Would the Devil Wears Prada 2 Looks Actually Make It into Runway Magazine? A Style Editor’s Take on the Costumes

I would like to formally start this off by saying this: The Devil Wears Prada is my movie.

It’s the film that reminds me that all isn’t lost when life feels muddled and the one that reminds me I’m in the middle of all the whimsy New York City has to offer. Heck, it’s what got me through those last years of high school when all I wanted to do was dress up while amid a sea of skinny jeans, crop tops and basketball shorts.

So when the production for the sequel kicked off in June, why was I so anxious?

I’m a firm believer in the adage, “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it,” which I know sounds sacrilegious in the era of remakes and sequels (Happy Gilmore 2, Freakier Friday, Bridget what number are we on again? Jones — and so on). But I felt no differently when all those rumored murmurings around the Devil Wears Prada sequel — which is directed by David Frankel, the man in charge of bringing Lauren Weisberger’s novel series to life the first go-around — finally came true this summer.

Not much has been disclosed about the movie as a whole, but if you’re deep in what’s happening on social media, you’d know that the thing being talked about the most so far is the costumes. Almost every day, I log onto the internet and clock in for my daily writing duties, and there’s another spoiler-filled image of the costumes. Let’s just say, I, like the masses, am not as excited as I should be.

Patricia Field, the costume designer behind Sex and the City, Ugly Betty and Emily in Paris, oversaw the wardrobe for the 2006 film, and it seems like this time, her protégé Molly Rogers was called for the gig, as reported by Harper’s Bazaar UK, Page Six and Vogue. (Per IndieWire, Field will be behind the seams too.) I’m not saying they aren’t talented by any means. According to Rogers’ IMDb page, she actually worked on the original film alongside Field, so she knows a thing or two about what clothes make the characters sing. Yet, I can’t help but feel the tugging intuition that something just isn’t clicking.

One part of me sees some of the looks as a win. Nigel (Stanley Tucci) is back in his sharp and well-accessorized garb and Emily Charlton (Emily Blunt) still has that fiery passion for fashion, and it shows. Nothing’s stopping her from wearing a chainmail necktie and high-heeled Oxford shoes or even going through with a dramatic hair transformation.

Even new additions to the cast are delivering exactly what the movie needs, such as Simone Ashley, who was photographed on July 23 in the same Monse dress once seen on Taylor Swift, which seemed like a nice nod to current pop culture while serving working girl on the go.

What I’m having a tough time digesting (and I say this with love) is what we’re seeing on the duo I consider to be the foundation of the franchise: Miranda Priestly (Meryl Streep) and Andy Sachs (Anne Hathaway).

To be fair, I’m not entirely put off by Andy’s new wardrobe. Before her Runway makeover, she was a norm-core girl with no interest in designer fashion at all, so I’m glad to see that some of that spark was reignited through colorful and trendy looks.

I’m just confused at the hodgepodge of it all. One minute she’s in a muted suit, the next she’s in a mosaic rainbow frock — and where does the sparkly purple dress we’ve been seeing her prance around in fit into the equation? Clearly, I have questions.

Never miss a story — sign up for PEOPLE’s free daily newsletter to stay up-to-date on the best of what PEOPLE has to offer​​, from celebrity news to compelling human interest stories. 

What I assume to be Miranda’s work outfits are disappointingly average and one-dimensional, which I guess would make sense if her style is meant to reflect her plotline, which, according to Variety, sees her navigating her career amid the decline of traditional magazine publishing. But would the woman who gracefully slammed florals and paved the way for cerulean blue really succumb to just … average? What happened to the glamour, the opulence, the fantasy!

Never miss a story — sign up for PEOPLE’s free daily newsletter to stay up-to-date on the best of what PEOPLE has to offer​​, from celebrity news to compelling human interest stories. 

Anyway, it looks like our saving grace just might be the Met Gala-inspired sequence, which thankfully sees Miranda in her true form and wearing an extravagant ball gown that I can only imagine costs half as much as my college tuition.

All of this leads me to my final thoughts. The outfits seem commercialized so much to the point where I believe most of them would never make the cut in Runway — like, ever. The attempt to channel the “je ne sais quoi” of the first film while also leaning into trends is too on the nose. But that’s not all. The first film was exclusive, it was posh, it was everything 15-year-old me dreamed of becoming — but that, readers, was the point. Fashion is escapism, it’s something that will make you want to do and be better, but that all goes away when you outfit these admired and historically well-dressed characters in clothes that are just a drive away at your local mall. Here’s to hoping we only go up from here.