Almost two decades after its release, the anticipation forThe Devil Wears Prada 2is reaching fever pitch. Meryl Streep and Anne Hathaway are poised to reprise their iconic roles as the formidable Miranda Priestly and her ambitious assistant, Andy Sachs. The sequel promises a glimpse into the characters’ evolved lives, navigating the ever-shifting landscape of the modern media world.
The original film, a sharp and witty exploration of ambition and workplace dynamics, resonated deeply with a generation. Based on Lauren Weisberger’s novel – a thinly veiled account of her experiences working with Anna Wintour atVogue– it captivated audiences with its compelling characters and deliciously dramatic portrayal of the high-fashion industry. Emily Blunt and Stanley Tucci’s unforgettable supporting performances only amplified its impact.
But while the core quartet is reuniting for the sequel, one familiar face will be notably absent: Adrian Grenier, who played Andy’s boyfriend, Nate. His character’s departure in the first film sparked a debate that continues to this day, and Grenier himself has recently revisited the controversy, defending Nate’s actions.
Nate’s breakup with Andy stemmed from his discomfort with her transformation, feeling she was losing herself in the superficial world she once criticized. While often portrayed as the “bad guy” by fans, some acknowledge the validity of his concerns. This long-standing debate recently resurfaced, prompting a discussion among readers about Nate’s true role in the story.
The response was overwhelmingly critical of Nate. One reader bluntly stated, “Yes, next question,” while another declared him “the real villain.” Many pointed to his perceived lack of emotional support, accusing him of “gaslighting” and attempting to “keep Andy down” as she pursued her career.
One reader articulated the frustration felt by many: “As she was growing within herself, Nate began to pout, belittled what she did, and questioned her advancement at work. Sorry, Nate was and will always be the villain.” This sentiment highlights the core of the argument – Nate’s inability to celebrate Andy’s success and his resistance to her evolving identity.
Grenier, however, maintains that both characters were simply striving for success in their respective fields. He emphasizes the importance of commitments, citing Andy’s missed birthday as a key point of contention. He acknowledges Nate’s reaction may have lacked strength, admitting his character “had some growing up to do.”
In a playful nod to his controversial status, Grenier even appeared in a recent Starbucks advertisement, jokingly acknowledging Nate’s imperfections and expressing a willingness to revisit the role. The ad sparked further discussion, with fans divided on whether Nate deserved a second chance.
The debate continues to rage, with some arguing that Andy herself was the true antagonist, and others acknowledging that everyone in the film possessed flaws. Ultimately, the story isn’t about finding a single villain, but about the complexities of ambition, compromise, and the challenges of maintaining authenticity in a demanding world.
With Grenier not invited back for the sequel, Nate’s story remains unresolved. Perhaps it’s best to imagine him contentedly crafting grilled cheeses in Boston, while Andy continues to thrive in the fast-paced world of New York City.The Devil Wears Prada 2arrives in cinemas on Friday, May 2, promising to reignite the conversation and offer a new chapter in this beloved story.
