I remember, during an advance screening of The Promotion, I was standing in the movie theater and there were women everywhere. This was about a week or so after Sex and the City came out -- and it was right smack in the middle of the week -- but there were still tons of women, all done up and what not. I joked to my friend that this "tons of nice looking women standing in a movie theater lobby in the middle of a random weekday without any men" was kinda similar to a lunar eclipse, in that it rarely happens. If I were a dating councelor, I'd have recommended my male clients to get the hell over to a Sex and the City screening pronto.

Luckily, single men will most likely have another opportunity to mingle with the SATC crowd over a tub of popcorn and a sexy Dr. Pepper as Entertainment Weekly reports a sequel to Sex and the City is already in development and is apparently being fast-tracked by Warner Brothers (New Line put out the first flick). Michael Lombardo, president of HBO's programming group, told folks during a press tour that "there's a lot of energy behind doing another SATC movie." However, one inside source claims Sarah Jessica Parker and her lady friends are a little hesitant because they don't want to rush into things and disappoint fans. Assuming they add another villain to the mix so that it's not just Spacey's Lex Luthor, I'm sure everything will be fine. Oh wait, wrong franchise.

So who wants another Sex and the City movie?

WHAT?! Well, sort of. Actually, she'll play a rich Manhattanite who loses her high-paying job and posh Upper East Side apartment and decides to start a business helping rich New Yorkers get their kids into elite kindergartens. (Knowing someone who worked as an admissions officer at an elite kindergarten, this is not shocking to me.)

The movie is The Ivy Chronicles, based on a novel by Karen Quinn, and it will have to fight off the immediate impression that it's an epic fantasy film. In fact it's pitched as a comedy in the vein of The Devil Wears Prada and The Nanny Diaries.

Let's talk about Sex, baby ... I got an email from Melissa Silverstein over at Women and Hollywood yesterday, asking a pack of women who work in various aspects of the film industry to share our thoughts on whether a successful box office turn for Sex and the City, which opens this weekend, might herald a change in Hollywood's attitude toward chick-centric movies. Melissa posed the following questions:

• If it's a success do you think that this will change Hollywood minds about whether women can "open" movies?
  
• If it doesn't do the predicted numbers, do you think this will spell more difficulties for women centric films?
  
• Do you think that because this is an "event" that other films about women will be held up to an unrealistic standard?
  
• Do you think there is a double standard for this film?
  
• Are you surprised by the nasty tone that some of the media has taken on this week?

You can read my response, and the thoughts of some other smart women, over on Melissa's site, but in the meantime, I thought this was a great set of questions to pose to Cinematical readers. Whether you love Sex and the City or hate it, what are your thoughts on whether a big box office run for the film might change the way Hollywood thinks about movies for and about women? Discuss away ...

I was, admittedly, a bit of a latecomer to the Sex and the City craze. For years, I staunchly refused to watch the show, convinced from what I knew of it that it wasn't for me. It struck me as self-absorbed and superficial, episode after episode of successful, independent women who should have been perfectly content with their lives, endlessly bemoaning what they didn't have -- Prince Charming and "happily-ever-after" -- over endless rounds of Cosmos. Who wants to listen to four women talking about nothing but fashion and men? Not me, said I. I didn't even drink Cosmos for the longest time, just because I associated them with the show.

And then, one day a few years ago I was going nuts being confined to bed rest with my last child. I'd watched everything on Court TV and more sappy Lifetime movies than any one person should ever have to stomach, I was desperate for something else to watch to pass the time. And there, right by the DVD player, was my oldest daughter's most prized possession: Season One of Sex and the City. What the hell, it couldn't be any worse than re-watching Tori Spelling in Mother, May I Sleep With Danger, right? I slipped the first disc into the DVD player ... and didn't stop watching until I'd watched every episode of the first season. And then I was hooked on the adventures of Carrie, Samantha, Miranda and Charlotte.

Since Sex and the City has screened around the world and critics have weighed in, it's time for a little nitpicking -- and nobody seems more up to the task than that unflagging beacon of urban gossip, Page Six. Today, the New York Post column reports that New Line Cinema and Radio City Music Hall are facing off in a blame-fest following the mistake that lead to 1,000 ticket holders getting turned away at the New York City premiere. At the close of the piece, however, the article gets into some of the details of the plot: "Those who've seen Sex and the City are buzzing that its story owes much to widely reported episodes involving Jonathan Tisch and Ellen Barkin," it reads, and that's just one of the alleged rip-offs. There's also a supposed reference to Tisch's canceled engagement to Jill Swid, and a "scene where Carrie freaks out about having a 347 area code seems just like one in an old Seinfeld episode."

Not having seen the movie, I can only judge from afar, but this sounds like two very separate complaints. That Sex and the City would use real life incidents to inspire its metropolitan plot shouldn't bother anyone (except the real life inspirations, of course). But borrowing from Seinfeld? Now that's a low blow.

