CJS-DEPPendent

TV, Movie, pop-culture and fanfiction nerd extraordinaire. Do I know how tumbr works? No. Do I hope to create a somewhat entertaining collection of posts based around my many little obsessions? Yes.

[cjs-deppendent]

So. I have now seen The Devil Wears Prada 2 twice and I have Thoughts™.

A couple of criticisms first before going full fangirl with the Mirandy read.

Under the cut because spoilers.

First of all: somewhere in the Disney vaults there is absolutely a 4-hour-long Zack Snyder director’s cut of this film and I need them to release it immediately....

Because the editing in places is surreal. We go from the end of Gaga’s performance, to a random aerial shot of Milan (we KNOW we are in Milan, every character is CURRENTLY IN MILAN), then back to Nigel at the same party, while Andy and Miranda vanish off on a mysterious mission that is never fully explained before later materialising in Vermont via helicopter in entirely different outfits.

The movie also seems to be trying to juggle too many messages at once:

the death of print media

AI

the collapse of curated culture

tech bros

capitalism eating art alive

cancel culture

loyalty and betrayal

female ambition and the cost of success

biblical allegory

…and all of those themes are good and interesting and probably beautifully developed in the mythical 4-hour version living in a vault somewhere. But in the theatrical cut, it occasionally feels less like “one coherent enemy” and more like the characters are fighting the general concept of modernity itself.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The callbacks were also occasionally a bit too on-the-nose. A cerulean carpet at a Runway gala is not a cute little wink to the audience, it’s a huge choice someone within the world made. Miranda Priestly does not accidentally make the symbolic centrepiece of her event blue. That woman could weaponise a napkin colour. So there should be a reason for such a bold move. Add to that the cerulean bags, street vendors and lampshades and it starts to feel like a little too much fanservice.

________________________________________________________________

THAT SAID.

The core four absolutely served. Meryl. Anne. Stanley. Emily. Absolute tour de force performances from all four of them.

And what struck me most was the thing that I have always thought was the mark of genuinely great acting: I stopped seeing the actors and just saw the characters as people. I wasn’t watching Meryl Streep playing Miranda Priestly. I was watching Miranda Priestly. Same with Andy, Nigel and Emily. They slipped back into these characters so naturally it genuinely felt like these people had simply continued existing offscreen for twenty years.

Emily Blunt in particular somehow emerged from cryogenic storage exactly the same.

The supporting cast mostly worked well too, even if a lot of them primarily functioned as environmental architecture for the Runway universe. Amari and Charlie were both charming (Charlie especially had actual personality), and Sasha was genuinely compelling despite the film not giving her much material.

Jay, unfortunately, lacked presence and dude really needs to stop touching Miranda like she’s his bro.

Benji, however, I thoroughly disliked. I understand that the film wanted a tech-bro billionaire caricature. I do. Truly. But this man was so catastrophically insufferable that I physically cannot buy Emily Charlton willingly dating him. He doesn’t even have the magnetic charisma that usually makes terrible billionaire men believable. He’s just… exhausting. Which accidentally weakens Emily’s storyline because Emily may be ruthless, ambitious and emotionally constipated, but she is also intelligent and highly perceptive. I simply cannot reconcile that woman voluntarily listening to Benji explain why we don’t need necks over dinner.

________________________________________________________________

Speaking of side-characters, I also took issue with the “romantic partners”. Not because I’m a Mirandy shipper. I mean, I am, but I get that Mirandy is not canon and that both characters are straight in the film. So, it makes sense that at least one of them would have a partner. But they just didn’t feel real…

Stuart, feels TOO perfect. He’s cultured. Gentle. Patient. Emotionally intelligent. Entirely unthreatened by Miranda’s success. Deeply supportive. Wealthy enough not to need anything from her. Happy to simply exist beside a 76 year old woman who eclipses him in every way. In other words: a unicorn.

And I know we’re supposed to take the relationship at face value, but I genuinely cannot decide whether the film intends us to fully believe in it romantically or whether it’s deliberately presenting the relationship as something platonic. Because Miranda and Stuart don’t feel like passionate soulmates; they feel like two lonely people choosing companionship. And honestly? That interpretation actually makes the relationship more emotionally interesting.

