The Devil Still Wears Prada: How the The Devil Wears Prada Films Understand Culture

Still in fashion, Meryl Streep and Anne Hathaway return for a sharp, sophisticated sequel that will leave fans pleasantly surprised.

20 years after Andy Sachs first stepped foot into the marble halls of Runway magazine, she’s back — but unfortunately, the world of print journalism she once knew is a shadow of its former self.

The Devil Wears Prada 2 arrived in theaters not just as a nostalgia-fueled sequel, but as a reflection of the flailing media industry struggling to survive the digital age. While the original was a story about surviving your nightmare boss, the sequel centers around the death of traditional journalism and the rise of the “tech bro” era.

From Meryl Streep’s icy, yet satisfying, return as Miranda to Anne Hathaway’s transition of Andy into a serious reporter, the sequel has already surpassed box office expectations, proving that even two decades later, Miranda Priestly’s approval is still the most sought-after accessory in the world.

But let’s rewind and see how a movie about one of the most respected fashion publications came to be.

The Real Story

It was 1999 and Lauren Weisberger had just graduated from Cornell University when she got a job working as Anna Wintour’s assistant. It was clear to everyone from the start that Weisberger had little to no care about high fashion, but more so a career in writing.

After less than a year in the role, Weisberger left the magazine and followed a Vogue editor to another publication. Just two years later, she sold her debut novel, The Devil Wears Prada.

What makes this story so interesting is that 20th Century Fox bought the rights to the film adaptation in 2003, before the novel was even completed. The studio knew they had found gold and once Streep was cast, the project was greenlit.

So, while the movie is loosely based on Weisberger’s real-life experience rather than a direct retelling, there were real and specific situations, like being told that “a million girls would kill for this job,” that were included.

The Magic of the Original

The first film was a commercial success when it came out, with Streep being praised for making a cold character complex and entertaining. It earned $326.6 million worldwide on a $35 million production budget and, as we know now, the film would become a cultural phenomenon with quotes, merch and montages to be remembered.

What makes this film stand true today is the decision between ambition and personal values. As Andy succeeds at Runway and begins to learn, it comes at the cost of her personal life and relationships, with Nigel (Stanley Tucci) even saying, “Let me know when your entire life goes up in smoke, [it] means it’s time for a promotion.”

The turmoil of which to choose is seen especially through the lens of the working women. Not only having to decide between personal or professional goals, but dealing with public perception of how qualities like strength and motivation in women are seen as cold and mean.

The film resonates with many women as they understand the sacrifices Priestly had to make and sympathize with the position Sachs finds herself in. It’s the age-old question of: how much are you willing to sacrifice to succeed?

Not only that, but the first film establishes fashion as its own character. Largely because of the amazing styling of Patricia Field, who worked on projects like Sex and the City and Confessions of a Shopaholic, fashion is its own entity.

While fashion professionals have criticized the movie for being a bit satirical of the working world, people still love to see the clothes in the movie.

Personally, if I only had one minute and 39 seconds left to live, I would watch the Vogue montage scene where Andy is seen wearing a variety of incredible pieces.

Much like Andy, the audience learns that clothes don’t just come from a “pile of stuff,” but rather a reflection of the thought and care that is behind each stitch or fabric choice.

It’s an industry where, by understanding and learning, you can actually make a difference in your life and the lives of others. Take the cerulean belt scene, which crystallizes the power of fashion and influence, as an example.

With just one monologue and one single color (which Streep chose to use herself), Priestly dismantled an entire worldview of people who think they are too good or too smart for fashion.

The first movie delivered on many levels and is a timeless piece that allows each generation to uncover a world they wouldn’t have otherwise imagined. Then came July 2024, when news hit that there would be a sequel. I fell to the floor in shock.

Sequel Fears

Hollywood has always been about making a profit and, in the age of superhero franchises, my biggest worry with this sequel was that they’d ruin the characters we all love, like many others do.

We’ve seen beloved movies getting remakes or sequels that leave audiences disappointed. The first movie worked because it was in a time when social media didn’t exist. You could only learn about that world by experience or reading about it — it wasn’t something that was easily accessible.

The ending of the first movie was also effective in showing the payoff between Priestly and Sachs as they parted ways. While Sachs left the fashion world, she had still learned lessons in styling that would help her in the future, and Priestly had an assistant that reminded her of herself.

What would the plot of the sequel be centered around? Fast fashion? Social-media influencers?

Again, the first movie is a timeless masterpiece that can be indicative of whatever stage the person watching is at. But in this sensitive time we’re in, could writers come up with something that felt as reflective?

