HR, Power, and the Death of the “Toxic Boss” in The Devil Wears Prada 2

When the original "The Devil Wears Prada" was released back in 2006, audiences were fascinated by Miranda Priestly’s leadership style. She was emotionally distant, and impossible to satisfy, yet somehow admired. Back in early 2000s workplace culture celebrated leaders who were brilliant but brutal and success justified hostile behavior. That is probably the reason that 20 years ago when I worked as a junior print buyer, stepping foot in the legendary Conde Nast cafeteria and witnessing personal assistants carrying their boss food tray seemed completely normal.

Twenty years later, the sequel presents a very different reality. What stands out in The Devil Wears Prada 2 is the decline of print media and the rise of digital culture but also workplace accountability, and changing employee expectations. For me, that shift feels very personal. I went from being a print media buyer, constantly running between deadlines, approvals, and campaigns to becoming an HR executive focused on shaping environments where people can do their best work without burning out in the process.

The film treats HR as a symbol of cultural change. Miranda’s harsh comments are interrupted by assistants warning her that certain statements are “risky.” Her authority feels restrained in ways it never was before. In the original film, assistants absorbed unreasonable demands without question. Every morning Miranda naturally throws her coat at her assistant. In the sequel, boundaries exist. Leaders are expected to consider inclusion, professionalism, and employee wellbeing as Miranda struggles to hang her own coat.

The original movie reflected an era where overwork was glamorized. Andy answering calls at midnight or sacrificing her personal life for work was seen as ambition. The sequel reflects a workforce shaped by burnout, layoffs, social media transparency, and accountability. Younger employees are less willing to accept toxic leadership simply because someone is talented.

At the same time, the movie raises an interesting question: did workplace culture improve while the industry itself declined? Throughout the sequel, Runway magazine struggles to survive in a digital-first world dominated by algorithms, influencers, clickbait, and AI-generated content. Miranda’s old-world authority is fading not only because HR exists, but because the entire publishing model is collapsing.

The movie suggests that professionalism alone cannot save an industry undergoing disruption. HR may reduce toxicity, but it cannot stop layoffs, declining revenue, or technological change. Andy’s layoff scene at the beginning of the film captures this perfectly: employees are treated more politely than before, yet they are still disposable.

The sequel refuses to fully romanticize either era. The old workplace culture was abusive and unsustainable. But the modern workplace is not necessarily healthier emotionally; it is simply different. Employees now navigate softer language, HR policies, and inclusive leadership while also facing instability, automation, and constant performance pressure.

In many ways, Miranda Priestly becomes a symbol of an old leadership model losing relevance. She once represented certainty, hierarchy, and authority. In the sequel, she is forced to operate in a world where leadership requires emotional intelligence, collaboration, and adaptability.

In the first movie Andy leaves Runway for pursuing her journalism career leaving behind her abusive boss. In the new movie she end up leveling with leadership and get the office on the same floor as her boss.

The biggest message of the movie is that power itself has changed. In 2006, power belonged to gatekeepers like Miranda. In 2026, power is defined by authenticity, integrity and culture responsiveness.