You’d think after announcing my revised once-a-week schedule, I would have taken better advantage of my time to produce a new comic for you first thing Monday morning. My apologies that it didn’t happen.
I think part of me is still wrestling with my decision. Well, maybe not wrestling. “Adapting” is probably a better word. I didn’t really know what to do with myself on Tuesday or Thursday night when I wasn’t staying up until 3:00 in the morning working on a comic. By the time the weekend rolled around, I felt like I was completely out of practice!
I will say this, however. The extra time allowed me the opportunity to think up a few different punchlines to this comic and the final result is MUCH better than what you would have gotten originally when I was under deadline and firing from the hip. I won’t say what the original idea was. Just trust me that this one is better.
Before going any further, I wanted to take a moment to thank EVERYONE for their comments last week here on the site, on Facebook and on Twitter as well. I didn’t receive a single negative comment and that is really a credit to you guys. I received a few messages where people expressed disappointment. But no message expressing outright disgust or anger.
Truthfully, I don’t think the majority of you are even capable of that. But the internet is a pretty big place and you know how it works with negative comments – one jerk’s thoughtless comments can wipe out a dozen understanding, supportive, thoughtful replies.
But like I said, there wasn’t ANYTHING negative. You guys totally understand where I’m at in my life right now and the needs I have to address. It was a load off my mind that you guys recognized the effort required to produce Theater Hopper three time a week and could weigh that appropriately against the real life responsibilities I need to focus on now.
Thank you.
Okay, so with that said, can we talk about Sex and the City 2 for a minute? I’ve been dying to talk about it.
Now, I know I will probably catch a little grief for how I chose to portray the four women from the movie in today’s comic. They came out looking a little grotesque, but that’s because I drew them from memory.
I will admit that it was a conscious decision, though. Because these actresses – and more specifically, their characters – have become gross caricatures of spoiled American 40-SOMETHINGS that need to be stopped.
When the trailer for this movie came out, did it not look like the most insulting piece of excrement you ever saw?
And before I go too deep down the rabbit hole, let me first confess that I’m not a SATC hater. My wife watched the show religiously and watched several of the episodes right along with her. It wasn’t always my cup of tea, but I frequently found it entertaining and kept up with the individual story lines. I knew what was happening in these characters lives.
So, when the first movie came out, we went. I thought it was so broad and laughably over the top (Carrie dropping her jewel-encrusted and monogrammed cell phone in slow motion when Mr. Big gets cold feet at their wedding, Charlotte literally crapping herself in Mexico), I didn’t think anyone would be dumb enough to green-light a sequel.
Yet, here we are, two years later and this time the ladies have spirited away to Abu Dhabi so they can get away from their husbands and children so they can pretend to be the free-wheeling party girls they were OVER A DECADE AGO.
Now, when the original series ended in 2004, I will admit that it betrayed the core concept of the series that women act like men and avoid emotional detachment in their relationships. But the alternative is way, WAY worse. Because no one wants to see a women in her mid-40’s trotting around with a drink in their hands trying to pick up hot guys.
Sidebar: KIM CATTRALL IS 54 YEARS-OLD! Wanna know how old Rue McClanahan – who played the sex-crazy Blanche Devereaux – was when The Golden Girls premiered in 1985? SHE WAS 51 YEARS-OLD!!!
To me, Sex in the City 2 represents the most worthless, self-centered attitudes about Americans. The me-first mentality that permeates so much of our culture. This would be okay if the film didn’t feel it was important that you actually ROOT FOR the lead characters. I like to imagine a world where the producers of Sex in the City 2 saw fit to laugh at and ridicule these incredibly shallow, materialistic dum-dums for two hours rather than try to pull the wool over the audiences eye’s with faux-glamor and faux-romance.
Am I being harsh on the film? Undoubtedly. Have I seen the film? Not at all. Is this fair? Not in the slightest. Do I care? Absolutely not. And judging by the 15% “fresh” rating the film received from Rotten Tomatoes, I’m not far off-base with my criticisms.
People can smell a stinker a mile away. Sex in the City 2 had “shameless money grab” written all over it from the moment it was announced. If you pay money to see this film, you will get everything you deserve from it.
