Why I won’t be watching The Devil Wears Prada sequel
There are many films which should never have a sequel and The Devil Wears Prada is one of them. This is not because it is bad, but because it was very much of its time.
Based on a semi-autobiographical novel by Lauren Weisberger, the 2006 comedy-drama starred Anne Hathaway as a green young personal assistant who comes up against a monstrous magazine editor (played by Meryl Streep doing her best not to impersonate Anna Wintour). It’s fun, campy, and as someone who worked in the magazine industry at this time, I can tell you that there is more than an element of truth.
The media was profligate back then. Press launches featured fire-eating dwarves and canapes shaped like flamingoes. Now you’re lucky to get a glass of warm chardonnay. The magazine in The Devil Wears Prada was very much at the top end of the luxury market, and its staff (entitled and a bit silly) revelled in the excesses of the age. In those days, journalists worked hard and played hard, and salaries – although not exactly stellar – did at least allow you to live reasonably well.
Yet The Devil Wears Prada sequel, reports suggest, will emphasise that the party is well and truly over. Streep’s character, Miranda Priestly, is now having to deal with the decline of magazines and come up with a strategy for survival, which involves liaising with her ex-charge Emily (played by Emily Blunt) who now works for a luxury brand company.
This is depressing. Nobody wants to see a grande dame trying to work a spreadsheet document as revenues tumble and budgets are slashed. Nobody wants to see an industry that used to thrive on beautiful art design and smart pieces of writing now snuggle up to the smug marketeers and clueless brand monkeys. And that is why The Devil Wears Prada should remain preserved in aspic in 2006: a reminder of the fun magazine journalists used to have, and the editorial excellence they once strived for.