Peter is almost aggressively harmless. Like the film sat down and said: “Okay but what if we designed a boyfriend in a laboratory specifically to never challenge Andy in any meaningful way?” He’s quirky. Sweet. Safe. Earnest. Completely non-threatening. And I understand what the film is trying to do. He’s supposed to represent stability and emotional availability in somewhat direct contrast to Nate. But unfortunately he occasionally crosses the line from “healthy adult man” into “golden retriever emotionally begging for approval.” And the problem is that Andy has fundamentally never been drawn to safety. Not in 2006. Not now. Even when she wants stability she gravitates toward intensity, challenge, sharpness, ambition and emotional complexity. Which is why poor Peter never really stood a chance the second Miranda Priestly walked back into the narrative.

________________________________________________________________

I think one of the things that made the film feel disjointed is that some important plot points feel like they were explained/dealt with in scenes that were cut for time.

Emily’s betrayal of Miranda should have landed like a nuclear bomb emotionally and instead it arrives so abruptly that it almost feels like we skipped an entire subplot. We needed more context. More history. More evidence of resentment brewing beneath the surface.

Same with Nigel. I adored him, but part of me struggled with the fact that nothing seems to have materially changed for Nigel in twenty years. Even a new work title on his office door at the end would have helped to at least show that Miranda had finally “paid him back” in some way.

Also, while I loved that Nigel was the driving force behind Andy getting hired, I need more backstory. Why was he so sure she was the right person? Why does a recommendation from him immediately make Irv hire her? Have they stayed in touch? Has he been following her work? He certainly remembers her and still calls her "Six" - I can barely remember the name of co-workers from a year ago, let alone the nickname of someone else's assistant from 20 years ago. I think this reveal could have done with a bit more backstory to support it.

That said, Nigel’s “my girl” speech about Andy nearly took me out emotionally.

________________________________________________________________

The strongest thing the film does is Andy and Miranda themselves.

Andy especially feels wonderfully true to the woman she would realistically become. Successful, articulate, adventurous, still deeply principled, still slightly incapable of minding her own business when someone needs saving. Her rambling speech about journalism felt exactly like something the Andy of 2006 would say after becoming successful enough to stop caring whether people found her annoying. I also really appreciated that the film didn’t punish her with a “having it all means settling down and disappearing into domesticity” ending. She has a career. A reputation. A life. Good.

What fascinated me most, though, was the way Andy regresses around Miranda. I’ve seen people interpret this as Andy becoming weak or needy again but honestly I think it’s more complicated than that. As someone who has recently gone from being supervised to working at the same level as former seniors: old dynamics do weird things to your brain. You can KNOW you are equals professionally and still accidentally slip back into old patterns around someone who once held authority over you.

I also think Andy struggles to navigate the Miranda of 2026 because the Miranda she encounters here is not the woman she spent twenty years mythologising in her head. She’s not on her pedestal anymore. That’s not to say she’s weak - which is a criticism I’ve read a few times. Miranda isn’t weak or soft; she’s cornered.

Miranda is still intelligent. Still dangerous. Still commanding. But for the first time we are seeing Miranda operate in a world where her authority is no longer absolute. She can’t bulldoze through situations the way she used to because the landscape itself has changed around her. This Miranda feels different because the world is different.

She’s like a wounded lioness: still terrifying, still powerful, but suddenly forced to conserve energy, calculate risk, and tolerate humiliations she never previously would have accepted. And when she hesitates or lashes out under pressure, it’s not weakness; it’s self-preservation.

Andy doesn’t know how to process Miranda under these circumstances because she has literally never seen her like this before.

That, to me, is the actual emotional core of the sequel. Not nostalgia. Not fashion. Not journalism. It’s two women trying to reconcile who they thought the other person was with who they actually are now.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I genuinely think the hotel suite scene with Miranda and Stuart might be my favourite scene in the entire film and it is almost entirely because Meryl Streep is operating on a level of acting that should qualify as witchcraft.

