Et l'homme créa la femme

I have read plenty of reviews where people are comparing this to 1975's, I don't think that's fair, as the interpretation of the novel is very different. The original film was very much a horror, this is a comedy with virtually no horror at all, but a definite vibe of political correctness.

It is obviously too sweet and syrupy for many, but it does have good points. It's loaded with irony, it's not laugh out loud humour, it's more tongue in cheek, with some good humour, mainly at the expense of little men. I liked the performances, Glenn Close and Bette Midler especially. It wasn't Kidman's finest hour, although she wasn't bad, just didn't get the best material to work with.

On the debit side, Matthew Broderick doesn't exactly shine, but worst of all is the lack of any horror vibe, it doesn't really have any suspenseful moments of any note.

It's a nice vanilla comedy, those looking for horror must avoid. The original movie is way better. 6/10

I wasn't expecting too much from this movie, given the reviews it got. But how bad could a movie be with this cast? As it turns out, VERY bad. But I have to think that some plot and character development was lost on the cutting room floor.

The opening credit sequence is absolutely brilliant, with witty use of vintage '50s clips of housewives in their "miracle kitchens of the future" and that sort of thing. Deliberately choppy editing and occasionally speeded up action lend the sequence a mechanical feel on top of its satirical air. Too bad nothing else in the movie measures up to it.

I did think there were a couple of decent laughs, mainly when Glenn Close was on screen. Roger Bart, playing a gay stereotype we've seen too many times in recent movies, milks it for all its worth and earns some chuckles, too. But Nicole Kidman and Matthew Broderick often seem lost. Christopher Walken, Bette Midler and Jon Lovitz are all mostly boring here, hard as it is to believe.

I haven't seen the '70s version in ages, but I remember thinking it was OK but campier than it was meant to be. Upping the camp level was not a bad idea for the remake, but I don't know what happened with the screenplay. Paul Rudnick is no genius, but he's done far better.

I get the feeling that major scenes must have been cut out for some reason, as the plot development felt awkward especially in the early scenes. It might be worth renting the DVD for the deleted scenes.

Also, as others have stated, the movie is totally inconsistent on the point of whether the women are robots or have simply had their brains altered. It's as if they figured we wouldn't really be playing close attention, so what difference did it make?

My bottom line advice -- if you get a chance to see it without paying, watch the opening credits and then change the channel.

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 .

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!

Standing alongside The Wicker Man as the worst remake ever this really is a pile of utter nonsense. The original had a good story to tell but this one is just a joke.

Nicole Kidman would seem to be the perfect choice for a robotic woman, I've never seen her show any emotions whatsoever. You can't really blame the cast, the script is so poor that even the best actor would struggle to convey any meaning in their lines.

The studio weren't too happy with the downbeat ending so ordered a change, and then another, and then another. This ensured that this movie has a happy smiley ending and the fact that it makes NO SENSE whatsoever didn't seem to worry them because in their minds we the viewers are basically vegetables that just need to be exposed to some flickering images for about an hour and a half.

An entire army of producers cut this one up and made an absolute mess of it, it's barely even a proper film let alone a coherent story. You know what's really frightening though? It still gets a 5 star rating (at the time of writing) so most people think this trash is average.

Even for bad movie fans there's just nothing to enjoy, the whole film is atrocious and the fact that it is a remake of a good film just plunges the knife in deeper. Deserves a spot in the bottom 100.