Hmm… That took a decided sour turn, didn’t it? I hate to leave you on that note. Let’s try a little mental exercise. I want you to think of a gorilla in a wearing party hat and swim trunks riding a unicorn in a field of cotton candy. Kind of hard NOT to think about that now, isn’t it?
Alright! There you go! Thanks for waiting for today’s update. Be sure to stay on top of things buy subscribing to Theater Hopper’s Facebook and Twitter accounts.
Oh, and it probably wouldn’t hurt to subscribe to Theater Hopper’s RSS feed, while you’re at it!
Do you have any thoughts about Sex and the City 2? What about Prince of Persia: Sands of Time (which got a cursory mention in today’s comic)? If so, leave your comments below! We have the week to hash things out now, so fire away!
There's a reason for that, actually...
GIVE US THE DAGGER! We will release The Sands of Time, reverse time and drink cosmopolitans for eternity!
“Am I being harsh on the film? Undoubtedly. Have I seen the film? Not at all. Is this fair? Not in the slightest. Do I care? Absolutely not”
HAHAHA awesome stuff. I agree with you 100% and I think the comic today was one of your best! keep up the good work 🙂
Samantha would certainly be all about dropping the menopause so she doesn’t have to use so many creams and ointments.
Yes, I saw the movie on preview night. But it was free, and they boozed me up before hand.
There isn’t enough Jack Daniels in the world that could make Sex and the City 2 watchable.
Is it just me, or were the roles reversed last weekend? It felt like Sex and the City was the big “event” movie and Prince of Persia was simply the counter-programming. “Did the wife or girlfriend let you off the hook this weekend? Don’t have a wife or girlfriend? Come on down to see our little video game movie!”
Of course, I didn’t see either, so what do I know?
Great comic, Tom. I also thought that the caricature you did of the girls. It fits the tone of the comic, and was effective.
As for Sex and the City 2, I was a little floored that they were actually planning a sequel. I watched the series in disjointed bits, but actually thought it was a decent show. I felt that the show ended on a good note, and had a sense of finality behind it. The first movie I felt was unneeded, and really just broke all of the finality that was held in the series.
The second movie just seems like it is trying to rehash the same thing, and seems pointless. I mean, Carrie doubting her relationship with Big? How many times can we see that before we realize they aren’t meant to be together.
I’m trying to think of what it is Kim Catrall reminds me of in the comic picture with that upturned nose…
On the topic of movies I heard, though it could be garbage, that a prequel is being planned where SJPs character is 17 when these four idiots first met which is part three of shameless money grab. The part that disturbed me is that SJP is apparently fighting the people to cast her as her 17 year old self… if true that is some serious denial.
More importantly I enjoyed Prince of Persia, it had decent pacing, fairly good humour and enough trappings to keep it fairly faithful but it does have that bruckheimer shaky cam, fights are meaningless blurs crap everyone (except Bruckheimer I guess) in the world hates.
I would almost want to see here try to play the character at 17, just to see the manont of CG they would need to pull that off.
Ha, ha! Yeah! Because that “de-aging” CGI they used on Patrick Stewart in X-Men 3 was not jarring AT ALL! 🙂
From reading the reviews it sounds like instead of the writers including conflict, the characters go on vacation to run away from their problems.
I’m with you Tom, 100%, thanks for expressing my opinions much more coherently/cohesivly than I could have! lol. I hadn’t heard anything about the SATC2 movie even being in production until I caught the trailer on commercial. Even my wife and mother who were all about the series and the first movie were like “Really? Why?” so if that was the general reaction of actual fans, I totally expect this piece of garbage to bomb.
Same as you MJay, I had no idea there was a Sex And The City 2 until I saw a trailer last week for it. Fortunately, my girlfriend was more interested in seeing Prince Of Persia (or at least knew that I wanted to see it as well), which was good. Not found the time to see it yet, but will be sure to come back with my thoughts when I have.
Love the observation, Tom … it’s such a welcome breath of fresh air after the faux-glam sycophants on the radio who overlook the movie’s obvious egocentrism for the sake of their princess fantasies. Here’s hoping that someone (maybe SNL or Lonely Island) can give the aging party-girls the reality check they need.
