Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
Posted at 11:12 AM ET, 10/11/2010

Sarah Jessica Parker: Third 'Sex and the City' film possible

By Sarah Anne Hughes

Posted by Sarah Anne Hughes

Say it ain't so, SJP! The actress told New York Magazine's Vulture blog that there could be a third "Sex and the City" film. "I don’t know the future; I would say that you never know what will happen with that particular franchise. It’s less about the reviewers than it is about the audience, and they’ve been pretty true, so we tend to listen to them more than anybody else," Parker said to the magazine.

Indeed, the audience has been good to "SATC." The second film in the franchise grossed over $93 million domestically, with a worldwide total of $288.35 million, according to Box Office Mojo. Compare this with the film's dismal 15% fresh rating on Rotten Tomatoes.

Alright, I'll admit it: I have seen both "SATC" films. Happy now? While I found the first dull but completely watchable, the second film was perhaps the most painful two hours and twenty minutes of my life. That train wreck of a film should be the sad end to the once entertaining franchise. Do you think there should be a third "SATC" film? Let your voice be heard in our poll and in the comments section!

By Sarah Anne Hughes  | October 11, 2010; 11:12 AM ET
Categories:  Celebrities, Movies, Pop Culture  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Simon Cowell changes his name to 'Lightning'; Crystal Bowersox marries
Next: Celebrating Columbus Day with Eminem, Anderson Cooper and embedded video

Comments

Won't the free market system decide the future of the SATC franchise?

Posted by: Nosy_Parker | October 11, 2010 11:42 AM | Report abuse

SATC 3: because geriatrics have sex, too.

Posted by: northgs | October 11, 2010 1:20 PM | Report abuse

SATC should take note of Seinfeld and The Sopranos: go out gracefully, leaving fans wanting more. Don't overstay your welcome.

Posted by: Californian11 | October 11, 2010 2:08 PM | Report abuse

stop your whining... the first film was awesome... the second film was weak no doubt... just silly fluff. you are easily swayed be woman hating critics... it was no worse than male oriented fluff that comes out all the time.

and since the two films had a box office gross of like 700 million and prob hit 1 billion with dvd sales and tv... it would be crazy for warners not to have a third one... i hope there is a third... BUT it has to be better than the second one. while it was just fluff it was also a little painful to watch them be so silly... especially since the series was so perfect. i think all of those involved while defending the film prob have learned a bit about what went wrong and if there's a third will get back on track. the last thing i want to see is a bad third film.

Posted by: dommyinla | October 12, 2010 5:21 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2011 The Washington Post Company