"Sex and the City" culminated its march into theaters with a big, New York City premiere at Radio City Music Hall. The film hits theaters this Friday and I'm still torn. On the one hand, I loved the show and all its irritating storylines so I feel like I have to see it. On the other, I can sit in my house and watch the dvds, which is a. cheaper and b. might be more enjoyable. Will a full-length movie be TOO much "Sex?"
So far the film has got a 67% rating at Rotten Tomatoes, but it's early. Variety's review hit home with what I've been thinking:
"For a series so steeped in romance, the eagerly awaited “Sex and the City” movie feels a trifle half-hearted. Although there’s pleasure in seeing HBO’s fabulous four reunited, writer-director Michael Patrick King doesn’t fully bridge the gap between TV and film — delivering major story flourishes but, too often, playing like a regular episode bloated to five times its customary length."
This movie is almost 2 1/2 hours long? That sounds like a big commitment to me. And I won't even be able to pause when I inevitably have to take a bathoom break. Hmmm, I'm going to have to think about this.
In the meantime, the ladies all donned their finest last night, to varying degrees of success. SJP and Kristin Davis looked lovely. Kim Cattrall and Cynthia Nixon? Less so.
Photo Source