Depending on which analyst you trust, the Sex and the City movie could take home as little as $20 million at the box office, or as much as $40 million, when it hits theatres May 30. Some box office “experts” suspect viewers might be turned off by having to wait four years since 2004’s show finale. Others say its a good thing they had to wait.

Some find a problem with a movie aimed at women older than 30, though The Devil Wears Prada found a place even among the tween set. (Then again, Anne Hathaway/Princess Diaries OMG.) And also, there’s that whole contingent of gay men who will see this movie at least four times.

The film should arrive in theaters while the series still has cultural currency (”The Simpsons Movie” opened while the show was still on) but not wait so long that the title seems like yesterday’s news (”Bewitched”). But, if you play your cards right, you might have “Alvin and the Chipmunks,” “Charlie’s Angels” or “Mission: Impossible.” However, the odds are just as good the interest will have vanished and you’ll get a bomb like “Speed Racer,” “Thunderbirds” or “Rocky and Bullwinkle.” […]

The film’s stars are ancient by Hollywood’s unfortunate standards — Parker and Davis are 43, Nixon is 42 and Cattrall is 51. To add some youth appeal, 26-year-old “Dreamgirls” Oscar winner Jennifer Hudson was added to the cast.

For whatever reason, some young girls are now expressing interest in the movie, audience surveys show, even though they aren’t old enough to get into an R-rated movie. If “Sex and the City” can start attracting more teenage girls (and appeal to audiences in smaller cities), it just might have a shot at turning into a hit, even though New Line isn’t around to celebrate, having been swallowed by Warner Bros. earlier this year. [LAT]