I love Sex and the City. The Tv show was amazing and I even enjoyed the first movie with all its mellow drama. I was cautious about them making a second one since all the stories were pretty well wrapped up. But the previews looked fun and as a hard core fan, I had to go. Man I was dissapointed. The film was SUPER mellow dramatic to the point that I just didn’t care and I wanted them to get over themselves. There were funny moments but they were short lived. I don’t have a problem with them being older though. I like that they can still be sexy and sassy at their age. I enjoyed watching the fashion and the glamor which is all part of the show. I know I will never afford those kinds of things but I don’t care. I like watching the girls decked out in Dior and Jimmy Choo. SATC2is crap compared
I don’t have a problem with the characters aging, either. So long as they act age-appropriate. Having them run around the desert like spoiled 30-somethings is just SAD.
They should have renamed this movie “TWILIGHT MOMS” and been done with it.
Tom, since when are you the judge and jury of who’s acting sad? Maybe you should move to Hollywood and be a consultant on the matter for all the movie studio! 😉
I never said I was an expert. But I know it depresses me to see anyone in that kind of denial.
To the show but it will never ruin my love for the franchise. Carrie for life!
Ug…. I’ve seen the Sex and the City series, and the first film. This second film absolutely feels like a money grabber. Three of them are married (Samantha might as well be), two of them have children. WHY are they running off to a country that would love to stone women like them (they weren’t allowed to film there, by the way, because the movie had “sex” in its title; they filmed in Morocco), to act like they do in the first few seasons (pre-hubbies and kids)? It doesn’t make ANY sense. And then they try to inject new drama (ie: Aidan), when there was already total resolution on the last film. There’s NO REASON for this movie to have been made, when taking into regard story and resolution.
Newflash everyone… Every single movie shown on the big screen is a “cash grab”! You’re telling me people weren’t tired of Shrek three movies ago? You’re also telling me that whatever studio made Iron Man 2 didn’t make it for the money? Also, what’s so wrong with making a movie that some people want to see?
What I find worse than women acting like spoiled 40-somethings is people who put down every single thing they don’t like that aren’t frankly targeted at them.
Oh, and about your 1-comic a week, I’m sad about it Tom, but I totally understand. I hope you’re eventually able to come back to 3-comics a week, but we’ll take whatever you can offer us. Keep up the good work!
How about amending the idea of a cash grab? The original indy trilogy was great and I gave money several times for with the VHS boxset and then the DVDs. The fourth one was not worth it so people gave him money and got something of lesser worth in return… theft by a lack of creator integrity.
Yes, Andre. Every movie is a cash grab. But some of them do a better job of obscuring it than others by – y’know – paying attention to the plot or having the characters behave in a manner that is consistent with previous interactions.
I’m not putting Sex and the City down because it wasn’t targeted to me. Like I said, I watched the show. I was familiar with the characters and their relationships. I was invested.
This sequel seems to spit on that time investment by reducing the characters to the worst versions of themselves.
If they want to save a lot of money on the 3rd movie when the ladies meet at 17 they can just re-edit parts of “Square Pegs” for the young Sarah Jessica Parker scenes. Then no one has to be cast to play the young Carrie.
The young Kim Cattral scens could be cut from “Porky’s”.
Do you think the third movie will be called “Sex in the City 3 : Cash Grab”?
Actually, I kind of expected the sequel to Wall Street to be called “Cash Grab.”
I just dont GET the whole debacle about Sex and The City. Yeah, it wasnt the worst show ever made, but the way media played up the actresses and characters like something to aspire to… I mean, who actually finds Sarah Jessica Parker attractive? She’s rail thin, and her face looks like a foot. Not to mention that they, like Tom said, often behaved like spoiled jerks, and we were still supposed to root for them.
Informed attractiveness indeed
It centres around how being an asshole is supposed to bee something you aspire to as a liberated woman… I’m an asshole but my gender means it is bad. Just one of those feminist double standards.
