Sex and the City Prequel: Sarah Jessica Parker's Not the Only One Against It!

Find out who doesn't want to see younger actors replacing the original cast. However, about that third SATC movie...

By Marc Malkin, Brett Malec Feb 23, 2011 2:48 PMTags
E! Placeholder Image

While rumors that Blake Lively was in talks to play a younger Carrie Bradshaw in a Sex and the City prequel have been shot down, another of one of the original SATC gals agrees with Sarah Jessica Parker that the whole concept of going back in time is a bad idea.

So who's joined the anti-prequel bandwagon? Read on to find out...

"Not so into the prequel movie," Kristin Davis told us at last night's Costume Designer Guild Awards at the Beverly Hilton Hotel.

Why not?

"Because we're us and we've discussed our history in the show already so for all of our fervent fans who listen to what we say, why would we rewrite that?" explained Davis, who hosted last night's Lacoste-sponsored gala. "And then have like different people with our names? It's kind of freaky."

Parker recently told the Los Angeles Times she thought a prequel wasn't necessary. "I don't think we can pretend to go back," Parker said. "It's creating two histories. It's like, 'Oh I didn't know that about Carrie Bradshaw.' "

Davis also agrees with Parker that there's room for a third SATC flick. "I'm always hopeful and I always believe there's another story to tell because these are these women's lives so why wouldn't there be another chapter," she said. "[But] I don't know if it will happen."

She smiled, "I'm not the person who has to decide that, thank goodness. I leave the pressure up to Sarah Jessica and Michael Patrick King."

Parker told the L.A. Times she could see the third installment happening in about five years.

Now we want to hear from you: Should there be a Sex and the City prequel with 20-something actors replacing Parker and the rest of the original cast? Should there be third movie? Sound off below.

VIDEO: Which celebrity offspring has been bitten by the acting bug?