Why I lowkenuinely despised the Devil Wears Prada 2.
The Devil Wears Prada 2 is a disaster movie.
And I don’t mean, this film is so bad that it’s a disaster. I mean it in the way of the 2008 American parody film: it’s fucking dystopian, end of the world type energy.
This film is everything that’s wrong with the world! And I bloody loved that gorgeous first film!!! So in the words of Dave Hughes during his regular Rove Live segment 17 years ago (around the same time as the first Devil Wears Prada was released): I’m angry.
But behind my anger is disappointment.
Because for me, the bar is bloody low when it comes to a girlie comedy ☹️. I have watched some rather hollow rom-coms and still kind of enjoyed them… ¯\_(ツ)_/¯.
I couldn’t help but Carrie Bradshaw wonder: how could this film surpass this low bar, and then continue travelling deeper past the subterranean depths where the Titan submersible imploded killing those billionaires, arrive in actual hell, AND STILL BE PLAYED AT THE CINEMA NEAR ME 17 TIMES A DAY.
Why it sucks
Vastly different to our first Devil Wears Prada film (which I’ll speak on momentarily), this film is not one iota artistic. It doesn’t care to build a mood, an atmosphere, a vibe. There is no detail or humanity.
The characters are constantly ‘telling us’ what’s going on, rather than showing us at a pace we can follow and engage with, and I don’t know, feel something for?! (And look maybe this is because no one’s face can move due to botox and facelifts, so they simply have to narrate their experience, but more likely this is because the producers want to cater to second screen viewers.)
The plots and subplots are weak and unsatisfying because they’re not properly explored or dealt with. We cycle onto or pivot to the next plot point quickly without resolution or care.
The characters lack credibility, they don’t care enough. There is no tension or stakes or emotional investment.
Instead we have our “hero” Andy, a relentless people pleaser, feel mildly upset about AI, and try to keep her job by way of… trying on shiny dresses and relentless people pleasing.
The film’s resolution was simply that nothing catastrophic happened: no one spoke up or resisted the impending tech takeover, and due to people pleasing: nothing really changed. Isn’t that like, exactly what the billionaires want us to do? Pretend to be happy about everything, while they progress what they’re up to? Take all this lying down?
Is this AI propaganda…?
Regardless, there is irony here because this film is a lot about how short attention spans, AI, tech and billionaires are causing problems — but then the film is actually just all those things literally and metaphorically?
The first film: Devil Wears Prada (2006)
Watching the first movie in 2006 felt really cool and different and sexy.
It gave us a peek behind the curtain of what it would be like to work at Vogue Magazine. Everyone knew Runway Magazine was literally supposed to be Vogue and Meryl Streep’s character Miranda Priestley was literally supposed to be Anna Wintour.
In fact, Meryl and Anna now hang out and nod vigorously to this homage (for press for this new movie machine or whatever).
Back to movie number one and its magic. The film opens, an atmosphere is created by the gorgeous ‘Suddenly I See – KT Tunstall’ montage. Shots of beautiful women applying expensive make up and lingerie before ‘get ready with me’s’ existed (vintage!). We focus in on our hero, Andie, who’s GRWM I’d actually want to watch (I am partial to a normie GRWM, just sayin’).
It’s a beautiful, artistic opening.
We hold our breath while Andie starts her new job in an intimidating, glamorous world which seems impossible to succeed in from the moment she enters. There was a commitment to creating real atmosphere, tension, and stakes. Through time, slowing down, and detail we get to know the characters and what matters to them.
Miranda Priestley is introduced. Employees trip over each other preparing for her morning entrance, applying lipgloss in their webcams, changing shoes, spreading the news to one another: ‘she’s coming’.
She’s here. She’s iconic. She’s powerful. She’s brutal. We love her. She’s artistic and she cares about her art more than anything. The tension builds. Stakes are established. This has all taken TIME.
Then we get some beautiful dialogue laced with detail:
…
Devil Wears Prada (2006) script excerpt – Miranda’s monologue
Miranda Priestly: Where are the belts for this dress? Why is no one ready?
Jocelyn: Here. It’s a tough call. They’re so different.
Andy Sachs: (snickers under her breath)
Miranda Priestly: Something funny?
Andy Sachs: No. No, no, nothing’s… you know, it’s just that… both those belts look exactly the same to me. Y’know, I’m still learning about this stuff, and uh… (giggles uncomfortably)
Miranda Priestly: This… “stuff”? Oh, okay. I see. You think this has nothing to do with you.
