To hell with the critics: SATC2is a template for sensible living, says VICTORIA GALLAGHER-O'HOULIHAN
WHY DO film critics take everything so seriously? Don’t they realise that some movies are just supposed to be a bit of fun? Apparently they do not. Instead, these joyless, mostly unmarriageable yobbos always have to bang on about things like story or character or acting or misogyny, things that, frankly, don’t matter a jot to real people like you and me.
I'm talking, of course, about Sex and the City 2. Reading the reviews, you'd think shoe shopping was a crime. Well, it's not. In fact, if we are ever going to cure this recession we keep hearing about, people need to max out their credit cards.
Critics, unfortunately, have no understanding of economics, just as they have no understanding of how much Carrie, Samantha, Miranda and Charlotte mean to us ladies. These women are shining beacons in these dark, depressing times and, far from being “a damning indictment of western extravagance”, they are an endless source of handy tips for good housekeeping.
Let’s look at the evidence. Does Carrie buy Big a new watch for their anniversary? No, she carefully selects a vintage Rolex because in times of recession it’s a really smart investment.
And so what if she kicks up about his gift? By complaining about the flat-screen TV he gives her, she's able to bag that anda black diamond. That's what I call a happy ending.
Similarly, many critics have a problem with the girls heading to the Middle East to stay in a $22,000-a-night hotel. Once again, this is perfectly reasonable behaviour in the current economic climate; it’s not like they’re paying for the limos and manservants out of their own allowances.
As ever, the SATCgirls are blazing a trail for pocketbooks everywhere. Before I became acquainted with this plucky quartet, I thought I would have to work a three-day week in PR. Watching Carrie Bradshaw, I soon realised that I could do 15 minutes of typing for VIPmagazine or the back of the Sindoand earn a pot of money, leaving me free to lunch with the girls or fly to Marrakesh with gentleman callers whenever salon appointments permit.
But the critics, a miserable bunch at the best of times, simply cannot or will not understand the sensible lifestyle choices outlined by SATC.
Who cares if the second movie isn’t as good as the first one? And who cares if the girls are really, really old now? Being well brought up, I was always taught that we should help the aged, not send them away, especially not when they’ve had work done to rectify the situation.
It is unfair of these film journalists to look past all the great things SATC2 stands for just because it's "vacuous" or "homophobic" or "sexist and racist". I mean, really, what's wrong with being sexy and racy? Nothing, I hope. Or I could be in real trouble.
