Advertisement
Michael Patrick King Talks About Sex
In 2004, during the final season of HBO’s “Sex and the City,” Carrie Bradshaw dangerously flirted with love in Paris and the seed for a movie version of the show was planted. As the series came to a climactic close—ending a heady era of Manolo Blahniks, cosmopolitans and candid girlfriend camaraderie—creative leader and executive producer Michael Patrick King toyed with the idea of taking the fabulous foursome to the big screen.
When HBO expressed an interest in exploring a movie version shortly after the show wrapped, King drew up a rough outline. But the project quietly ran aground. The actresses’ contracts were put on hold for a period of time and eventually lapsed.
It was a false start, King now admits. “The whole thing was pursued from an artistic level, but not from a business level in any real way,” he says. “There was no real business mandate—there was nothing to point at that it would be a moneymaking venture.”
Then, in the summer of 2006, The Devil Wears Prada arrived in theaters, where it went on to rake in $326 million worldwide. According to King, that took the business heads by surprise. Perhaps they had underestimated the power of the female dollar. “It became, ‘Maybe we missed the buck on making the bucks—literally. If The Devil Wears Prada, which was wonderful, stylistic, artistic, beautiful and a success, could create that much money without any groundswell, then maybe we should re-investigate,’” he recalls.
Soon after, HBO called King up and asked, “Do you want to come up with a script?” Without missing a beat, he agreed.
King, a former stand-up comic and actor in New York City, knows a thing or two about timing. Born in Scranton, Pennsylvania, he started out working as a writer on “Murphy Brown,” which he calls “the Yale School of Drama for comedy writing,” and went on to work on other sitcoms like “Cybill” and “Will & Grace.” After “Sex and the City” ended, King produced the pilot and other episodes for HBO’s “The Comeback,” starring Lisa Kudrow.
When King started playwriting, he fell in love with the craft. “People would immediately respond,” he explains. “It became the thing that had the most power behind it. Your script is your stock. Over the years, I’ve been fired a couple of times and I’ve also been hired a couple of times. But the reality is, no matter what, if your stock stays up, you will work.”
As writer, director and producer of Sex and the City: The Movie, King set out to create a cinematic feast with dollops of whipped cream and cherries on top. It’s not a traditional romantic comedy, he insists, because it has a lot of drama. “I think it’s romantic storytelling,” he says. “It’s fun because it can go wrong in so many ways.”
King opened up to MM about his writing process, romantic comedies and the foibles of adapting an über-popular TV series to the big screen.
Jennifer Soong (MM): What has been the hardest part of adapting such a popular TV series for the big screen?
Michael Patrick King (MPK): The hardest part was getting people to understand the finances involved in taking something that was legend and redoing it. It was a sprawling script because no one has done a romantic comedy that centers around four women, each having an arc. Usually it’s the star—Kate Hudson—and some girl at Starbucks who’s her side player. If it gets long, you just cut her scenes. I had four stars, so that guaranteed an enormous amount of story and to pay for that story was going to cost. You couldn’t squeeze it into a certain amount of days; it really had to be done well.
MM: What concerns did you face with the budget and finances?
MPK: I had a lot of pressure on me. Then the script also had to be enough to justify the big-budget aspect of the movie. We always knew it had to be a big-budget movie, because it had to be just as fabulous—and more—than the series was. We did not scrimp and save on the series. It was a very decadently designed series, which is why I think people are still able to watch it over and over again. Aside from the writing, aside from identifying with the girls, each detail is beautiful. It wears well on your eye.
1 of 3 |
Digg
StumbleUpon
Facebook
Del.icio.us
Reddit
YahooAdvertisement
COMMENTS | POST A COMMENT 
- Comment by esther on 6/05/08 at 2:31 pm
Interesting to learn that artistic design/craft preceeds the motivation for earning female dollars.
Good discovery reporting here!- Comment by Sara on 6/11/08 at 6:10 pm
Why focus so much on the “audience”? Why not just write the story? As you have before in the series? Was this a movie just to “please” a specific group of women (not me) and I am one who thought SATC was clever and insightful. The major vehicle you had going for you was Carrie’s writing and her questions (which were timely.) In the movie all this disappeared. Basically, I think the movie was not believable--viewer didn’t buy at all. While, the series, yes, I’d see much into it that was of meaning, value and entertainment. I’m a therapist so perhaps that figures in. But what is most interesting is that I saw a huge incongruence in the series and the movie? Were you afraid to take risks? The kind of risks that make for not just a “feel-good movie” but for a movie that engages and challenges (as often Sex and the City series did.) I have no doubt that you have the talent. I just wonder why you didn’t use it. Any writer knows that once you start focusing so much on “what the audience” (or anyone for that matter) thinks, then complexity and even interest goes by the wayside. Sorry, but I almost walked out and I do think you’re a truly gifted writer. So use your talent. Especially if there is a sequel. Let things happen! Don’t be so afraid. You aren’t usually as far as I’ve seen. But this movie had “holding back” written all over it.
- Comment by Virg on 8/30/08 at 10:26 pm
Loved the movie ... except for the scenes denigrating Mexico with the character of Charlotte, the prissy little white girl, who was so very afraid to eat anything in Mexico. Sure she got her commuppance, but, nonetheless, I sat in the movie theatre bristling and decided to walk out and leave as did the group of women I attended the movie with. So lots to say about that, like subliminally setting up the audience to think negatively of a lovely country with lovely people where Americans continually flock to for vacations and to live. That didn’t pass by thousands of us in the Latin community who are generations-worth of Americans, who will not frequent Michael Patrick King’s movies anymore unless something is written to apologize for this injustice. But what I want to know specifically is, why was that written into the movie? What was the point? That could have easily been eliminated or not witten in at all - no point - no progression in the overall story line. So what’s up Michael Patrick King? What’s your story in this?
.jpg)
This story was published in the Spring 2008 MovieMaker Magazine. The headline was:
Everything You Always Wanted to Know About Sex/Michael Patrick King reinvents Sex and the City for the big screen
Order this issue | Subscribe to MM
Latest from the blog:
“Give ‘Till It Hurts” at the Fourth Annual SAW Blood Drive
SAW fans may get to save a life or two with the Fourth Annual SAW “Give ‘Till It Hurts” blood drive. Benefiting the Red Cross, the blood drive is set to coincide with the Halloween premiere of SAW V, the latest entry in the gruesome Lionsgate Films horror franchise, opening nationwide on October 26.
Posted 09.3.08 | Happenings | News/Commentary | No comments yet...
Other recent posts:
Tropic Thunder Holds Strong Over Labor Day Weekend
ASC Looking for TV’s Greatest DPs
USC’s Elizabeth Daley to Receive The Charles S. Swartz Award
Posts people are talking about:
SITE DELIVERY OPTIONS
Advertisement