You… go to your closet, and you select… I don’t know, that lumpy blue sweater, for instance, because you’re trying to tell the world that you take yourself too seriously to care about what you put on your back, but what you don’t know is that that sweater is not just blue, it’s not turquoise, it’s not lapis, it’s actually cerulean.
You’re also blithely unaware of the fact that, in 2002, Oscar de la Renta did a collection of cerulean gowns, and then I think it was Yves Saint Laurent, wasn’t it?… who showed cerulean military jackets. I think we need a jacket here.
Nigel: Hmm.
Miranda Priestly: And then cerulean quickly showed up in the collections of eight different designers. Then it filtered down through the department stores and then trickled on down into some tragic casual corner where you, no doubt, fished it out of some clearance bin.
However, that blue represents millions of dollars of countless jobs, and it’s sort of comical how you think that you’ve made a choice that exempts you from the fashion industry when, in fact, you’re wearing a sweater that was selected for you by the people in this room… from a pile of “stuff.”
…
We now trust the reality of this world. It has credibility. We are hooked.
Rereading that script made me miss scenes with substance, depth and detail.
We like Miranda because we appreciate her expertise, intensity and passion — we are rooting for her to like Andy because she is the underdog. But at its core this first film was about something really interesting and human: the cost of success. Should Andy abandon her life, her friends, her boyfriend, and herself (people pleaser), in order to succeed?
Well, it pisses me the fuck off that the second movie is actually about NOTHING, AND Andy is the biggest people pleaser we’ve ever met, completely undermining what we learned in the first film. Let’s take a look.
The Devil Wears Prada 2
20 years later and we have the second film. And Miranda? I hardly knew her.
She needed a full blown contextual re-introduction. So did everyone actually. We have the film from 20 years ago, but that is a mere vignette now. The passage of time is long. Tell us something interesting about what’s going on now. There are these awkward call backs to the humour, but like what is actually happening for any of y’all right now!?!? What do you care about?!?!?! ANYTHING!??!
It’s like it’s trying to be a Sex and The City cast reunion extravaganza type movie where there is camp pithy dialogue and everyone wears sequinned suits and attends fancy New York parties, but those only work because we have 6 seasons, and we’ve fallen in love with Carrie, Samantha, Miranda and Charlotte.
Further things that deeply irk me about the Devil Wears Prada 2
- Everything about this new film screams immediacy. I want X so let’s do Y to get it. I did or didn’t get Y. What do I want next. So much doing. Doing, doing, doing. At a certain point it becomes a spy movie??? Like there is a helicopter and scary men (tech bros) doing high tech things for no reason, except maybe to glamorise AI (propaganda).
- There is a subplot where Andy decides she wants a fancy New York apartment for no reason. Here we meet her love interest who is a PROPERTY DEVELOPER. Are you joking me???? And then he explains how what he does isn’t that bad?? So that we like him???? Is this also property developer propaganda?
- Miranda hardly speaks (none of these characters really speak to each other), and when she does talk she’s just rude and clichéd BECAUSE WE HAVEN’T BEEN ALLOWED TO CARE ABOUT HER. There’s this dumb reference to HR having told her she’s too mean so she’s holding back — but she’s still really mean and it’s just one dimensional mean because we have no interesting context, stakes, or humanity underpinning her:
- Miranda doesn’t know her office has a cafeteria but every single person she works with eats there? What do you mean? The passage of time is LONG. She has worked there for 40 years. Simply not believable. (OK maybe I am realising after working in corporate that I don’t think it’s funny or cool to be addicted to work, out of touch, and ignorant toward your employees’ basic needs. This one might just be on me.)
- And then there’s this scene long gag about how she doesn’t want to fly economy on a flight. So boring and predictable. Give us something fucking human or interesting or endearing????? The twins? The Harry Potter books? Details. I don’t know. We’ve heard about rich, powerful people fearing flying coach many times before. Next.
- The film’s social commentary is weak and inconsistent:
- It introduces the cut throat digital content industry and the risks that exist: tech bros in puffer vests taking over, AI being used to generate content instead of humans. Andy is upset about this and argues with her property developer beau about it who kinda doesn’t give a furk. This is never revisited or resolved.
