Film Review: The Devil Wears Prada 2

 

Sexuality/Nudity Mature

Violence Acceptable

Vulgarity Acceptable

Anti-Catholic Philosophy Mature

Even after 20 years, the original The Devil Wears Prada is still popular among fans.  

And those same fans will thoroughly enjoy the sequel.

The Devil Wears Prada 2  takes place two decades after the original.  Andy (Anne Hathaway), is an award-winning New York journalist whose paper gets unceremoniously shuttered suddenly.  At the same time Miranda Priestly (Meryl Streep) and her brand "Runway" have just been hit by a scandal.  In order to bring back integrity to the publication, Andy is hired without Miranda's consultation.  At the offices, Andy reuintes with her old friend and mentor Nigel (Stanley Tucci).  She also eventually encounters her old posh co-worker Emily (Emily Blunt), who left "Runway" and is working for Dior.  The movie shows Andy re-adapting to the changed world of fashion while at the same time trying to bring journalistic idealism and integrity to the brand, all the while struggling for Miranda's elusive approval.

Part of the strength of a movie like this is that it makes me fascinated about a subject I would normally ignore: fashion.  I am not someone who keeps up with the latest trends and fancies.  I think my own fashion sense ended in the early 1990's.  So it is a credit to this movie and the original that I found myself deeply invested in the ins and outs of the industry.  Since the original, print magazines have become obsolete.  "Runway" is a style brand that seeks to move the needle with its online presence and its large, splashy events.  Miranda herself has had to pivot not only her business model, but also her style.  No longer can she throw around coat and abusive comments.  She is caged by modern HR practices.  This feels like a mixed bag: the enviorment is less unpleasant, but crucible that forged Andy into the competent person she became seems to be missing.  Like most Gen-Xer's, it is almost sad to see the adversity disappear because we know that as much as it hurt, it also helped build character (if it didn't crush us completely).

The studio was incredibly smart to bring back the entire main cast and crew together.  Original director David Frankel and original screenwriter Aline Brosh McKenna returned, which gives such a great continuity of tone, character, and look.  Sometimes when a legacy sequel like this happens, there is a bit of disjointedness between the first and the second.  But with exception of the age of the actors, this movie could have been filmed almost immediately after the first and I would have believed it.  

Much of the movie follows many of the same story beats from the original: Andy gets the job, Andy tries to do a good job, Miranda criticizes her, Andy gets upset, Andy pushes herself harder, Andy does something excellent... etc.  Some may see this is a deficit, but with such a time difference since the first one, I see it more as a comfort.  They remembered what people enjoyed about the first and tried to give them the same experience.  It reminds me of how Rocky II also hit a lot of the same beats as the original for the same reason.

What the story does do as an improvement is that it allows for more catharsis.  The first film had everyone at a slightly professional distance from each other.  But in this movie, with the characters older, it allows for them to be a bit more reflective about the relationships in their lives.  Kenneth Branagh, one of my favorite actors, has a nice turn as Miranda's husband.  Unlike her previous spouse, he brings out her softer side with his gentle encouragement.  There is one moment towards the end, where a character finally gets a much-desired cathartic moment that I could not helped but be touched.

I also like that the film has something to say about modern life.  I don't always agree with it, but it has a voice.  Benji (Justin Theroux) is Emily's dopey billionaire boyfriend.  But even he has a moment in the third act where he talks about how technology bears down on us like the fires of Pompeii and we cannot stop the change.  The world is changing and the question becomes how much do you adapt to it before you lose what you value.  There is a scene where Andy goes into a recently renovated apartment building and complains to a man there Peter (Patrick Bramwell) that the gentrification was everything wrong with the world: taking something beautiful and gutting it for a profit.  Peter turns out to be the renovator and he says that the building was vacant and in disuse and would have been lost anyone unless he brought it into the 21st Century.  There is a constant give and take in the movie about its relationship to the changing world.  This is something that the Catholic Church is constantly wrestling with especially post-Vatican II.

The performances are as good as the original, if not better.  Time and the layering of the relationships gives the actors a lot more to do.  Hathaway is as good as always.  Here Andy is complicated and flawed.  In an argument she has with Peter, her self-centered side comes out and there is something ugly about it.  Hathaway does not try to embrace this selfishness like a girl-boss, but allows the audience to see the downside to her ambition.  Streep steps back into the role of Miranda very well.  Though I would imagine that some people my be disappointed at the slightly less ferocious lioness from the first one.  I remember my wife did not like seeing Miranda having to hang up her own coat.  I think this disappointment would be the same that people felt at the aged Michael Corleone in The Godfather Part III.  Blunt still plays Emily as shallow, but she does it with great comedic timing.  But the standout is Tucci, who really is the heart of the film.  He carries a quiet grace, always tinged with a sense of sadness that time has passed him by, so he is content to enjoy his time in this art.  He never goes for big, maudlin emotional beats.  Instead, he shows incredible restraint in a way that seems almost paternal.

My biggest head-scratcher is why Andy is so desperate for Miranda's approval.  Nothing about it feels false, but I could not find an explanation other than, like most over-achievers, she is in need of constant validation.  The movie also seems to celebrate divorce in some areas as something empowering of women and their independent identity.  As a child of divorce, this was not a particularly pallatble theme to me.  Children also seem to be pushed to the sidelines.  Miranda's twins are barely seen.  Emily has children that she pawns off on her ex-husband so she can globe-trot.  And Andy mentions that she has her eggs frozen because she chose not to start a family.  It just seemed like children were more of a luxury or a burden to the main goal of fame and success.

However, this does not ruin the good aspects of the movie.  In the second half there are a few twists, some I saw coming and some I did not.  The overall effect was surprisingly cathartic experience.  I didn't realize how much I missed these characters and how much I would hope to see them again for a third film.