Stepford Wives

The Horrornews forum has been around for years. This is where the wealth of information shared by our community over the years can be read.
User avatar
Posts: 1075
Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2003 1:36 am
Location: Sacramento, CA

Stepford Wives

Post by Kimberly » Thu Jun 10, 2004 10:20 pm

Just got back from a screening of it. I've not seen the original so I can't compare the two. It was alright, a few laughs. I'm glad I didn't have to pay to see it. IMO it's a rental... unless you got a theater around you that has matinee prices and you have nothing better to see.

User avatar
Remo D
Posts: 1266
Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2000 10:00 pm
Location: Marina, CA U.S.A.

Post by Remo D » Fri Jun 11, 2004 5:10 pm

I quite enjoyed this--up to a certain point.

After the original movie and three TV-sequels (each of which contradicted the last one and did nothing but confuse the issue), here comes the remake to do it all in ONE movie!

Playing it for laughs was the best way to go--Glenn Close is simply hysterical (Claire-obics, anyone?), Bette Midler was inspired casting, etc. Matthew Broderick and Nicole Kidman were well-teamed, and you can't go wrong with Christopher Walken.

The addition of a gay couple into the mixture added an enjoyable character and a rather topical subplot--it worked quite well.

Oh, and the Christmas craftbook discussion? Good Lord, I was laughing so hard I was almost crying... watch Midler walk away with THAT one!

And perhaps best of all, they took an extremely bold turn with Kidman's character. We see her first as every chauvinist's worst nightmare--the woman on top, her powers almost literally castrating. She cavalierly humiliates and ruins the life of a man she doesn't even know--and she has a nervous breakdown when she's abruptly knocked off her high horse. Believe me, she's no saint, and it's an awfully difficult trick to get an audience to sympathize with her (unlike Katherine Ross in the original). You can feel the film just DARING you to give voice to the subconscious thought: "Well, maybe there are SOME women who DESERVE to be put in their place!" And yet once it becomes clear what's going on in Stepford--no. You can't even wish it on her--and that's a huge testament to how well much of this movie works.


As with many remakes, THE STEPFORD WIVES simply didn't know when to QUIT. And I'm sure you'll know just what I mean. There was a perfect place for the film to end, and it just... didn't.

Granted, the last ten minutes continue to provide some entertainment, but the mechanics of getting there are clunky beyond belief, and they raise questions that the film doesn't have a prayer of answering.

Too bad--this could have been one of the best remakes ever, and it's still worth seeing. Let me know what you think.
My dog's breath smells like peanut butter...

...and I don't even have a dog!

User avatar
Posts: 850
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 1999 10:00 pm
Location: Wareham, MA

Post by DylanDog » Sun Jun 13, 2004 2:12 pm

Wow, I'm surprised to hear that this is pretty good. But the sad fact is, I hate Bette Midler with a passion and just cannot, CANNOT, bring myself to watch something with her in it. I'll have to just fondly remember the book I guess.
"This must be settled the way nature intended...with a vicious, bloody fight!!"
Onyx Blackman
Flatpoint High

User avatar
Posts: 472
Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2003 11:04 am
Location: n/a

Post by Kassie » Mon Jun 14, 2004 9:06 am

"The Stepford Wives"??
Don't they live in Bellevue????