Sometimes I feel like my cultural literacy is shamefully limited. I watch a lot of movies but somehow I rarely watch many television shows. I only have the most basic cable, so I could tell you all about the most fascinating shows on Austin community access but nothing about, say, Sex and the City. I saw the movie Sex and the City without ever having watched an episode, with an unfortunate tendency to refer to it as Sex in the City, and with such an ignorance of pop culture that I kept mixing up Carrie Bradshaw with Carrie Underwood. I brought a friend to the screening who was well acquainted with the TV show, in case I needed help, and whispered things like "Is that the theme song?" and "What's the joke?"

Fortunately, for those of us who are encountering Sex and the City for the first time, the movie's opening sequence provides compressed backstories about the four characters so we don't feel lost and confused. But even if we didn't know who had done what and whom and where, the storyline -- set five years after the TV show's end -- is not difficult to follow.

I've just realized -- Sarah Jessica Parker being surrounded by (or wearing) atrocious clothing is nothing new. Does anyone remember Girls Just Want to Have Fun? I was always obsessed with Lynne's velcro and never thought about how SJP has been doing the terrible fashion trends for years. Her Janey Glen was fairly run-of-the-mill, but check out the clip above, which dips into just about every god-awful fashion nugget of the '80s.

Sex and the City opens this week, and in honor of the release, Moviefone has put up a Before They Had Sex for the cast, highlighting early roles for each one of the sexy stars. Of course, Sarah Jessica Parker got her dance on in this and Footloose, but the rest of the ladies had their share retro fare as well, from Kim Cattrall's infamous stint in Porky's, to Cynthia Nixon in Little Darlings, as I shared before. Some of them have come a long way, and some, well, they're staying true to form.

Care to list a favorite role ... or four?

Why would you hold the splashy world premiere of a movie that celebrates Manhattan on a different freakin' continent? A few weeks ago, Eric Kohn reported on the rumor that Sex and the City would premiere in London; as he wrote, SatC is "automatically a quintessential New York film ... Considering all that Sex and the City owes to New York -- its entire legacy, really -- the idea of fleeing to Europe first sounds a little confused."

The rumor was true; the premiere was held in London last night, and now Sarah Jessica Parker finds herself defending a decision she did not make. The Telegraph describes her as being "diplomatic," stating simply: "This is where New Line Cinema decided to do it, so we started here. We are thrilled to be in London and we will be thrilled to take it to America." Cynthia Nixon downplayed the event, calling it "kind of [a] smallish premiere," and said that last night's show and another in Berlin on Thursday are "building" to the New York premiere, which will be held in two weeks, three days before the film opens on Friday, May 30. Kristin Davis told the Los Angeles Times: "Everyone is upset about it and I just don't understand why ... It's saving the best for last. No offense to London."

Sarah Jessica asked the audience to keep the plot secret; The Telegraph promptly posted a teasing "review." I'll let you decide if you want to click through and read it.

With the end of this month comes final confirmation: Can Sex and the City make it as a feature film? To continue to whet our Sex appetites, a whole slew of clips popped up over on the net. Above you can check out the, erm, fleshed out waxing clip from the trailer, and after the jump there's a wedding announcement, that Cinderella clip, some "coloring," home shopping, and Carrie getting a little bit too "pat on the head," "I've been there" preachy with Jennifer Hudson.

As someone who enjoyed the show (whilst ignoring the idiotic fashions and some of the crappy men), this is looking to be the sort of film that will appeal to fans ... although it will be a little different than its skin-risque HBO roots. A few years passed and now it seems that we won't be getting the usual fleshy shocker from Samantha -- rumor has it that the only woman who celebrates full-flesh is Cynthia Nixon. It's too bad that age seems to be making the women cling to the clothing, but then again, that's SatC for you -- partially stereotype-breaking and partially stereotype-clutching.

Remember that ominous "loss" that Sarah Jessica Parker said Carrie would deal with in the new Sex and the City movie? Well, Michael Patrick King is now speaking out on the matter once rumors started to fly about just what kind of loss it was. If you don't want to know anything about this loss rumor, stop reading now!

According to The Hollywood Reporter, you won't have to worry about any big, or should I say Big demise. King says: "Kill Mr. Big? I would have been chased around the planet by women with torches." He goes on to say that the "ultimate target" of this film is to make women happy, so Big won't die because that wouldn't make them happy. But if this means then that the two break up again, since the trailer certainly seems to suggest it, talk about a tired flipping plot!

Does this mean, then, that there is no death? I don't think we really have a finite answer on that. When asked whether anyone dies: "It's a summer movie. Why would I want to kill anyone?" This could be a straightforward "no, this is a fun movie and death doesn't fit;" however, summer movies are all about wowing audiences and over-the-top fare, so someone else could still be on the chopping block.

We'll know soon enough -- the film opens on May 30.