Sex and the Seriously Lame: Part II

Oh.Em.Gee! Guess what, everyone! I have THE BEST news for you!

Remember that atrocious poster for the new Sex and the City 2 movie? Where Carrie was wearing an awful white dress from Forever 21?

Well, as it turns out, it's not from Forever 21! In fact, it's from the all new "affordable" line from Halston, dubbed Halston Heritage.

Color. Me. Abso-freakin-lutely. Thrilled.

I'm sorry, it STILL looks like it's from Forever 21. What's with that weird slit in the front? And the flannel-shirt style curved hems on the sides? Ridiculous.

It's officially called the "V-Neck Jersey" dress and it retails for an "affordable" $325.

How much? For THAT? Someone has lost their mind. Oh my god. Just go to Forever 21 and you'll probably find an exact duplicate for about $30.

Let's talk about the rest of the outfit for a moment, shall we?

On top of the trashtastic dress, she's got on:

Lmited edition Mykita & Bernhard Wilhelm Franz shades, $525.

That necklace is by Solange Azagury-Patridge. It can be yours for the super-steal price of $198,200. Chump change, right?

Here's a closeup:

Almost $200K for that? Maybe it's just a really bad picture, but it looks a little bit like...a Leggo necklace that a preschooler might make. Maybe I just don't get it.

Next up, Christian Louboutin Pigalle Gold Crystal pumps - I can't seem to find an official price anywhere, but if eBay can be believed at all, it seems they retail for about $3,100.

They're cute and all... But $3,100? They'd better take me out to a fancy dinner, spring for the vintage Cristal, and bring me a gift - preferably one that sparkles and comes in a little blue box tied with a white bow.

Let's not forget her fabulous gold clutch from Chanel. I'm not sure of the price, but I doubt it's any less than $2,000.

The fun isn't over yet, though. It gets even better! Halston Heritage is responsible for another one of Carrie's outfits in the film, though at least this one isn't nearly as bad.

This is the Metallic-Stripe Dress and if I'm being honest, I don't hate it. I think it's kinda fun, actually. I like the way it flows and it looks like it could be very forgiving for those without Sarah Jessica Parker's size nothing figure. It's definitely a great color, too.

Still not sure it's worth the $435 price tag, though. And I like it better when it's styled with that white belt like Carrie has on.

And just for kicks, here's the rest of Carrie's outfit:

Jee Vice - Heated orange sunglasses - $170 (Eh...I'm not impressed. And I hate the color.)

Christian Louboutin (shocker!) Gino T-Strap heels - $865 (I love these!)

Christian Louboutin - Large Sylvia Hobo in pink - $1,795 (This bag is way too big, even for me!)

So there you have it. The mystery is solved. No more fretting that our beloved Carrie has suddenly started shopping at all those normal stores like the rest of us. Rest assured that she's still living the high life with Big.

All is well in Sex and the City Land.

[photo credits: neimanmarcus.com, ugc.dhingana.com, fanpop.com, videogum.com, patriciafield.com, redcarpet-fashionawards.com]

Sex and the Seriously Lame

Carrie on? Really?

Are you Tim Gunn?

This is quite possibly the most ridiculous teaser poster I've ever come across. I mean... CARRIE ON? Is this "Taglines 101" or something?

I tolerated it when the first movie used "Get Carried Away."

Alright, I thought to myself, it's okay... Carrie is a fan of puns. They're trying to be cute. I get it. Carrie kinda looks like she's about to get carried away...the look on her face, the grin, it's all working for me. The dress was fab, the windblown hair was fun, the black and pink theme was hot...

But Carrie On? I just... I don't approve.

And, I have a few questions.

Why does Carrie look surprised? Why does her neck look as if it has sprouted two or three extra inches since the last time we saw her? Why does it look like Manhattan is exploding in a sea of white light behind her? Why do her sunglasses have a weird gold reflection of the sky? If she's walking down the street in the city, shouldn't the reflection be other people? Or buildings? Anything besides the sky, considering she's in the middle of a skyscraper-filled city?

Why is she wearing a dress from Forever 21? Not that there is anything wrong with Forever 21 because there absolutely is not. I shop there all the time, but for a Sex and the City poster? They could have done better. Much, much better. The whole damn point of the show is the fashion. I have no problem with mixing and matching high and low end items, but not on a poster that is supposed to make me want to see this movie. Not on a poster that is supposed to represent the next installment of a series that made Manolo Blahnik a household name.

And what the hell is she carrying on? Life? Marriage? Babies? Snarky columns about about being single in the city? Oh, wait, NONE OF THEM ARE ACTUALLY STILL SINGLE!

So, what then? Do you have any idea? Cause I sure don't...

No? I didn't think so.

LAME.

[photo credits: storybookwedding.files.wordpress.com, www.huffingtonpost.com]