The critics have spoken – “Sex and the City 2″ won’t be bringing home any Oscars early next year.
But the film’s Razzie chances couldn’t be higher.
It’s hardly news when critics scorch a new film en masse, but the level of animosity toward “SATC2″ seemed excessive even by snarky film critic standards.
Is there something else at play, considering most film critics are male and the film is heavily skewed toward female film goers?
WWTW checked in with two veteran female critics to get their reactions.
Carrie Rickey, film critic and blogger for the Philadelphia Inquirer, found reviews of the film by industry giants like Roger Ebert and A.O. Scott of The New York Times over the top.
“It’s a fantasy film. No one harshes ‘Iron Man’ for being populated with bubbleheads [as Ebert criticized 'SATC 2']. No one criticizes ‘Iron Man’ for its privileged characters exercising their privileges [as Scott did],” Rickey says via email.
Female critics still felt compelled to smite the new film all the same, she says.
“I myself felt it was overlong, borderline racist and poorly directed. But it made me laugh,” she says.
She thinks the film shows a genuine “gender divide” amongst film critics. She recalls the reaction to the 2005 Ashton Kutcher/Amanda Peet rom “A Lot Like Love” as another example.
“It was slammed by all the male critics and got positive reviews reviews from Carina Chocano, Manohla Dargis and me,” she says.
Tricia Olszewski, film critic for the Washington City Paper in D.C. says “SATC2″ deserves every bit of scorn heaped upon it.
“They turned the characters into cartoons – Samantha in particular, who’s going through menopause and says things such as ‘Lawrence of my labia!’ while they’re in Abu Dhabi,” Olszewski says.
The opening gay wedding sequence blasted “every homosexual stereotype” at full volume, she adds.
“I think the vitriol stems from it being not just a thumbs-down, but an incredibly over-the-top, tone-deaf, sometimes offensive, and overwhelmingly humorless misfire,” she says.
And that, it would seem, is something both male and female critics can agree upon.
(Photo: The new film “Sex and the City 2″ starring Sarah Jessica Parker is getting horrible reviews, but could gender preferences be partly to blame?)
Related posts:
on 
on 
{ 2 comments… read them below or add one }
A great post, Christian, and I am sorry I could not give you my thoughts earlier today. As I watched the film (and watched, and watched, boy, it is long), I was annoyed because it is crass and smug and slow and dumb (Charlotte falls off a camel?). And yet, several times, I found myself smiling, and that is why I gave the film a B- (which, in my ranking means that the film’s target audience is likely to be slightly disappointed but find it worth seeing). It’s like playing Barbies — with Kens that are functional.
One thing that occupied my attention during the long slow parts of the film (like the clanging howlers of those awful puns and the Lucy and Ethel hijinks) was musing about the ways it departs from many women-centered films. As I noted in my review, it is unusual in that the focus is not on the romantic relationships but the friendships. Carrie, Miranda, and Charlotte love their husbands but they don’t seem to confide in them or welcome confidences. Their husbands are there to make sure they don’t have to feel any anxiety about whether they will find a guy and to serve as arm candy and providers of co-parenting services and lovely gifts. But they get their soul-sustaining intimacy from each other. Ultimately, I think that is something women respond to differently from men, whose closest friendships are not based in the same kind of conversations. And that’s one reason men and women respond differently to this movie.
A lot of women critics did hate the film. Tricia posted a link to a hilariously excoriating review from Lindy West (http://www.thestranger.com/seattle/burkas-and-birkins/Content?oid=4132715). I think the women who hated it felt that it let them down from what was best about the series. I think in general the men who hated it may be reflecting a certain sense in the film that men are merely accessories.
Good follow up from your earlier post about his, Mr. WWTW. Also, fantastic comment, Nell. Very informative and thought-provoking. Thank you both!