Media attempts to whip up male hysteria around the release of the "Sex and the City" movie have been thoroughly peculiar. The assumption appears to be that any guy voluntarily going to see this picture — or, more likely, getting shanghaied into seeing it by the "Sex"-addicted woman in his life — would somehow be sullying his heterosexuality, and, who knows, might soon find himself mooning over a pair of $700 Jimmy Choo sandals, or something. In London, where the movie opened on Wednesday, a columnist for the Evening Standard warned, "If there ever was a time for men to avoid the cinema, this weekend is it."
This is truly stupid, and not just because the movie turns out to be so unexpectedly excellent. Granted, the "Sex and the City" series that ran on HBO for six seasons, from 1998 to 2004, was an urban-girly phenomenon, a window into a bright, chattery world in which women actually talked about things that women actually talk about, and in the earthy terms they actually use. (The show could only have flowered fully on cable; the censored reruns currently airing on TBS are a feeble facsimile of the original series.) The characters were, by most measures, deeply superficial — scene-makers, trend slaves and fashion victims of the most tragic sort. But they had real human complexities, out of which arose very human concerns. And the show was brilliantly written — the dialogue had a snap and bite that surely would have found favor with Howard Hawks or Preston Sturges or any of the other Hollywood screwball masters of yore. It was also beautifully shot — a visual valentine to the iconic delights of New York City (well, make that Manhattan).