Ebert FTW
June 3, 2008
by Nate
Ebert's got some great lines in a recent blog post, responding to a reader who agreed that the Sex and the City movie sucked, but urged him to check out the series should he have the opportunity:
I regret, Ian, that I will never have the opportunity. Wild horses could not drag me to the opportunity. SATC is so definitely not my cup of tea that, for me, it is not tea at all, and does not come in a cup.
Comments
On June 3 at 5'19 PM
, Mike Helland wrote:
Just curious, but who is the Leibniz fan that chose the name for this blog?
I was wondering what relation there is to Leibniz and movie reviews.
On June 3 at 5'55 PM
, Nate wrote:
I am he! I give a brief defense of my choice of name on my about page, but, really, I just think Leibniz is awesome, and chose to name my personal blog after him. I like to think, however, that Leibniz would be a big fan of movies, were he alive today. (I imagine him as a huge Sergio Leone fan, honestly.)
On June 5 at 6'06 PM
, Amanda wrote:
I enjoy the series Sex and the City and more for the character development and the friendships between the women than the sex or outfits and shoes. The blanket rejection and disdain I encounter from so many people who have never seen a single episode of the show on moral or whatever grounds reminds me of your post about Woody Allen: http://monadology.net/archives/movies/woody_allen_is_a_creepy_old_ma.php
The movie was disappointing in certain ways though. The plot would have worked better as two half-hour episodes of the show than as a feature film. This seems to be a constant problem with moving television shows to the big screen.
On June 6 at 8'59 AM
, Nate wrote:
It’s certainly possible that many people criticize SATC for poor reasons. I must admit, though, that having watched more than two seasons of the show while in Cameroon, I can only echo Ebert’s sentiment. I, of course, would not have expressed it so cleverly, which is really the point of this post.
On June 9 at 9'39 AM
, Joseph Method wrote:
I have actually seen SATC in the theater with Amy. For this I earned 10 points, which I plan to cash in on Hellboy II. It also covers some back payments on Aliens v. Predator II and the second Resident Evil film.
On June 9 at 9'40 AM
, Joseph Method wrote:
Also, I kind of liked it.
On June 13 at 1'20 AM
, Robbie wrote:
I was somewhat similarly compelled to see it, Method. And I about agree with your evaluation. I don’t think I’d see it again, and I wouldn’t have minded if it were shorter, but it had its moments. I think the pointing to the women’s friendship in #3 above is right on, and may be central to the show’s popularity. I can’t remember her name, but — the cute one? brown hair? married to the bald guy? — her response to Big (especially in the initial moment, but later on too) was genuinely touching to me, and I couldn’t have been any less invested in the show or its characters coming into it. The friendships are what it’s about, I think. And the showcasing of NYC doesn’t hurt.
(Samantha’s character is distractingly impossible, though. Maybe she stands in for a psychological need, but not for a real human being. Christina Aguilera’s take on SNL was perfect: she’s a dude. Not just male. A dude.)
I also got a kick out of the audience, and the chorus of laughter at every joke and gag with not a male voice discernible. It seemed to be mostly middle-aged moms in small groups, and it was awesome.