2754716707_b34c6aaf25_mI haven’t seen the movie (yet), but this bit in the New York Times (thumbs down) review of Sex and the City II had a bit that jumped out at me:

“If they seem less wonderful now, it isn’t because of slackened effort or diminished charm on the part of the actresses who play them. It is that the movie itself, and perhaps the culture it stands in for, has lost interest and can’t figure out what to do with them as they tiptoe toward middle age. “

Well, yes and no. I agree that the culture “can’t figure out what to do with” us women as we “tiptoe” toward middle age, although I’m not tiptoeing so much as lurching clumsily in my brand new platform espadrilles while trying not to trip over the Razor scooters and American Girl dolls left in my path. Hence all this cougar silliness and MILF talk and poor Formerly Famous women doing THIS to their faces. That’s why we’re here, caught in the adult tween zone between what we were and what we are becoming, a.k.a., Formerlies. We’re figuring it all out as we go, because there’s no graduation ceremony or wedding or bat mitzvah that you prepare for as you approach 40 and then move on to the next thing.

But I SO do not agree that the culture has “lost interest,” in us, not least of all because we are part of the culture, and there are so many of us, older women who were us, and younger women who are all too aware that they will soon be us. If the excitement about the movie (and all the nice buzz this site and the upcoming book has been getting) is any indication, the culture is wildly interested. In fact, this movie, which by all accounts is pretty high on the suck-o-meter, will nonetheless be watched until the SATC ladies are in Boca with their 4th husbands ogling pool boys.

Could it simply be that SATC II wasn’t a great movie, and didn’t do quite as good a job painting the life of glamorous Formerlies as well as it did glamorous 30somethings? All that means to me is that someone needs to write a better movie about us.

Photo by Jessica Diamond CC