On first viewing I thought the scene was simply about Miranda being overwhelmed. On second viewing I realised there is so much more to it.

Miranda asks Stuart what she will have if she leaves Runway, and he starts listing the things she still has if she walks away:

the girls

the dog

him

All the while stepping closer and closer to Miranda. And Miranda says: “Yeah.”

But here’s the thing. Stuart hears: “Yeah?” — as in, “please reassure me.” So he moves toward her. Comforts her. Holds her.

And this is where Meryl does something absolutely insane with a single word and almost no visible movement whatsoever. She says: “Yeah…” and you can practically hear the unspoken “but” hanging in the air. She’s not asking him for reassurance. She’s holding back from saying “that’s not enough”.

And then my favourite moment of the film: Miranda ripping the bow from around her neck as if she is suffocating. It immediately changes the entire emotional temperature of the scene. To me, the moment speaks of how cornered and trapped she feels. Not because of Stuart per se. But because of the future he has alluded to. Runway isn’t just a job to Miranda. It’s identity. Relevance. Control. Creation. Legacy. Language. Armour. It’s purpose.

Then Stuart basically tells her: “In the morning, you can decide what you want to do next.” And the film immediate cuts to Miranda pounding on Andy’s hotel room door. I’m sorry but that is the funniest and most emotionally revealing cut in the entire film. Because apparently Miranda heard: “Take the night to think about what matters most to you.” …and her subconscious immediately responded: “ANDREA.”

________________________________________________________________

Now. Mirandy goggles.

Andy is absolutely still hopelessly devoted to Miranda, and if anything it becomes more intense the longer she’s at Runway.

Also, no. I do NOT buy that Miranda forgot Andy existed. Please be serious. Miranda Priestly probably remembers the blood type of an assistant who once brought her the wrong skirt in 1998. She calls Andy “Andrea” outside Dior. The woman knows exactly who this is.

The whole “I forgot you existed” thing reads much more like Miranda trying to regain emotional control of the interaction. Especially because her response when Andy calls her out on it in the kitchen is evasive and noncommittal. And honestly I think Andy knows she’s lying too. Which almost makes it worse (better?) because it means both of them are immediately playing emotional chess within thirty seconds of seeing each other again.

________________________________________________________________

The kitchen scene is genuinely so loaded with subtext that I could give a TED Talk on it.

Because first of all: Miranda. Be serious. You expect me to believe you just HAPPENED to need more rosé literal seconds after watching Andy leave the table? That woman tracks movement in a room like a military drone. She knew where Andy was going and chose to follow.

And then we get: “I don’t know why I’m telling you this.” Yes you do, Miranda. You just can’t admit it.

Also this is the first time in either film that Miranda has voluntarily dropped her mask to anyone. Paris doesn’t count. Andy witnessed vulnerability in Paris accidentally. Miranda never intended to be seen. But here? Miranda deliberately follows Andy. Deliberately stays. Deliberately opens up. Deliberately lets the mask slip.

And Andy’s body language throughout the entire scene is fascinating. Every time Miranda speaks Andy physically moves slightly closer to her while simultaneously hugging herself like she’s trying to hold herself back from something.

Meanwhile Miranda is looking at Andy like she’s trying not to say something catastrophically life-altering. And then Meryl does that tiny lip bite and the fandom exploded.

________________________________________________________________

The Last Supper narrative

Miranda explicitly frames the situation as one where she KNOWS betrayal is coming. Much like Jesus knowing one of the apostles would betray him.

And what destroys me is that Andy thinks Miranda is accusing HER. So Andy is heartbroken because she would never consciously betray Miranda; while Miranda still fundamentally believes Andy is capable of betraying her because she already did – in Paris. Which adds a whole other level of emotional complexity to what they’re each feeling.

________________________________________________________________

Also the banquet scene?

Oh my god. Andy cannot stop staring at Miranda throughout that entire sequence. And yes, objectively the film probably wants us to interpret that as concern for her former boss/the future of the company/etc. But the energy is so personal.