- Then Miranda is faced with a tech bro threatening her and her leadership role directly, who says: “maybe we won’t use any humans at Runway soon. Soon it will all be AI.” Opportunity for an interesting response? No. Miranda says: ‘well [if that does happen] I hope you remember the importance of beauty in all of this’… GIVE US NOTHING SWEETIE. Everyone shrugs about AI, and celebrates that Miranda gets to remain at the helm of Runway (for now) after her role is briefly threatened? No word of how any of this will impact Runway’s future.
- Where is the anarchy? Where is the actual response. Where is, at the very least, this scene from Suddenly 30:
Without a scene like this, and with so much exposure to billionaires buying and selling media groups, layoffs due to AI, instagram face, sweatshops, you’re not beating the propaganda allegations sweeties xo.
I think this film further shot itself in the foot by:
- Distancing Andy from fashion itself and instead making her an “investigative journalist”, so the film couldn’t really concern itself with fashion as an artform. Also Andy never applied for her role, she was just given the role, which she was kind of confused and lukewarm about, and then when her role commenced no one really remembered her or cared about her — a complete refusal to create stakes;
- Not leaning into the romance. The first film isn’t about romance, but it is about something else important. So in the absence of a key message, GIVE US SOMETHING HORNY AND NICE WITH THIS PROPERTY DEVELOPER.
- Never being about humanity.
Also there is this point where Andy falls in love with a dress in the office closet, and asks to borrow it. The audience do not see the dress yet, but we assume we will see it soon during a reveal, and we are excited. After some convincing, Nigel (Stanley Tucci) lets her borrow the dress, but warns her not to spill anything on it under any circumstances. In the next scene, she is wearing the dress but there was no reveal or build up so we are not even sure it’s the dress (plus the dress is so weird and nowhere near as remarkable as the other things she wears). Andy does then spill something and is mildly stressed, so OK now we know she is in fact wearing the dress. She begins to clean it, and then we never hear about it again because we’ve moved on to something else someone wants. Do the creators have ADHD? Fine if they do, so do we all, but have they not heard of a call back? Bring us back. CLOSE THE LOOP.
What is this film, actually?
I love almost every rom com I have ever seen — even the hollow ones. I think it’s because even the thinnest love story gives you something to care about. It taps into something real and human no matter what.
But this film isn’t a romance. And if it’s not about love, and it’s not dramatic in any meaningful way — or funny, because it’s not funny… then what is it? What is the genre? Capitalist brain rot? Oop.
A few things I did enjoy
- I liked Emily Blunt’s character, also named Emily, who partners with a tech bro after leaving her narcissistic ex husband. Benji Barnes (pictured below), apparently inspired by Jeff Bezos/Elon Musk, is foul. And so is Emily when she is with him. There is something about the way they play off each other that’s grotesque and interesting and funny. I liked watching it.
- I liked that there was an (albeit fleeting) exploration of how the start of a relationship can be imperfect, through Andy and the property developer (played by Patrick Brammall) deciding to continue dating after an awkward start. (It kind of reminded me of Offspring, my favourite television show of all time, but that might just be due to the Patrick Brammall double up. 🙄) Brammall’s character is, like every character in DWP2, flimsy and one dimensional: we know nothing about him, just that he is divorced and likes Andy. And yet we finally get some social commentary that is kind of refreshing: in a world predicated on consumption, dopamine and rushing to what’s next, maybe these two can just be weirdos together and accept their own awkwardness.
- No one’s face moves, so we needed a lot of physicality and embodiment from everyone. It’s like watching plasticine dolls in a dollhouse but the dollhouse is a corporate building with marble columns. Andy limping, Miranda throwing herself on a chair with an arm in the air to portray a sigh, and don’t get me started on that old man / plot device randomly carking it in the middle of a formal event (I thought he had been shot by a sniper). I guess I kind of enjoyed watching actors cheat their inability to act by making bold physical choices.
In conclusion
Anger and disappointment and other such ‘negative’ emotions are helpful to me, because they provide a compass. I want my life to be full of depth, slowing down to feel and discover, passion, emotional investment, connection, caring about things, stakes, love, art, growth, journeys, hard work, POETRY AND DETAIL. This movie didn’t have any of those things. It had: rushing, dopamine hits, distractions, sequinned pant suits, technology and disconnection.
Catch me watching old movies and realising what actually matters to me, how ‘bout dat.