Anyone seen Stepford Wives? Thoughts… *Spoilers*
› Forums › Other Forums › The Pub › Anyone seen Stepford Wives? Thoughts… *Spoilers*
- This topic has 14 replies, 6 voices, and was last updated 20 years, 4 months ago by
nursewhen.
-
AuthorPosts
-
17th June 2004 at 7:12 pm #40015
aquabloodstone
ParticipantComments?
*Spoilers* below
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Maybe it’s me, I’m dense or missed a connection, or it’s because I never read the book or saw the original but I have a question.If the reason these housewives are changed is because of nanotechnology in their brains, then what’s the deal with the creepy automaton that Walter and Joanna see at the men’s club? How does this relate to bionic boobs or invulnerable hands? I know the whole mind over matter situation is a factor, but we clearly see the [u]actual[/u] wives recover at the party.
17th June 2004 at 7:38 pm #72083pet
ParticipantI haven’t seen it yet, but I don’t remember the original having anything to do with nanotechnology, did it? It’s been quite awhile….
Me, as far as remakes of brainwashing movies are concerned, I’m more interested in how Jonathan Demme is going to explain the title of the new Manchurian Candidate, since it now takes place after the Gulf War which didn’t involve China at all….
BTW, is the Stepford Wives as funny as it looks in the trailers, or is that misleading?
17th June 2004 at 9:04 pm #72086nursewhen
ParticipantThey’ve remade another classic!?
A pox upon them!In the original, the wives are replaced by robots and the first job of the robot was to kill the wife.
Then they did a sequal which ruined it by having the wives under chemical control.
In the sequel to that, they were hatching children in jam jars.
If the latest follows the trend, I predict it’ll be dire.
The original as always was the best. In fact in my opinion, it was better than the book.
17th June 2004 at 10:53 pm #72087aquabloodstone
Participant[quote=”pet”]BTW, is the Stepford Wives as funny as it looks in the trailers, or is that misleading?[/quote]
It won’t have you rolling on the floor, but it has humor here and there.
*Spoiler warning* The opening has the most humor. Joanna(Nicole Kidman) is a ball-breaking TV exec introducing her new reality show promos. Those have to most up front humor.
All in all, it’s a passable movie. If you love the first and are a stickler, I don’t think I’d waste my money. It has definitely been updated and changed.
My impression was that these wives are the originals and they have computer chips implanted in their brains to change their behavior. But there are some inconsistencies in the movie or my reasoning ability that may contradict that. All the reviews say that the wives are replaced by robots. Who knows? Maybe I had my head up my wahoo and missed something.
The reviewers gave it a C+ and the viewers rated it a B-, according to the movie section of Yahoo! I enjoyed myself and my attention didn’t wander. But then again, it’s hard for your attention to wander when you’re going deaf from the theater sound system.
17th June 2004 at 11:29 pm #72088Cesare
ParticipantWell, haven’t seen it yet (I think that it has not yet reached cinemas in our area anyway), but I guess I may like it.
And – above all – however superficial this may seem to you – it’s got the divine [b][i]Walken[/i][/b] in it – so, for me it is a must see. Especially when the synopsis and trailer are so promising (trailers can be confusing, I know) AND there’s also Glenn Close in it…
And as I’m not familiar with the original, I’ll be less critical I guess.
So… Haven’t seen yet, but I am definitely going to.18th June 2004 at 2:54 pm #72095pet
ParticipantAh! You know, I think I must have seen the second one, because I don’t remember any robots and the drugging thing rings a bell.
I had wanted to see it because Walken is in it, but Mr. Pet doesn’t want to be “stuck in a dark room with Bette Midler and no mute button”, so we compromised by buying the Dead Zone and going out for Harry Potter instead (which did not have enough Gary Oldman in it). So it looks like I’ll have to revive this thread when the DVD comes out. Sigh.
I just heard Lovitz mention it on the Simpsons S4 commentary. Funny things you pick up on those…. 😀
19th June 2004 at 7:42 pm #72105theFrey
ParticipantI was thinking that the original used drugs and mindwashing …. but it has been a long time since I read the book.
19th June 2004 at 7:42 pm #72106theFrey
ParticipantI was thinking that the original used drugs and mindwashing …. but it has been a long time since I read the book.
19th June 2004 at 11:26 pm #72107sarahent
ParticipantI was thinking that the original used drugs and mindwashing …. but it has been a long time since I read the book.
20th June 2004 at 2:01 am #72108theFrey
ParticipantUmmm, Sarahent? Did thou forget something…. like maybe your comment. 😀
20th June 2004 at 2:56 am #72109pet
ParticipantI was thinking that the original used drugs and mindwashing …. but it has been a long time since I read the book.
😆 [size=9]They got to me, too….[/size]
20th June 2004 at 8:42 am #72115nursewhen
Participant[quote=”thefrey”]I was thinking that the original used drugs and mindwashing …. but it has been a long time since I read the book.[/quote]
I was thinking that the original used drugs and mindwashing …. but it has been a long time since I read the book.Nope, at the end of the original, our heroine invades the ‘Gentlemans’ club’ and comes face to face with a copy of herself wearing a negligee and sporting seriously enhanced boobs and carrying a knife.
The next thing you see is our heroine wearing one of those Laura Ashley dresses, shopping with a vacuous smile on her face.
I think she got away in the book.The chemical control was in The Revenge of the Stepford Wives.
I always thought that the major horror of the stepford wives was how the husbands could actually prefer those mindless automatons to their often brilliant and independent wives. I’ll have to watch the remake to see if they kept that or if it got lost.
20th June 2004 at 12:02 pm #72116sarahent
ParticipantI was thinking that the original used drugs and mindwashing …. but it has been a long time since I read the book.
*gets smacked on the back of the head*
Oh! Please excuse. Skipping for a minute 😀
20th June 2004 at 2:09 pm #72123pet
Participant[quote=”nursewhen”][quote=”thefrey”]I was thinking that the original used drugs and mindwashing …. but it has been a long time since I read the book.[/quote]
I was thinking that the original used drugs and mindwashing …. but it has been a long time since I read the book.
[/quote]I was thinking that the original used drugs and mindwashing …. but it has been a long time since I read the book.
You will bring Han Solo and the Wookie to me….
16th September 2004 at 8:10 pm #72855nursewhen
Participant[quote=”aquabloodstone”]Comments?
*Spoilers* below
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Maybe it’s me, I’m dense or missed a connection, or it’s because I never read the book or saw the original but I have a question.If the reason these housewives are changed is because of nanotechnology in their brains, then what’s the deal with the creepy automaton that Walter and Joanna see at the men’s club? How does this relate to bionic boobs or invulnerable hands? I know the whole mind over matter situation is a factor, but we clearly see the [u]actual[/u] wives recover at the party.[/quote]
Well I was a captive audience on a plane to Turkey and was forced to watch it. I have exactly the same question. Since the wives weren’t killed, what was that spare body doing in the men’s club?
The only thing I could come up with was that they moved the brains of the women into robot bodies and then suppressed their personalities using the nanotechnology
Review – Not a bad film, quite entertaining, but rather shallow and superficial. I wasn’t mad about the angle it took either. Those super aggressive liberated women made me have some sympathy for the rebelling males.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.