There’s even that moment where Nigel notices Andy staring and follows her eyeline toward Miranda and I swear that is the exact second he turns into Dumbledore and goes: “after all this time?”

________________________________________________________________

And finally:

The Milan-to-Vermont editing gap is the funniest accidental gift this fandom has ever received.

Andy finds Miranda backstage and says they need to leave “now.” They then:

get into a car

drive to a tiny airport

disappear entirely

somehow later emerge from a helicopter in Vermont

wearing different clothes

after an unspecified amount of time

with absolutely no explanation whatsoever

WHERE WERE THEY.

WHAT HAPPENED.

WHY DID THEY NEED TO LEAVE IMMEDIATELY.

WHEN DID THEY CHANGE CLOTHES.

WHAT TRANSPORT CHAIN WERE WE USING HERE.

Those tiny planes at the airport were not flying directly to America. Someone explain the logistics immediately.

The film accidentally leaves this giant unexplained temporal void where Miranda and Andy are apparently just travelling alone together across continents offscreen for an indeterminate amount of time.

Scratch “and they were roommates.” Replace it with: “and they were alone on a private jet together for twelve hours.” ________________________________________________________________

Overall?

Occasionally edited like a fever dream. Possibly missing forty percent of its runtime.

But emotionally rich, unexpectedly layered, extremely well acted, and absolutely fascinating to chew on.

4.5/5.

Now release the 4-hour cut, Disney.

[cjs-deppendent]

Ok but, like... is Gaga a Mirandy shipper?!

[cjs-deppendent]

In preparation for May 1st, I give you - fangirl DWP2 bingo.

And, yes, I'm a massive nerd...

(Please don't repost without credit.)

[cjs-deppendent]

Completed card after watching the film... under the cut because sort of spoilers?

[lgbteca]

Saw the movie tonight. I'm so happy.

[scarlet-heels]

Sure, Jan…

[cjs-deppendent]

Oops.

[cjs-deppendent]

Another gift from a new promo

"Oh, we're a team now? That's a nice story."

[cjs-deppendent]

In preparation for May 1st, I give you - fangirl DWP2 bingo.

And, yes, I'm a massive nerd...

(Please don't repost without credit.)

[cjs-deppendent]

Another back-of-the-car conversation, here we go!!

[cjs-deppendent]

More rambling DWP2 thoughts...

Cerulean isn’t a callback. It’s the point.

Ok, so I need to talk about the cerulean carpet because it was driving me slightly insane.

At first glance, sure—easy read:

“haha cerulean sweater reference, we remember 2006, move on”

Except… no. Absolutely not.

Because this isn’t a subtle little nod tucked into a costume or a throwaway line. It’s not Andy wearing a blue top in the background. It’s not even a cheeky one-liner.

It’s a carpet. And not just a carpet—an entire event built around it. The new online Runway release literally tells us this is intentional:

“Rolling out the Cerulean Carpet proves fashion is never accidental.”

Like… they are not being subtle here.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The thing that wasn’t sitting right

I've spent far too long thinking about this because on the surface it should be simple: “cerulean = iconic line = callback”

But the execution is way too aggressive for that.

You don’t:

build an entire gala identity around it

show it in both setup and payoff

centre multiple key scenes on it

…just to wink at the audience 20 years later.

So the question becomes: why this much cerulean?

And the only answer that actually works is: because it matters inside the story.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

What cerulean actually means

In the original film, the cerulean speech wasn’t about Miranda’s taste, or even about the colour itself.

It was about systems - the invisible, top-down structure through which fashion moves from designers to consumers. Cerulean was just the example Miranda used to dismantle Andy Sachs’s view that fashion was trivial.

What mattered wasn’t the colour. It was the shift in perspective.

And crucially—that shift happened to Andy, not Miranda.

Cerulean isn’t tied to Miranda as a symbol. It’s tied to understanding her world.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The DWP2 context (as far as we can tell)

The world Miranda explained in that speech? It’s disappearing.