I was also curious about the involvement of Vogue in this sequel. In the weeks leading up to the premiere, I kept focusing on how much Wintour, the real-life inspiration for Priestly, was present.

The original was so unique because many couture houses didn’t want to lend pieces or be attached to the project out of fear of “upsetting the powers that be” — the “powers” being Wintour.

Designers, journalists and models were all afraid of being involved back then, and with Wintour embracing this new project, I wasn’t sure how it would reflect in the movie. Little did I know, this was a conscious decision from Vogue’s head of editorial content, Chloe Malle.

Would it be filled with a ridiculous amount of product placement? Would we see cameos from tired celebrities like the Kardashians? What kinds of pop-culture elements would this movie have?

Which leads me to the day of the premiere, when I put on my ridiculously fabulous brown fur coat with my matching Dior purse and best Priestly face as I got ready to assess The Devil Wears Prada 2.

Analyzing The Devil Wears Prada 2

As I sat in the AMC theater recliner with my nachos on one side and a large Mr. Pibb on the other, I mentally prepared for whatever path the film may take. Suddenly, the lights began to dim, and Andy Sachs began to brush her teeth as Dua Lipa’s “End Of An Era” began to play.

The chills officially began.

The sequel centers around Sachs, who is now an award-winning reporter, before she’s laid off via text. Coincidently, Elias-Clark, the publishing company that owns Runway, is in the middle of a PR disaster after publishing a positive profile about a fashion brand that has sweatshops.

Looking to get out of this hole, Elias-Clark’s chairman, Irv Ravitz, hires Sachs to reinforce the brand’s image, and she’s now back at the place she thought she would never return.

Before long, Ravitz’s son is in charge and, with sudden new management, looks at layoffs and cutbacks. He wants to get rid of the Runway that Priestly had curated for so long, along with shifting to a more digital look. The only thing that matters to him is creating clickable content instead of shaping fashion trends.

The biggest theme throughout the movie is the fight to save journalism from people who have money, but no real creativity. The movie isn’t about Priestly’s meanness or the state of fashion, but the state of journalism.

Speaking with a little bias, I thought the film handled the discussion honestly and sincerely to how journalists feel now. With conversations around artificial intelligence (AI) and new developments in the tech world, at what point do we stop repackaging manufactured culture to shove down the consumers’ throats? The movie gets that.

There’s a part in the film when people try to cancel Priestly and share an AI-generated meme of her as a McDonald’s worker. Instead of actually using AI, which many in the film industry have done, the production team actually reached out to an artist to hand-create the meme to look AI-generated.

Obviously, we see incredible clothes and bonds between characters, but what I love most is the new relationship that Priestly and Sachs enter as they embark on their journey to save Runway.

The writing felt natural and made sense, along with the pacing, which felt very reminiscent of the first film. The writers modernized the conversation and made it feel very real and current because of factors like the decline of physical media.

While critics say that Streep needed to show off the “devil” side of Priestly more, I don’t think they understand her character fully. Priestly wasn’t a “nicer” version of herself, but in the age of PR nightmares, there are now limits to what characters in these positions can say.

She actually told someone, “You’re not a visionary, you’re a vendor,” which had me stunned and reevaluating my life choices. Critics may believe that Priestly is a watered-down version of her true character from the first movie, but moments like this reinforced her ability to remain cutting while not raising her tone.

Many people on social media loved the film and connected it with the development of each character. Even the toughest critic, my dad, left the theater with a newfound appreciation after being fiercely loyal to the artistry that the first film is.

There were callbacks to the first film, music from Lady Gaga and an incredible scene with the Last Supper painting that almost converted me into a Catholic.

All these kooky elements breathed life into the film, and for fans like me who weren’t focused on perfection, we got to see a return to form. We aren’t just being reunited with these characters, we’ve aged with them, and that’s what this sequel understands. 

All in all, The Devil Wears Prada is a cinematic masterpiece in which the sequel did not disappoint. It’s not often that a sequel connects with the audience, but The Devil Wears Prada 2 makes viewers remember why we loved the original. After watching both films twice now, I can confidently say that the first film is the perfect ending to that time in the characters’ lives, while the sequel ends their stories in a roundabout way. 

Will Sachs ever truly get Priestly’s approval? That doesn’t matter, because at least there’s another day to assess success now, in a time where the line is always moving.  

I guess the only question I still have is whether the story is really over, or will we get another opportunity to see the devil wear more Prada?

For now, that’s all.

Header Image by Diego Yepez