07/05/2007
"Sex and the City" Movie Talk, Yet Again
Variety is reporting that the long-rumored film adaptation of "Sex and the City" may very well happen this time, with New Line Cinema close to a deal to finance and distribute a feature version of the famed HBO comedy.
The show's key stars, Sarah Jessica Parker, Kim Cattrall, Kristen Davis and Cynthia Nixon, have all agreed to appear in the film, which according to plans will go into production this fall. Michael Patrick King will direct from his own script.
From the minute the show about four gay men single women and their friends living in Manhattan went off the air in 2004, rumors of a "Sex and the City" feature have been virtually nonstop. For a long time, the main holdout was Cattrall, though Variety suggests that her eventual contract for the feature included script input and a contract for a future series deal at HBO. (How Samantha of her!)
Love me some "Sex and the City" but I can't help but think this ship has already long sailed. My brother's suggested working title for the film? "New Hag City." Ouch.
Posted 3:43 PM EST by Kenneth Walsh in Television | Permalink
Like it?
Subscribe to FREE Towleroad daily headlines with our RSS feed!
RECENT STORIES:
Comments
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
How about
"Menopause & The City"
or
"Out of Work Actresses & The City"
Posted by: oh well | Jul 5, 2007 4:03:19 PM
How about "Golden Girls"
Posted by: Greggie | Jul 5, 2007 4:05:44 PM
I have a hard time imagining that a Sex/City movie will be a big hit. The series was magic, but now it's over. I think it might be better to leave it as a bright, sparkely memory, instead of risking a movie that could flop.
Posted by: sam | Jul 5, 2007 4:14:43 PM
can't imagine spending cinema dollars to see a TV movie.
definitely a rental.
Posted by: A.J. | Jul 5, 2007 4:29:24 PM
Someone please tell Kim that before SATC, she was basically a C-list actress and 3 years after the show ended she's back in the C-list. What has she done since the series ended that was note-worthy?
Posted by: gabe | Jul 5, 2007 4:31:40 PM
I'm sure many will see it, even myself though I was never a typical viewer. I think it'll depend on what we hear of the story, the impending rating of the movie, and how much of Jason Lewis we'll get to see.
Posted by: Rob (lrdarystar) | Jul 5, 2007 4:33:34 PM
The movie won't be a huge hit. But after it runs in theatres they will cut it into 4 episodes and they will be put in reruns with all the rest.
Carrie better wind up with Big again or else!
Posted by: whatever | Jul 5, 2007 4:41:20 PM
I have to agree w/ Rob about seeing more of Jason Lewis!
Posted by: Allen | Jul 5, 2007 4:44:34 PM
Ouch all you bitches! So much hate!
But you're kind of right. I loved that show, but it was very much a point in time. They did what single girls, with (unexplained) certain means do in New York, but that time has passed that group by. I might see it, just because, but I think it needs to be confined as a period piece, and not revived. Carrie, without Big, could not afford her, or any other, apartment and shoe budget in New York in 2007.
Posted by: So Left I'm Right | Jul 6, 2007 12:04:28 AM
Big deal.
Posted by: FanGirlHater | Jul 6, 2007 1:04:35 AM
Doesn't it have to have a plot?
Posted by: David | Jul 6, 2007 3:53:57 AM
Ow, bit harsh about Kim - you can't say Mannequin wasn't a big hit in its day, and Big Trouble in Little China is a classic of the genre (though, admittedly, the Western-meets-Eastern kung-fu supernatural actioner is a pretty small genre.) As for what she's been doing since then, she's been solidly appearing in plays in the West End in London to generally high acclaim (don't get no bimbos doing Mamet) - she's certainly been doing better than SJP (hateful acronym) - "The Family Stone", or "Failure to Launch" anyone? (the latter's name so ludicrous and prophetic that it doesn't need comment) - and what are those perfumes, "Lovely" and "Bitten" (as in, "off more than her minor celebrity can chew)?
As for the film, why not scrape a few more dollars together while there's still a faint interest in their former characters? But really, it would've been more dignified to leave the corpses in the grave...
Posted by: JohnJ | Jul 6, 2007 9:54:00 AM
I guess they don't need to use the same actors. The idea might work with twentysomethings.
Posted by: anon (gmail.com) | Jul 6, 2007 10:42:00 AM
God please no!
Posted by: soulbrotha | Jul 6, 2007 3:16:07 PM
Great blog congratulations!come visit our site and see amazing free on line movies www.zigbr.com
my site is the best in the world
Visit the best free vids site on the net
Posted by: video | Jul 13, 2007 1:15:37 PM