If you owned your very own movie theater and got to program the films it exhibited as you desired, what…
The Stepford Wives
The wives of Stepford have a secret.
What does it take to become a Stepford wife, a woman perfect beyond belief? Ask the Stepford husbands, who've created this high-tech terrifying little town, in a very modern comedy-thriller.
Part of **No ReWatch November 2012**.
The original novel by Ira Levin and the 1975 film are both dark, frightening thrillers. They have something to say about the shifting gender roles of the Women's Lib era. And the ending of the film will chill you to your core.
In this version, Frank Oz has decided to dispense with a direct remake. Instead, he's aiming for a Tim Burton-esque farce. By upping the silly and yet still making the gender politics the centerpiece, he robs the story of its impact on both a psychological and political level. He's going for weird and funny, and it doesn't really succeed.
I have to applaud the attempt, though. Some aspects do work. Bette Midler's…
I know this isn't a very popular film, but I love it. Perhaps it's because I haven't seen the original so my experience hasn't been tempered by a better take on the concept, perhaps it's my love of Nicole Kidman and Bette Midler but I really find it fun, light and really enjoyable.
It's well paced, the performers are amusing and I like the humour in it.
I wouldn't recommend it for everyone because I know it's an acquired taste, but it's a film I'll happily watch every now and then.
It's fairly funny!
In a superficial way. This remake stays away from the horror aspects of this classic story, and it focuses itself on humour. And it's a great choice. The central cast are all great, and Frank Oz even manages to mask the rumoured in screen hatred.
Not bad at all.
The Stepford Wives is a trashy misfire, filled with gaping plot holes and lacking the brooding atmosphere and paranoia of the original. However, it's camp fun and the dynamic between Kidman, Rees and Midler's characters proves to be more than entertaining.
A movie doesn't have to have blood and gore for it to be creepy. It just has to be a story about white, upper-middle class American society.
It's a good movie! Creepy... but good.
The worst film I've seen this month.
How on hell did Glenn Close and Christopher Walken joined this project??
The gay guy called Roger was the only thing that kept me watching this film . I wonder if there was any gay on the 70s original version
I think it's funny Nicole Kidman was cast as the non-robot. I kid, that's mean, and I like her. I did not, however, like this empty mess of a movie.
We rented this because Fran really wanted to see it. We had watched the first version together back when we first started dating and were both left tremendously underwhelmed. We watched about 10 minutes and then I thought, "This is not what I want to be doing."
So we went to the gym and played racquetball, came home, showered, got dressed up and hit some comedy night that was nicely priced but so-so on the comedy. When we got home, we watched all but the last 17 minutes and I was surprised at how turning it into a comedy was improving the overall film.
I started wondering, why did they remake this film at this time? Is it a comment on how uniform our society is becoming? Or how obsessed it is with image? Or a continuing statement on male-orientated culture?
Anyway, I started falling asleep with about 17 minutes left, so we decided to leave it until Sunday morning.
From the first few minutes I thought it was going to be a full blown feminist film, but gladly it toned down once they moved to Stepford. I love Nicole Kidman, but honestly she's wasted here. It certainly wasn't a bad film, just a run of the mill movie with nothing really standing out. They never really delved into the psyche of the people who were doing this and at the same time they never really gave in to the comedic side either. It was a good lazy Saturday afternoon flick but I'll probably never watch it again.
While not all the memorable nor really worth mentioning, the movie is absurd and funny enough to not regret watching it.
Many people think that this was utter crap and yeah, it has its moments but it was to me damn better than the original.
I wonder what point there is in remaking a film like The Stepford Wives if you're going to completely invalidate the underlying politics, themes, and genre of the source material. Frank Oz bafflingly envisions a broad comedy instead that aims for incredibly simplified humor and zero inflection. It's more superficial than the titular women of the town, and by the end, it can't even get it's own message straight. There's an embarrassingly talented cast here (who have no reason to be floundering in a film this shallow), but even they are overcranking their performances to make up for the lack of anything of substance in the script. The only brightside is that the film is kept mercifully short, with a steady pacing that somewhat mitigates this dreadful experience.
I have never seen the original film, though I'm aware that it's much darker and serious than this campy effort. I didn't love the film or the concept, but I did like the satirical approach to the perfect housewife. I've never been a fan of Nicole Kidman either and she didn't change my mind here. Matthew Broderick is as likable as ever though, so he's definitely a plus.
- The Hunger
- Fright Night
- Near Dark
- The Lost Boys
- King Kong
- Invasion of the Body Snatchers
- Nosferatu the Vampyre
- Cat People
Work in progress. Not all of the films are strictly horror, but I say close enough. (I'm sticking mainly with…
- Fright Night
- Shutter Island
- No Country for Old Men
- The Last King of Scotland
- The Wicker Man
Did you ever notice the disembodied heads that are sometimes lurking in the background of posters? I've managed to track…