Talk:Sex and the City (film)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

References to use[edit]

Please add to the list references that can be used for the film article.
  • Radner, Hilary (2010). "Sex and the City: The Movie (2008): The Female Event Film". Neo-Feminist Cinema: Girly Films, Chick Flicks, and Consumer Culture. Routledge. ISBN 0415877733.

Rating[edit]

The official site it says "This film has not yet been rated" and it's not listed on filmratings.org. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.10.0.230 (talk) 04:43, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Requested move[edit]

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposed move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move debate was not to move Sex and the City: The Movie → Sex and the City (film) — The trailer clearly shows the movie has same title as the series', without "The Movie" part —Kochas (talk) 06:27, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Survey[edit]

Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *'''Support''' or *'''Oppose''', then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's naming conventions.
  • Oppose for now per my comment below. If stronger evidence is available now or at a later date, I will happily reconsider my opinion. --Lox (t,c) 23:08, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion[edit]

Any additional comments:
  • I'd probably support this move, but I'd want some evidence that Sex and the City: The Movie is really a less common title for the movie than simply Sex and the City. I think that's probably true, I'd just like some evidence that it is. Andrewa (talk) 12:07, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wikipedia has a few articles with the suffix "The Movie" and these tend to follow IMDB's naming of the film, e.g. Twilight Zone: The Movie[1] and The Transformers: The Movie[2]. Since IMDB has listed the film as "Sex and the City: The Movie"[3], I suggest we wait until stronger evidence emerges for its release as just "Sex and the City" --Lox (t,c) 23:07, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • We shouldn't necessarily follow IMDB or the trailer, but IMDB is probably a better test of English Usage than the trailer is. So I'm tending now towards an oppose vote. Andrewa (talk) 02:26, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      • Yes, I think my comment may have implied following IMDB in all cases, which I don't believe is appropriate. I agree that we should follow majority usage and that this is often reflected by IMDB. --Lox (t,c) 09:48, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • It has been over five days, no other opinions or evidence has been provided so I am closing this discussion. --Lox (t,c) 11:05, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Cast[edit]

On Mikhail Baryshnikov's IMDB profile he isn't listed as appearing in the movie. Is there anywhere that supports his inclusion in the cast list on this article? 77.96.169.248 (talk) 18:17, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

He is not in the movie; I agree that this should be removed. Cactusjump (talk) 23:05, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect Undone[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was Move Anthony Appleyard (talk) 05:35, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A user redirected the page to Sex and the City (film), against the above consensus to not move the page. I have also undone the recurring link mishap on Sex and the City main page. Kat Malone (talk) 17:07, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Because of the continued process of editing done on both Sex and the City: The Movie and Sex and the City (film) despite the above discussions, I have retagged both articles with a Merger tag. Please take another look at the content and the reasonings behind the views. Kat Malone (talk) 17:42, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Though I had nothing to do with the move, I believe the "consensus" is outdated and needs to be reopened, if not revoked altogether. It was largely based on IMDb using "The Movie" back in December; it now uses only "Sex and the City (2008)", and even the official credits merely say "Sex and the City". The proper article title should be "Sex and the City (film)", much like for Dreamgirls where Dreamgirls is the stage musical and Dreamgirls (film) is the movie. (That film, of course, is relevant thanks to Jennifer Hudson--who's the main reason I'm interested in this film despite being a heterosexual male who's only seen bits and pieces of the TV series, mainly after sleeping thru baseball games on TBS.) --RBBrittain (talk) 12:35, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The page should be renamed to Sex and the City (film) as it can now be seen that the film dropped the 'the movie' part. Russell [ Talk ] 14:48, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with that. LeaveSleaves (talk) 15:49, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Plot veracity[edit]

Is there anyway to confirm the truthfulness of the plot? The film is yet to be released and the only way this plot is true is if there has been a leak or if the editor who added it has been to the premier in London. Would it still be alright to keep it before the release of the film? LeaveSleaves (talk) 01:01, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And what ever happened to the decency of writing a giant SPOILER notice before giving away the whole movie??? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.244.179.245 (talk) 03:22, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:SPOILER and WP:MOSFILM for reasons. LeaveSleaves (talk) 03:38, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I think that "consensus" needs to be revisited, too. Though I think it's appropriate to include spoilers, they should be wrapped in the old "Spoiler alert" and "Spoilers end here" tags for the benefit of those who do NOT want to see the spoilers, at least until shortly after the film's release (say, one to three weeks). Wikipedia:Content disclaimer is TWO links away from each article (not one), and many people have already seen the spoilers before they see that; I don't think that's enough notice for the ordinary user. --RBBrittain (talk) 12:41, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I presume you have gone through guidelines mentioned above. As you can understand adding another spoiler alert within the article conflicts of Wikipedia policy on disclaimers. I would also suggest perusing WP:NCD. LeaveSleaves (talk) 13:06, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Montages[edit]

Can some one please make a note of montages in the film theres more then 3 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.250.49.22 (talk) 05:31, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sequel talks[edit]

Michael Patrick King has mentioned in statements here and here that he'd be interested in creating a sequel but at no point has there been any official announcement of any kind. So I see no reason to present rumors, speculations or mere interests in the article at this point. LeaveSleaves (talk) 15:20, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

NYC is an Emerite Now?[edit]

Because the sequel section ends with:

Filming in New York has been postponed to the end of July as Dubai authorities have refused clearance for filming in the emirate.

What does one have to do with the other? Can someone please fix this? Vwicker (talk) 23:47, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Plot Summary[edit]

Isn't the plot section too big?--Stetsonharry (talk) 12:18, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

DVD/Blu-Ray release[edit]

Is there a source to the release date? FaithLehaneTheVampireSlayer 23:27, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm scared[edit]

  • I was on this page, then went 2 discussion, then back, and this came up:

http://i85.photobucket.com/albums/k60/zeldamaster3/untitled2.jpg

Help?

