Well this is cause to cheers a couple of Cosmopolitans: it looks like we’re not hanging the Sex and the City 3 hat up juuuuust yet.
And who better to give us the hope of a third instalment than Carrie Bradshaw herself – we mean, Sarah Jessica Parker.
The actress, 52, appeared on The Ellen Degeneres Show today and conversation quickly turned to whether there will in fact be another SATC movie.
We’ve had two.
We definitely loved one of them.
We still deserve one more to send us on home.
SJP – who played Carrie Bradshaw in the HBO series that ran from 1998-2004 – has long poured cold water on the chat, as has Kim Cattrall, who played Samantha. Perhaps for differing reasons (*cough* feud *cough*), but that’s neither here nor there.
Now, however, Ellen has got us the goods as Sarah Jessica admitted that regardless of Kim’s involvement there is still hope.
‘I think there’s a period of grief, a mourning process,’ she said, before joking about Ellen taking over the role, adding: ‘Perhaps we’ll be able to consider … say for instance, you playing Samantha.’
After Ellen joked about being ‘sexual’ and the public only saw her ‘talk show host persona’ she tried to get a serious answer.
To which SJP replied: ‘I don’t know. Last week, I said “No.”
‘Reality is a brutal companion. I feel like maybe, I don’t know. I have to make up an answer, because I have absolutely no idea.
‘You know, who knows. Perhaps, we’ll find a way. Right now, I don’t know.’
Hot diggity dog, that’s good enough for us!
SJP recently told Daily Beast about the alleged bust up between her and Kim which was said to be the reason we haven’t seen another movie.
She said: ‘The thing I continue to learn is how painful it can still be, after all these years.
More: Sarah Jessica Parker
‘When things aren’t true, especially when it is a personal attack about your character, the way you’ve chosen to conduct yourself specifically. I’m stunned by how deeply it still cuts.
‘I just kept saying, “This was an experience I loved. I love those women. We shared this experience. It was a privilege.”‘
Got a story?
If you've got a story, video or pictures get in touch with the Metro.co.uk Entertainment team by emailing us [email protected], calling 020 3615 2145 or by visiting our Submit Stuff page – we'd love to hear from you.
‘Antebellum’ has a ‘Get Out’ vibe, but doesn’t live up to its twist
“Antebellum” is built around a provocative twist, and it’s a good one — as well as one that definite..
“Antebellum” is built around a provocative twist, and it’s a good one — as well as one that definitely shouldn’t be spoiled even a little. Once that revelation is absorbed, however, the movie becomes less distinctive and inspired, reflecting an attempt to tap into the zeitgeist that made “Get Out” a breakthrough, without the same ability to pay off the premise.
Originally destined for a theatrical run, the movie hits digital platforms trumpeting a “Get Out” pedigree in its marketing campaign, since there’s an overlap among the producing teams.
More directly, the film marks the directing debut of Gerard Bush + Christopher Renz, who have championed social-justice issues through their advertising work. The opening script features a quote from author William Faulkner, whose intent will eventually become clearer: “The past is never dead. It’s not even past.”
If that sounds like a timely means of drawing a line from the horrors of slavery to the racism of today, you’ve come to the right place.
The story begins on a plantation, where the brutal overseers carry out grisly punishments against those tilling the fields. A few have just tried to escape, led by Veronica (Janelle Monae), and they pay a heavy price for their resistance, which does nothing to curb her defiance.
Also written by Bush + Renz, the script take too long before revealing what makes “Antebellum” different, but the middle portion — a “The Twilight Zone”-like phase when it’s hard to be sure exactly what’s going on — is actually the film’s strongest. (Even the trailer arguably gives away too much, so the less one knows, the better.)
The final stretch, by contrast, veers into more familiar thriller territory, and feels especially rushed toward the end, leaving behind a host of nagging, unanswered questions. That provides food for thought, but it’s also what separates the movie from something like “Get Out,” which deftly fleshed out its horror underpinnings.
Although the filmmakers (in a taped message) expressed disappointment that the movie wasn’t making its debut in theaters, in a strange way, the on-demand format somewhat works in its favor. In the press notes, Bush says the goal was “to force the audience to look at the real-life horror of racism through the lens of film horror. We’re landing in the middle of the very conversations that we hoped ‘Antebellum’ would spur.”
“Antebellum” should add to that discussion, so mission accomplished on that level. Monae is also quite good in her first leading film role (she did previously star in the series “Homecoming’s” second season), but otherwise, most of the characters remain underdeveloped.