated at your review (haven't read it) but a lot of reviews I've read that rip the morals of the story apart and not the actual story. I agree with a lot of what you just said, that wasn't the point of my 'review.'

Guys are often willing to overlook pointless action sequences because they are well-done and what they came to see, I'm just expressing that the wardrobe changes in Sex and the City are the same way for women. Don't like it? Fine. But why the "offense" that so many critics have had? That's what I don't get. Crappy movie versus morally offensive movie.

I was exaggerating about the vaginas, you people can be so serious sometimes, seriously!

I am totally about the knee-jerk reaction reviews these days, they're a lot more fun. And honest, in my silly opinion.

Glad to have pressed some buttons!!! You sexist pigs. Smile


Going by that logic, I wonder why Thelma and Louise wasn't criticized then? Oh wait, it has explosions and women kicking men's arses! Nevermind.
_________________
Slyder
-----------------------------------
I saw more movies at Sundance than Ben Lyons did!!!

You can tell me that I've got no class, look around you and see who's laughing last - Rush
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address MSN Messenger
Rob Gonsalves
HBS Monkey
HBS Monkey


Joined: 19 May 2006
Posts: 2042

PostPosted: Thu Jun 05, 2008 11:30 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thelma & Louise was about something other than airhead wish-fulfillment. I enjoyed it and so did many other males. Many females enjoyed it. Others did not, citing what they felt to be a defeatist denouement.

I just think the whole "you don't like this film because you're this/that/the other" is hopelessly out of touch; it's truly bizarre that we're still hearing it in 2008.
_________________
But I wish the public could, in the midst of its pleasures, see how blatantly it is being spoon-fed, and ask for slightly better dreams.

- Iris Barry, Let's Go to the Movies, 1926
----------
Shoot him again. His soul is still dancing.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
laura
HBS Monkey
HBS Monkey


Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 2640
Location: austin, tx

PostPosted: Thu Jun 05, 2008 11:31 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'm so glad you guys responded, because you just proved my point even more!!!

A few bullet points:

1) I have absolutely no problem with intelligent criticisms of the movie, and I'd probably agree with a good deal of them!

2) My beef was with the mob mentality of the male critics who are quick to call the movie sexist and shallow -- I've read many a review along those lines; I plainly disagree and I think those opinions -- more often than not -- stem from guys who just don't get it and that's because they are guys. I felt it necessary to defend the authentic character of the film and say it's okay for girls to like shoes, just like it's okay for guys to like explosions. Did I make broad generalizations? Of course, and they are clearly just that and I don't regret those sentences. It's a general social commentary, why all of you are getting so hung up on that is amazing to me -- eFilmCritic thrives on those!

3) As a girl, I am a minority here at eFilmCritic and in this thread and in the review, I am playing that role quite willingly. I am talking to you guys as a whole, and not preaching to the choir. So forgive my defense mechanism; I feel my review was necessary to balance it all out.

4) Time and time again you guys just revert back to the fact that the materialistic elements of the film imply some kind of bubble-headed ignorance of reality. First off, I've dealt with more than a few serious life problems and the last thing I want to do is relive them all in a comedy. So okay, Sex and the City is entertaining satire, rather than gritty satire. I don't see how that's a problem! And secondly, I ADORE clothes and do literally go nuts when I see a cute purse. This is how a lot of women are, it IS a reality. Just like my boyfriend turns into a little kid when he sees Star Wars toys.

SPOILERS -- major plot themes: Miranda realizes she's being petty and falsely relying on her own sense of independence by shunning her husband in bed. Carrie learns that a big wedding is not as important as a marriage and compromise is vital to a relationship. We see that Charlotte is still okay with a tubby, bald husband and an adopted kid -- previously she was stuck on that princess fantasy you guys keep talking about. And lastly, Samantha struggles with infidelity and admits to why she's breaking up with her hunky beau; refreshingly honest. How these themes were executed? That's a different debate. But I hardly see a superficial message coming across here.

5) My focus is not really film criticism anymore, I guess when your 40-hour job is copywriting, you have little time and energy to write for fun. I wish I did, but I'm burnt out enough as it is. So the few times I feel compelled to do a review is when I strongly disagree withe majority critical sentiment and feel that some counter opinions are called for and frankly, I think they've been a good element on the site.

6) Goss you know you are a little OCD, but I was only meaning it as a joke. But you kind are, for real, anyways. To a degree!!! You even admitted to me so much a couple of years ago. Smile
_________________
http://www.myspace.com/laurjane


Last edited by laura on Thu Jun 05, 2008 11:45 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address
William Goss
HBS Monkey
HBS Monkey


Joined: 24 Oct 2005
Posts: 2019
Location: Austin, TX

PostPosted: Thu Jun 05, 2008 11:41 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

laura wrote:
It's a general social commentary, why all of you are getting so hung up on that is amazing to me -- eFilmCritic thrives on those!


beginning-of-thread laura wrote:
OMG, people, stop making so much SATC-inspired social commentary!


BTW: when and how did SATC ever qualify as satire? If it were satire, it wouldn't love them for who they are, but would instead mock them.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
laura
HBS Monkey
HBS Monkey


Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 2640
Location: austin, tx

PostPosted: Thu Jun 05, 2008 11:46 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Wow, Goss, it most definitely is satire. Every episode was some date gone wrong due to the guy or the girl's flaws. The movie was a bit more of an update on the characters than the show of course, but you are meant to laugh at the character's modern quirks. Carrie's requirement of a big shoe closet, Samantha's obsession with sex, Charlotte's ruthless prudishness. There was probably a bit more drama in the film just to tie everything up, but the show is most definitely satirical.
_________________
http://www.myspace.com/laurjane
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address
Display posts from previous:   
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Hollywood Bitchslap Forum Index -> General Movie Talk All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Page 1 of 4

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group