This is probably appropriate:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/tim-siedell/a-review-of-emsex-and-the_b_593554.html
@Andre
I don’t think every movie released in major theatres is a cash grab. Take this for example: Charles Dickens was the most popular novelist of the 1800’s. He made lots of money off of his novels, but he wasn’t writing for money. Even so, when Americans cheated him out of money by avoided copyright fees due to the stupid copyright laws of the time–Americans didn’t pay fees when they published a book written outside the US–he was pissed, and told them he was. Just because a person expects to get paid for their work doesn’t mean they’re in it for money alone. Another Dickens example: A Christmas Carol–perhaps the greatest Christmas story every told beside the actual Christmas story, of course–was written for nothing more than money. He was low on cash due to lack of sales on Martin Chuzzlewit and wrote it to make some quick money. It didn’t really work, but he still took the time to write a good novel–one of his best-remembered and best-loved. That’s the difference between Sex in the City 2 and say. . .Iron Man 2. Sequels are always made for the money, but not all of them suck because of it.
Going with comments on the second pairing, and with the preface that I’ve yet to see this (and I never will as it personally offends me), lets talk about Prince a bit.
Its a video game to movie adaption, and I use the adaption word lightly, so its going to suck.
Get any other thoughts out of your head, basement your expectations. That way if in fact it is good (crazy thought I know) you can be surprised. You may be asking yourself ‘why the bitterness? Sure, most video game to movie adaptations suck, but this one might be ok.’ And I’m with you, it actually looks like it could be ok if it wasn’t wrecking the story of the game.
“Does it matter if the movie is good?” I can hear you say that, and it has merits – to a point. At what point does an ‘adaptation’ become insulting though? If, as an example, they took one of the Harry Potter stories and ‘adapted’ it to be a Clancy style tech thriller, would that be acceptable if the movie was good?
In this case, the Prince of Persia: Sands of Time is one of the best games ever made. It had amazing graphics (which are still pretty good 7 years later), a beautiful soundtrack that provided amazing ambiance to the castle locked in time, and an amazing story that drew you into the world fully.
For a moment, checking that movie out, I was enthralled. It looked perfect. Even Gyllenhaal looked the part. I was stunned, until I realized that it had next to nothing to do with the game, and jacked various images from the entire series into a totally unrelated story. “Ah great” I thought, “Max Payne all over again.”
Maybe it will be good. It could happen. Eventually they’ll make a decent movie ‘based’ on a game. And someday they might even make a movie ‘based’ on a game that’s actually based on a game. I’m not going to hold my breath though.
I think it is seriously the first good movie adaptation of a game. If you can accept that it is game canon and go into looking for a popcorn movie I think you can really enjoy it. I was waiting for it to suck and it honestly didn’t, it gives me hope for the future.
I do think the whole white washing thing is retarded since I have never heard of a young, “persian” actor that a studio will bet blockbuster sized wads of cash on. Even worse is this cast a black spiderman crap since if you tried to cast a white guy in a role that is traditionally black there would be riots in the streets and crucifictions.
I heard the rumor about a black spider-man, as well. I was a wee bit more than irritated, until it was mentioned that Donald Glover was the black actor they were talking about. If he were doing it, I’d at least give it a chance.
I’ve never once seen a single episode of Sex and the City.
I only announced this because, for the most part, people are usually shocked. Probably won’t be such a golden apple on this website ’cause it’s mostly for guys but people always seem so terribly offended by that preposterous notion.
As for Prince of Persia…, can any of the gamers on the site explain to me why it is that characters set in ancient Persia speak with a British accent? I mean, okay, fine, we’re hiring Jake Gyllenhaul to play a Middle Easterner, fine, whatever. I get it, we hate ethnic actors, fine, pass, Hollywood, okay? You get a pass on that one just because I don’t care anymore but really? You’re not even going to try and help the illusion? You’re just going to go “Oh, well… British accents are charming. Americans love that accent! Whatever, let’s go with it. Eventually the Crusaders’ll be here and they’ll take over this land sometime in the future, let’s just go with it. Even though English as a language probably isn’t even formalized yet, whatever. English accents”.
Doooooon’t really get that.
So Donnie Darko is going to use the Dagger of Time to prevent his little sister and girlfriend from being killed? {I can’t believe noones made the Donnie Darko Time Flux and Sands of Time connection}