--Cokeandpoprocks (talk) 16:27, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Critical Reception[edit]

"The film received negative-mixed reviews" was contradictory; I removed the word "negative." Cactusjump (talk) 23:36, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Amount of TV Show Footage Used in Movie[edit]

This film used large chunks of old episodes of SATC, with new scenes shot for the film to tie them together. I cannot recall another film that uses so much previously aired footage. To me, that's deserving of mention in the main article. Theaternearyou (talk) 05:33, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Plot rewrite[edit]

I'm attempting to rewrite the plot section to conform with WP:FILM as the tag requests. The plot section shouldn't exceed 700 words. I'll be rewriting/editting plot section here until it looks good, then I'll substitute the current version with the new version that conforms WP:FILM. In the meantime, I'll appreciate some help. This current attempt is 715 word-long, words left to cut.

---

Carrie (Sarah Jessica Parker) walks through the streets of New York City thinking about events that has happened in her and her friend's lives during the events in Sex and the City. Charlotte is now living a happy marriage with Harry Goldenblatt, but she had a hard time getting pregant, so they adopted a girl named Lily; Miranda (Cynthia Nixon) has settled down in Brooklyn with Steve (David Eigenberg) to raise their son together; and Samantha (Kim Cattrall) has relocated her business to Los Angeles to be close to Smith (Jason Lewis), who is now a prime-time television star, although she misses her old life and takes every opportunity to fly East to be with Carrie, Miranda, and Charlotte.

Carrie herself is now in a relationship with Big (Chris Noth), and they are viewing apartments with the intention of moving in together. Carrie falls in love with a penthouse far from their price range. Big immediately agrees to pay for it. Carrie offers to sell her own apartment, although she also voices her fear that she would have no legal rights to their home in case they seperate, as they are not married. To quell her fears, Big suggests that they do. Carrie announces her plan to wed to her friends. As a wedding gift, Charlotte hires her a wedding planner.

Miranda confesses to her friends that she has been so busy she hasn’t had sex with Steve in six months. When Steve confesses he has cheated on her, Miranda is devastated, and she immediately separates from him. At Carrie and Big's rehearsal dinner, Steve tries to reconcile with Miranda, but she rebuffs him. Still upset about his indiscretion, she tells Big bluntly that marriage ruins everything.

On the wedding day, Big is too fearful to go through with the ceremony. Carrie, devastated, flees the wedding. Big changes his mind and catches up with her in an attempt to reconcile. Carrie furiously attacks him with her bouquet while he earns scathing looks from Miranda and Charlotte. To console Carrie, the four women take the honeymoon that Carrie had booked to Mexico, where they de-stress and collect themselves.

Upon her return to New York City, Carrie hires an assistant, Louise (Jennifer Hudson), to help her manage her life. Miranda eventually confesses to Carrie about what happened during the night of the rehearsal dinner, and the two briefly falls out. After reflecting on the argument she had with Carrie, Miranda agrees to attend couples counseling with Steve, and they are eventually able to reconcile. Samantha finds her five-year-old relationship humdrum and begins over-eating to keep from cheating on Smith. She eventually realizes that she needs to put herself first, so she says farewell to Smith and moves back to New York. Around the same time, Louise quits her job as Carrie's assistant to get married.

Charlotte learns she is pregnant, and for several months she fears that something might happen to her baby. Carrie eases her fear. Charlotte has a surprise encounter with Big that leaves her so outraged that her water broke. Big takes her to the hospital and waits until baby Rose is born, hoping to see Carrie. Harry passes on the message that Big would like her to call him, and that he has written her frequently, but never received a reply. Carrie searches her correspondence and finds that he has sent her dozens of letters copied from the book she read him before their wedding, culminating with one of his own where he apologizes for screwing it up and promises to love her forever.

Carrie travels to the house Big had bought for them to collect a pair of Manolo Blahnik shoes she had left there. She finds Big in the walk-in closet he had built for her, and the moment she sees him, her anger at his betrayal dissipates. They share a passionate kiss, and Big proposes to Carrie properly, using one of her diamond-encrusted shoes in place of a ring. They later marry alone, in a simple wedding in New York City Hall, with Carrie wearing a simple dress. Miranda, Samantha, and Charlotte turns up to surprise Carrie. The film ends with the four women sipping cosmopolitans, celebrating Samantha's fiftieth birthday, with Carrie making a toast to the next fifty.

Anthonydraco (talk) 19:03, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A more proper use of her image? Opinion required.[edit]

I would like some opinion on the use of this image.

Cattrall was responsible for the cancellation of the filming of the film in 2004.

Do other wikipedians think this sounds like we're branding her for the cancellation? The caption on the right was the caption before I editted it. I mean, look at it. "Cattrall was responsible for the cancellation of the filming" reads as if she's committed a crime. And there's even her picture, showing who's responsible, as if saying "Hey, look! This is what she looks like!"

I've reworded some of the caption to preserve some neutrality, but honestly, I don't think this is a very good use of her image. I don't think we have a good rationale to use her image like this. So I'd like some opinion from other edittors whether we should remove it, or if we have a proper rationale to use her image in a fairer, more neutral way. Anthonydraco (talk) 05:42, 2 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Sex and the City (film). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 07:20, 23 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sex[edit]

Tudjwvubdckkvr jrichzszt ixiw uvtci unige 41.115.123.64 (talk) 04:12, 1 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

relp 2404:C0:1C10:0:0:0:17DF:4892 (talk) 18:32, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
114.122.108.139 (talk) 00:33, 13 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Sex_and_the_City_(film)&oldid=1204575376"