Now we’ve got:

fast fashion moving at TikTok speed

influencers bypassing editorial entirely

“rich = evil” flattening nuance

Miranda literally asking what she’s even allowed to say anymore

The system she described - where influence trickles down from couture - has fractured. Authority has been decentralised. Expertise isn’t trusted the way it used to be.

Runway isn’t just being criticised - it’s becoming irrelevant.

And Miranda, as a character, isn’t built to operate in a world where her authority is constantly questioned. Her entire power structure depends on certainty, hierarchy, and the legitimacy of that system.

Which is exactly what’s now under threat. Enter Andy...

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Andy’s return

Andy comes back to “restore credibility.”

And that’s important, because that doesn’t necessarily mean defending Miranda. It means something more complicated: making people understand the system again

Andy is uniquely placed to do that. She started outside the system, learned it, rejected it, and still understands it. She can see both sides - the logic of high fashion and the skepticism of the modern audience.

Which makes her the perfect translator.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Cerulean as the tool

And this is where cerulean clicks into place - because it already worked as a translation tool once.

Miranda took a lumpy blue sweater and turned it into a thesis on how fashion isn’t trivial.

If Andy is writing a “Miranda Priestly expose”, cerulean gives her an angle. A way to frame the current crisis. A way to explain to the audience—not just what Miranda does, but why it matters.

She can take haute couture from: “irrelevant luxury stuff” and reframe it as: the creative force that still shapes everything - even fast fashion

And a well written journalistic piece reframing the modern world’s view of fashion through a Cerulean lens would be really nicely topped off with a Cerulean-themed Gala. A physical representation of that reframing; maybe even a symbol of a crisis averted.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

TL;DR that cerulean carpet isn’t a callback—it’s the physical embodiment of the entire thesis behind both films.

....

Again, I may be entirely off base. But if this is the angle, it would make me happy.

[beardedmrbean]

[multifandominfj]

I see what you did there, Emily 😏

[cjs-deppendent]

DWP 1 (2006) || DWP2 (2026)

"The Emilys"

Then and now.

[cjs-deppendent]

Rambling DWP2 Thoughts

Ok, so, I’ve been re-watching the DWP2 trailers/clips like an absolute maniac and I have thoughts. Here’s what I’m seeing:

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Miranda’s New Second Assistant

Miranda’s new assistant appears to be a slightly chubby gay guy (which I am 100% here for).

In the first film Miranda literally says: “I always hire the same girl; stylish, slender – of course – worships the magazine”. So this feels deliberate – Miranda hasn’t gotten nicer or gone “woke”. But Miranda learned from Andy and evolved. in DWP1 Andy proved to her that a different model works, and Miranda adjusted her criteria accordingly.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hired behind Miranda’s back

In the clip shown on Stephen Colbert, Andy says “he said” that Runway needed to take control of the narrative and “he thought someone with my expertise would be a good idea”.

It is also clear from that clip and the final trailer that Miranda did not hire or choose Andy. Nigel’s reactions don’t fit with it having been his idea. So, whoever “he” is seems to be in a position to hire someone for Runway without Miranda’s say so. Possibly Irv?

If Irv hired Andy behind Miranda’s back, this could be yet another attempt to undermine her – forcing her to work with an ex-underling who is there to fix “her” mess. It would also create friction and put Andy in a position where she feels the need to “prove herself” again.

It's really interesting that Miranda reacts by immediately firing “Ashley”. Whoever “Ashley” is, she’s someone whose resume Miranda knows and who she probably hired herself. Miranda doesn’t act impulsively. Firing someone she chose to make room for Andy isn’t emotional — it’s calculated. That makes this an act of unspoken trust and she will have calculated that Andy probably is the right person for the job, even if she won’t admit it out loud.

It’s like she’s punishing Andy for being hired behind her back (and for Paris) while also recognising she’s the right person for the job.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Banquet Scene (Irv’s Death)

There’s that banquet scene where Miranda covers her mouth and someone rushes in front of her, and everyone stares at something (someone) on the floor.

We know Irv is back, and there are shots of Andy and Nigel dressed in black like they’ve come from a funeral.

