The Stepford Wives

Many of you seem to be missing the point. It's not a remake. It's a send-up, a parody of the original. It's a COMIC STRIP, OK?

We may disagree about how funny it is, but that's beside the point. I didn't think it was hilarious, but it was funny enough that I enjoyed myself. And, the cast were obviously enjoying themselves! Actually, it's as much a parody of our times as it is of the original movie.

There were enough plot twists and surprises to keep it interesting. Layer upon layer of uncertainty about who's what and what everybody's real motives were kept my attention.

And, yes, this version made the women as unlikeable as the men. To me, that's the film's best quality. Nobody is spared from the skewer!

Charming Joanna (Nicole Kidman) is a successful and creative journalist of a TV channel , then she suffers a breakdown for a programme . She along with her hubby (Matthew Broderick) and children are moved from Manhattan towards the quaint little town of Stepford (Conneticut) , a very modern and upper class location . She didn't like the neighborhood with attractive and perfect but unintelligent housewives . She is concerned that many wives spend their lives in domestic slavery . Joanna early befriends a pair good friends (Bette Midler and John Lovitz). Meanwhile , her husband joins the mysterious Stepford Men's club (run by a powerful Christopher Walken and married another too perfect wife , Glenn Close) which takes place in an old Manor house . Joanna soon discovers there lies a dark truth about the strange and servitude behavior in the all female residents and the sinister secrets hidden in the Stepford town .

The film is an amiable comedy with sci-fi , thriller elements and a little bit of drama . Heavily re-edited and re-written following test screenings , with new scenes shot and others deleted . The attempts to cater to audience tastes backfired as the new edits and scenes created continuity errors and major story problems . The casting is frankly well . Thus , a beautiful Kidman and good comedian actors : Broderick, Midler , Lovitz . Jolly and lively music by David Arnold . Special mention to colorful and glimmer cinematography by Rob Hahm . This new rendition is preferably a comedy , while the old version by Brian Forbes with Katherine Ross and Paula Prentiss was a chiller and considered to be very superior and being almost a classic film and followed three inferior sequels : ¨Revenge Stepford wives ¨, ¨Stepford children¨, ¨Stepford husbands¨ . The film was regularly directed by Frank Oz . The picture will appeal to the gorgeous Nicole Kidman fans. Rating : Average but amusing .

The original film, and the great novel that preceded it are worthy of a better treatment than this lighthearted, anti-suspenseful, Hollywood variety show. What's more, the excellent veteran cast, the catchy soundtrack and the expensive production values could have made this into the socially serious, poignant and yet funny contemporary masterwork it should have been. Instead, we are left with a film whose campiest moments are clichés and whose point seems to be love conquers all - even the sexism, genderism and masculocentrism still rampant in American Society today! I never expect comedies to do a particularly good job with continuity and logic, but some of the continuity problems in this film are really pretty amazing. Plot twists are, after all, supposed to change the COURSE of the plot, not its basic premises. I'm dying to tell you about it, but I won't write a spoiler.

Here are the basics: Nicole Kidman and Matthew Broderick are a successful couple whose marriage has been suffering a bit because of the stress of their work-lives. Nicole, a TV executive famous for post-feminist male-bashing shows gets fired for no particular reason and they couple decides to move away to Stepford, an exclusive community populated by people who seem to have no particular troubles of any kind, or even jobs for that matter. Some of the first things Matthew Broderick realizes about Stepford is that all of the women are beautiful, and everybody is marvelously happy with a few possible exceptions - his own wife, Bette Midler and a gay liberal whose partner has been sucked into republicanism. Predictably, these three conspire to resist the happiness all around them and investigate the mystery of the Stepford men's club.

I've described the first quarter of the film. Although the central plot is interesting and strong, the lack of even a shred of seriousness detracts very heavily from it - even from a comedic point of view. If this film hadn't made me disinterested, the feminist in me would have simply been angry over the missed opportunity this film represents. Moreover, it is possible to see this film as a justification of the 'blame the victim' mentality so often prevalent in contemporary culture.

Most of the cast seems equally unengaged. They sometimes seem to be playing roles in different films - interacting with each other poorly and playing their roles with no particular goal in mind. I can only fault the director here. Broderick and Kidman are, as usual, very watchable, but even Nicole seems to be unsure what her character is supposed to be portraying at times. Bette Midler is fine, as are Walken and Glenn Close. Close was actually, IMO, the show stealer - making the film tolerable with her excruciatingly irritating and very dominant presence.

While not a complete travesty, I can not recommend The Stepford Wives.

This movie is a perfect example of what is wrong with the state of movies today. The original was a gem, with excellent acting by Katharine Ross, Paula Prentiss, and Patrick O'Neal. It was part horror story, part feminist cautionary tale. Most of all, it was BELIEVABLE! You got the feeling these were real people, and that all this could really be happening--and with a minimum of "special effects". The dialogue was pretty intelligent, the plot twists weren't given away in the first 15 minutes, and the ending was a real shocker. You cared about the female characters in the movie--you cared about Joanna's plight, and rooted for her to escape her planned fate.

The current version could only--and was probably meant to--appeal to the lowest common denominator of movie-goer. In this film, the women are just as bad as the men--you don't give a damn what happens to them; that's how annoying the characters are. The laughs are cheap and lowbrow, vital plot elements of Ira Levin's novel are missing, and the acting is just plain bad.

You know what? I'm getting annoyed just writing about this dreck. If you have any taste, any sense, any feeling for good films, any aversion to wasting good money on bad movies--stay far away from this one!! See the original, and appreciate the stunning subtlety of a thinking person's movie, well-made and well-acted.

I went to see this movie for the sole reason of seeing Glenn Close, whom is a very great actress. Many people had also commented on how great the original was, so I was ready to see this supposedly great film. I was utterly disappointed. Obviously not sticking to the exact script of the original, the whole thing smelled of modern humor gone terribly bad.

Nicole Kidman's character was, at times, convincing. Bette Midler's character was an obvious replay of her previous roles. Glenn Close's character was absolutely unconvincing. But the worst ever was Matthew Broderick's character. I just wanted to cry after watching him flounder about in the depthless role of the weak-then-suddenly-brave and-bad husband. And I'm quite sure the original Stepford Wives didn't have a gay couple--intended, I guess to put a modern twist on it. The characters didn't have pasts; they didn't have reasons to act the way they did. This small detail drove me up a wall: Faith Hill's character has a "blow out" at the party and sparks fly out of her ears. Another wife spits out money like an ATM. It is later revealed that the wives aren't robots; they're merely brainwashed. So tell me how a normal person shoots sparks out of their ears and money out of their mouths? It doesn't make sense!

This movie could have been so much better if someone would have actually read the script and then threw it away and wrote something more meaningful. At the end of the movie, I was left there wondering what its point was.

But there is one redeeming quality in the movie: the 1950s styled costumes. They were bright, well fitted, and the only thing interesting on the show. So if you are really into the costume thing, just grit your teeth and sit through this hopelessly ridiculous movie.