Glad you liked the movie!

I have to say that red carpet thing they showed before the movie was pretty dang ridiculous.

"OVER THE SHOULDER!!"

I've got a story for you: At one point, I slid out my own cell phone to turn it off and was made to take it to my car. I was pretty sore (mainly because I was forced to stop watching the red carpet hubbub) until I actually read my ticket, which raised all kinds of concerns about people attempting to record things during the screening ~ so I guess the mean man who made me go and come back was justified. But still...give me a break. My phone's a cheapie, with no video-taking capabilities.

As a longtime veteran of promotional screenings, let me say that is not unusual. Most often they say turn them down or turn them off, but more and more they're banning them from the theater altogether. I bring my camera for the job (photographing panelists) and I get grief I get on a regular basis (including a comment that same night). I have to get there early, get my panelists, and take the camera back out to the car before the movie starts.

You're right that it's a piracy issue, even though most cellular phones have limited capability (I know my brand-new phone only does about 30 seconds or so of video), so I think it's a little silly to do, but I guess it's their movie, their rules, for the most part.

It's a nice courtesy on their part (which they did not do for SATC) for the companies to at least post signs on the front doors of the theater telling you as much so you don't stand there in that ginormous line, get frisked, profiled, interrogated and probed only to be instructed to take your phone out to the car. It's just one of the inconveniences of the privilege, I suppose.

Ack. Did anyone read the New York Times review of the film?

I'm disappointed.

Seems the author thinks the story line should revolve around the male characters -- as if there aren't already enough movies who revolve around men and offer marginalized female roles (See Ironman -- a flick I liked, by the way).

It also seems the author is just a little less than offended by Carrie's appearance in the movie -- maybe even a bit freaked out by the girls growing a bit older. Give me a break. Carrie's a real person, and one with a very personal fashion sense. She might well have "cubist" features, but --like most of us -- she's working with what she's got.

Seems to me, the stylish ones in the world are those who find a way to express themselves via their appearance. They have a "look" all their own, and Carrie certainly has that.

So, no kudos! No kudos for you creepy NYT critic.

While reading that, I realized that I can't think of a single prominent female movie critic. There's the legendary Pauline Kael, but she's reviewing movies in that big theater in the sky. Maybe that has something to do with the sort of movies that get critical respect. Just throwing that out there.

We have been fans of the show since the beginning and we were a little nervous about where they were going to take these characters but we loved the movie. The Times review was harsh. We don't really need to see Carrie wearing an Obama button. The clothes and cocktails are fun but the heart of the show, and now the movie, is the rarely seen portrayal of womens' friendships. The scene with Carrie rushing across town so that Miranda isn't alone on New Year's Eve and the scene of them in the car as Miranda begs Carrie's forgiveness are great examples. One thing though, wasn't anyone in the editing room? The boom mic was visible in so many scenes that one website said that it should get a co-starring credit.

I agree ~ though I must confess, I didn't notice the mic.