Putting that together, it really looks like Irv collapses and dies at the banquet. This would create an immediate power vacuum, opening the door for a corporate reshuffle (very possibly involving Emily and the luxury brand she works for).

Andy is already at the banquet with Nigel and Emily, which suggests she has either already been brought into Runway (supporting the Irv-hired-her theory).

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Staircase Sequence and “I hope that’s not what you’re wearing”

Andy looks upset and close to tears in the scene where Miranda tells her she hopes that isn’t what she is wearing.

She then descends the stairs in the hotel looking crestfallen only to come back up with Emily (to a different floor).

When returning with Emily, she appears to say something that sounds like “renege with her?” Andy’s distress isn’t (simply) about Miranda’s disapproval of her clothes. It’s about the idea that Miranda doesn’t trust her/expects her to betray her.

Miranda’s default setting is to expect and anticipate betrayal – and with so much change afoot and so many threats to face, it makes sense that she assumes Andy will betray her.

Andy goes to Emily, likely for clothes; but this likely also prompts an alignment in all three women’s goals. Miranda is trying to weather a storm – believing she is facing it alone. Andy is trying to help her. Emily now chooses a side (even if this is not immediately obvious to the other characters).

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Emily being framed as “the villain”

At first glance, Emily is presented as the antagonist in the trailers; but on closer inspection, I think she is very deliberately ambiguous.

Emily is now working for a luxury brand and has power – over the industry, over advertisement money and, hence, over Runway and Miranda.

She is in a position to choose to climb to the top at Miranda’s expense, which may be tempting after being her underling. However, she is also in a position to influence the industry to advance and evolve while respecting history and, thus, Miranda and her legacy.

When she says “may the bridges I burn light my way”, I don’t think she is burning bridges with Andy/Miranda/Nigel/Runway. I think she is burning bridges with the easy/obvious path to success; choosing to align herself with Miranda instead.

I don’t think she’s the villain. I think she plays both sides for most of the film, gathering information and keeping her options open, but then chooses to align with Miranda. Not out of loyalty - She’s not a minion anymore, she’s not a follower - she doesn’t pick the winning side; she makes it the winning side.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

“The Definitive Miranda Priestly Expose”

The trailer hints that Andy might be pushed towards writing an “exposé” on Miranda.

I don’t buy for a second that this is a real betrayal arc – that would go completely against who Andy is as a character and what the first film was about. This is almost certainly misdirection.

If Andy does write something, it’s far more likely to be a reframing; something that actually reinforces Miranda’s myth rather than dismantling it.

Which would mirror the real-world parallel with Anna Wintour. The original The Devil Wears Prada book was framed as an exposé, but ultimately made Anna more iconic, not less. If the sequel leans into that again, it’s not about exposing Miranda — it’s about cementing her legacy.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Unnecessary Husband™

Something doesn’t sit right with me about The Husband™.

Miranda has been married several times (3? 4?), so it is not strange that she got re-married. However, it has always been clear that her marriages weren’t her priority and that she was married to her job first and foremost. That being the case, how has this marriage survived?

Also, it seems strange that she would find “true love” with a man who “really gets her” in her 50s, 60s or 70s – while it is a stereotype (and, yes, he could be the exception), most men that age would be dating younger women. So is there an ulterior motive?

I can’t quite figure it out, but the way I see it, he is either:

The emotionally secure, unicorn husband who is not threatened by Miranda’s success and is just there to support her (extremely unlikely).

He represents another facet of The-Husband-Who-Doesn’t-Get-It™ – pushing for Miranda to slow down and retire, telling her she’s “done enough”. Essentially, a vehicle through which external influences and societal expectations try to “phase Miranda out”. He’s not evil or the villain per se, he even perceives himself to be supportive; but to Miranda, he’s asking her to stop being who she is. This option also puts him in a position to contrast with Andy: he wants Miranda to slow down and retire; Andy is supporting Miranda to continue and adapt.

