The much-anticipated sequel to the 2006 classic, *The Devil Wears Prada*, has elicited a range of reactions, particularly concerning its portrayal of body diversity. Despite promises from stars Meryl Streep and Anne Hathaway to represent a broader spectrum of body types, early reviews suggest that the film falls short, relying on outdated humour that undermines any claims of inclusivity.
A Press Tour of Promise
During the extensive global promotional tour for *The Devil Wears Prada 2*, both Streep and Hathaway expressed their commitment to enhancing body diversity within the fashion narrative. Their experience at Milan Fashion Week, where they noted the “alarmingly thin” models, sparked discussions about ensuring that the sequel would not perpetuate past stereotypes. Hathaway even mentioned her proactive approach to the producers, advocating for a more varied representation of bodies in the film.
However, the initial excitement was quickly dampened. Just minutes into the film, the first weight-related joke lands, signalling a return to the very tropes that the original film had previously championed. While the casting of comedian Caleb Hearon as Miranda Priestly’s second assistant and the fleeting appearance of plus-size models like Ashley Graham during a runway montage were touted as steps towards inclusivity, they feel more like token gestures than genuine progression.
The Weight of Culture
The original *The Devil Wears Prada* emerged during an era steeped in diet culture, where body shaming was rampant, and the obsession with thinness was pervasive. The fictional luxury magazine Runway illustrated this fixation, with characters frequently making quips about weight and appearance. While some lines became iconic, they also contributed to a societal norm that equated worth with physical appearance.
Since then, the landscape has shifted, with movements advocating for body positivity gaining traction. Milestones such as the appearance of plus-size model Ashley Graham on the cover of *Vogue* in 2017 and the inclusion of mid-size models in major fashion shows have marked significant progress. Yet, recent reports indicate a troubling regression. In a Vogue Business analysis, a staggering 97.6% of looks presented at recent womenswear shows were modelled by individuals considered straight-size, with a mere 0.3% represented by plus-size models.
The Impact of Weight-Loss Culture
Compounding the issue is the rise of weight-loss drugs, originally intended for diabetes management but increasingly used for aesthetic purposes, particularly in Hollywood. This trend has shifted the focus from fashion as an expression of art to the body as a status symbol, further entrenching the ideals of thinness within the industry.
As the Met Gala approaches, themed around the intersection of fashion and art, the emphasis on body ideals becomes even more pronounced. The anticipated showcasing of “naked dressing” only highlights the ongoing struggle against the superficial standards that continue to dominate the conversation about body image.
The Echo of Past Jokes
Despite the film’s aspirations, it becomes evident that 20 years after the first *Devil Wears Prada*, the sequel still leans heavily on weight-related humour. Hathaway’s character Andy refers to herself as the “former fat assistant,” echoing the derogatory language of her past. There is a stark contrast with the original film, where Miranda referred to her as the “smart, fat girl.” The evolution of Andy’s character, from a size 6 to a size 4, underscores the ongoing obsession with weight loss, even as she achieves professional success.
In a particularly jarring moment, Miranda misinterprets the concept of “body positivity,” dismissing it as “body negative” in a misguided attempt at humour. This reflects a broader cultural misunderstanding of body positivity and highlights the stagnation of progress within the industry.
Why it Matters
The release of *The Devil Wears Prada 2* serves as a sobering reminder of the fashion industry’s complicated relationship with body image. While there have been notable advances in body inclusivity, the film’s reliance on outdated tropes and humour reveals a concerning trend: a return to the very ideals that body positivity sought to dismantle. As audiences engage with this sequel, it raises critical questions about the representations of body diversity in media and the responsibilities of filmmakers to reflect a more inclusive society. The impact of such portrayals extends beyond entertainment; they shape perceptions and attitudes towards body image in real life. As we navigate these conversations, the need for authentic representation has never been more pressing.