Anne Hathaway and Meryl Streep are seen filming scenes at the "Devil wears Prada 2" set in Hudson Yards, Manhattan on July 29, 2025 in New York City. Photo / Getty Images
The Devil Wears Prada sequel isn’t set to release until next year, but some fans of the first movie are already whipping themselves into a frenzy.
They are picking apart images from on-location shoots in New York City, speculating and fantasising about potential plotlines and otherwise looking for clues as to whether we’re in for an improvement on the first (like The Godfather Part II) or a cringey sequel (like Sex and The City 2).
And in what’s become a cottage internet industry, everyone seems to have an opinion on the costumes: Are they beautiful? Underwhelming? Unrealistic? Perfect?
Among these “fans” we speak of are our very own Rachel Tashjian and Shane O’Neill, who got to yapping about their hopes and fears for the new movie and why the original has become such an enduring hit in the nearly 20 years since it was released.
Why are we so fixated on a sequel we know very little about? And can a movie about the decline of the media industry and the digital revolution deliver the fantasy punch we all seem to be craving?
Here are some excerpts from their conversation.
Rachel Tashjian: Shane, are you writing this down? I need you to tell Simone that I’m not going to approve that girl she sent me for the Brazilian layout. I asked for clean, athletic, smiling and she sent me dirty, tired and paunchy. And R.S.V.P. yes to Michael Kors’ party. I want the driver to drop me off at 9.30 and pick me up at 9.45 sharp. Call Natalie at Glorious Foods and tell her no, for the 40th time, no! I don’t want dacquoise. I want tortes filled with warm rhubarb compote. Then call my ex-husband and remind him that the parent-teacher conference is at Dalton tonight.
Then I want you to call my husband and ask him: Why is everyone so excited for this Devil Wears Prada sequel?
Shane O’Neill: Hearing you talk like this makes me feel fatter than Andy Sachs.
RT: How many times have you seen the original movie? And why do you think it’s so sticky?
SO: At least three times, but probably no more than six. But I’ll be honest - the broad appeal and long tail of admiration surprises me.
RT: I think it’s one of the great movies about the workplace. Up there with Working Girl and Office Space and Wall Street. It makes me feel bright-eyed and bushy-tailed!
SO: I have that feeling, too. Which is strange because it’s supposed to be about being ground down by a sadistic boss in a ruthless industry. But it feels so fresh! So fun!
RT: The long tail is surprising - why? Should we pause and talk about why we’re talking about it?!
Basically: Anne Hathaway and Meryl Streep are (very publicly!) filming the sequel to this movie. The sequel is unexpected, I think - because this is a movie about the inside guts of fashion, and one wouldn’t think that would have inspired sequel material.
I also think, maybe more crucially, the world that it glamourised, of high-end solipsistic aspirational magazine-making was at its tail end when the movie came out in 2006. And watching Miranda Priestly navigate the digital revolution (BORING!!!!) does not sound like the stuff to inspire escapist fare like “florals? for spring? Groundbreaking.”
SO: Its vision of New York City is also very of its time. This is not Midnight Cowboy or Liquid Sky. This is a city that is tough but not dangerous. You might spill your latte while running between cars, but there’s never even a question of whether it’s a safe place for Andy to roam alone at all hours of the night.
RT: Yes - it’s the dream of a New York we no longer know! A more innocent (if sanded-edged) time! I think we see Andy, pre-makeover, take the subway once, while she’s eating her onion bagel. But as soon as she gets that little wardrobe of newsboy caps and Chanel necklaces, she appears to be a town car girlie. And, if you read Michael Grynbaum’s Empire of the Elite, you’d know that Condé Nast, which is the basis for publishing conglomerate Elias Clark, pretty much gave its whole staff carte blanche to take black cars everywhere.
SO: It was an era when there was still money rolling in for legacy media, but also little spies and leakers all over the city eager to take celebrity culture down a peg or send an email when they spotted Anna Wintour somewhere. There wouldn’t have been public interest in a Condé comedy without Gawker.
RT: So people are fixated on these paparazzi images of the film shoot. In part this is because of THE FASHION! What are your thoughts on the clothes, which in the sequel are designed by Molly Rogers, protégée of the original costume designer (and sartorial master of Sex and the City) Pat Field? They have been very divisive, much like Rogers’ work for the Sex and the City reboot And Just Like That …
SO: Like you, I am a Pat Field devotee. I’m also a Wintour devotee. One of the things that I disliked about the movie when it came out was that Miranda was not based on Wintour. Ostensibly the most stylish and influential fashion voice in the world, Miranda is not given any of the film’s most memorable looks.
RT: Field and Streep really created their own fantasy editor in chief whole cloth. The portrait of Miranda was much more in keeping with Kay Thompson’s Maggie Prescott, the Diana Vreeland stand-in in Funny Face. But that was the fun of this film: There were these moments of almost documentary observations, like the relentless pace and hours of the fashion industry, with this extreme fantasy, like Miranda’s parade of coats slammed down on the desk when she arrives.
SO: From what we’ve seen so far from on-location shoots, nothing has really captured my imagination … I mean this is a great look for a woman going to work. But it’s not giving any level of fantasy or camp.
RT: The shoes are dowdy and the colours are sad. Of course, when the film came out, a lot of fashion insiders said that the clothes were not up to snuff - not enough Chloé, Marc Jacobs or Marni and too much big, blingy stuff. I did clock a pretty forward-looking outfit on Andy: a Phoebe Philo train T-shirt, white jeans and Prada pumps. That’s the kind of thing I see women wearing in SoHo on a random Wednesday.
SO: In the nearly 20 years since the movie came out, online discourse has really shifted to view Andy’s friends as the villains. Where do you stand on this? Is Miranda the Devil?
RT: I do think Andy was overworked at that job. I am happy that fashion is not like that anymore. (And I assure you, for a long time it really was.) However: I maintain that Andy ushered in an idea that the fashion industry is a playground for overachieving upper middle class women. What makes fashion great is the way it courts outsiders - people who were not the popular or straight-A student.
SO: Watching it this weekend, I wasn’t really shocked by the way Miranda worked Andy. I was shocked by the casual misogyny and fatphobia of her and Stanley Tucci’s character. I gasped when Miranda looked at Andy and said, “I hired the smart fat girl”.
RT: Tell me your ideal plot for this sequel.
SO: My ideal plot: Miranda is secretly in her Grey Gardens era. She’s keeping up appearances because she still gets free clothes galore. But Runway is about to be bought by a private equity company and both her townhouse and Hamptons home are underwater. The twins are on their third stint in rehab. Her Hail Mary is to write an actual, honest, dishy tell-all. So she reaches out to Andy Sachs to ghostwrite.
RT: Realistically, Andy doesn’t work in fashion or media. She was a people-pleaser, and is probably married in the suburbs with a nice family. The true battle: Emily Charlton, the real fighter with excellent taste, versus a retired Miranda Priestly. Emily is running the show now, but when a Bernard Arnault-inspired kingpin wants to buy the magazine and make it shoppable, she has to call on Miranda to come out of retirement and help save the day.
SO: And then Emily strikes out and makes her own Substack-style media company, right? Priming the pump for Part 3?
RT: Maybe Andy’s boyfriend (played by Adrian Grenier) will re-emerge, revealing himself as a major architect of the Dimes Square alt-right movement.
SO: Now we’re talking! Although I’m legitimately not sure how much of the real world I want to penetrate this movie. Most importantly: I counted three montages in the first Devil Wears Prada. The sequel better meet or exceed that number.