He is actively part of the problem. I doubt he is the outright villain sabotaging Miranda from within her own home, she’s too smart to let that happen. But he could be influenced by others e.g. the board, financial interests, etc… to subtly manipulate and try to steer her in certain ways.

And we know he must play a significant role. They cast Kenneth Branagh. You don’t cast an Oscar-nominated, BAFTA, Emmy, Golden Globe and Olivier Award winner to play a bit part. He’s not there to look angry at the top of the stairs and play drunk in a cut scene… he’s a freakin’ Shakespearean actor ffs! So The Husband™ must play a significant role.

Also, it feels weird that he isn’t wearing a ring… Marriage of convenience??

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Andy’s Confidence

Andy is portrayed in the trailer as someone who has built a life and a career on her own terms. She is confident, self-assured, and comfortable in who she is. But within minutes of coming face to face with Miranda, she’s babbling, over-explaining herself and shrinking back into the 20-something year old who considered calling the coastguard to airlift her boss in a hurricane.

On the surface, this looks like she is still intimidated by her boss from 20 years ago. But I think it’s more of an unresolved identity issue.

When Andy walked away and threw her phone in the fountain, it was framed as self-preservation. But it was also avoidance – she was scared of the version of herself Miranda saw.  

Andy has built success, but she hasn’t given herself permission to stand at Miranda’s level, because she still believes that doing so would require becoming her. And so, when faced with Miranda, her confidence wavers.

We see that in how she reacts when she realises Miranda didn’t know she was hired, and again in how shaken she is by the seemingly simple line: “I hope that’s not what you’re wearing tonight.” It’s not about clothes — it’s about approval, alignment, and whether she belongs in that space.

For Andy, I think a large part of the story will be about accepting that she doesn’t have to reject Miranda or become her. She just needs to learn she can stand shoulder to shoulder with her without compromising who she is.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mirandy

Let’s be real for a second — Mirandy is not going to happen in any explicit, canon way.

Mirandy as a ship sprang from the subtext and chemistry between the characters in the first film. It wasn’t intentionally written that way, but it was there, and the fandom immediately picked up on it and ran with it (and has kept running with it for the past 20 years).

I’m sure at least some people on the creative team are aware of Mirandy as a concept — they’re online, and it’s not exactly hidden. But within the context of the story, it wouldn’t make sense to suddenly redefine two previously straight leads.

And, bluntly, this is a massive studio film with a huge global audience and a very established brand. They’re not going to risk all of that by making a last-minute, fundamental change to the core dynamic. That’s just not how these films work.

So no, it won't be canon. But if the trailers and promos are anything to go by, the chemistry and subtext are still very much there and will likely continue to fuel fanfic for the next 20 years — and honestly, that might be more fun anyway.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Ending

The two obvious options for an ending are:

Miranda retires

Miranda steps sideways to a new role

I don’t think Miranda retires – it doesn’t fit with her character or what we know about her. Miranda is Runway - and she is unapologetic about it. After 3 (4?) failed marriages sacrificed to her job, I don’t think she gives in and retires now. Also, the tag-line: “Icons reign forever” doesn’t suggest a calm and dignified retirement.

But I can also understand that, at 76, she probably won’t be EIC forever. So a sideways move would make sense. I can see her joining the board at EC (perhaps in Irv’s old job?) - above Runway, less hands-on but more untouchable; still influential and shaping everything.

This would also beautifully mirror Anna Wintour – with whom it all began. Retired but not irrelevant. Like Anna, Miranda moves from being indispensable in the room to inescapable — defining the role whether she’s present or not.

And, between Andy, Nigel and Emily, Runway will be in good hands. Whether under Nigel as Editor-in-Chief with Andy as Features Editor, or as part of a broader partnership with Emily’s company, Miranda will still be steering the ship — just no longer from the deck.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Those are my rambling thoughts, anyway. May be totally off base, but if this is sort of how it goes, I'll be happy.

[cjs-deppendent]

Spot the difference...

[cjs-deppendent]

DWP (2006) || DWP2 (2026)

"Do I know her?" - Miranda Priestley

[cjs-deppendent]

DWP (2006) || DWP2 (2026)