(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fus.ent4.yimg.com%2Fmovies.yahoo.com%2Fimages%2Fhv%2Fphoto%2Fmovie_pix%2Fparamount_pictures%2Fthe_stepford_wives%2Fnicole_kidman%2Fstepford.jpg&hash=197f33eb10b7dfef4ddaec3c0b7cfe9bf4ae60cb)
Teaser Trailer:
Hi-Res (http://us.rd.yahoo.com/movies/trailers/1808411987/qt300k/?http://playlist.yahoo.com/makeplaylist.dll?id=1251127&sdm=web&qtw=480&qth=300)
Med-Res (http://us.rd.yahoo.com/movies/trailers/1808411987/qt100k/?http://playlist.yahoo.com/makeplaylist.dll?id=1251126&sdm=web&qtw=480&qth=300)
Lo-Res (http://us.rd.yahoo.com/movies/trailers/1808411987/qt56k/?http://playlist.yahoo.com/makeplaylist.dll?id=1251125&sdm=web&qtw=480&qth=300)
Release Date: June 11th, 2004 (wide)
Cast: Nicole Kidman (Joanna Eberhart), Matthew Broderick (Walter Eberhart), Bette Midler (Bobbie Markowe), Christopher Walken (Dale Coba), Roger Bart (Roger Bannister), Glenn Close (Dr. Emily Francher), Faith Hill (Sarah Sunderson), Jon Lovitz (Dave Markowe), Matt Malloy (Herb Sunderson), Mike White, Lorri Bagley (Charmaine Van Sant), Colleen Dunn (Marianne Stevens), Tom Riis Farrell (Stan Peters), Jason Kravitz, Lisa Masters (Carol Wainwright), Kate Shindle (Beth Peters), Robert Stanton (Ted Van Sant), Christopher Evan Welch (Ed Wainwright)
Director: Frank Oz (The Score, Bowfinger, In & Out, What About Bob?, Dirty Rotten Scoundrels)
Screenwriter: Paul Rudnick (In & Out, Jeffrey, Isn't She Great?, Addams Family Values)
Premise: Joanna (Kidman) and her husband (Broderick) move to the beautiful upper-class suburb of Stepford, where she soon starts to suspect something is strange and artificial about her new female neighbors. The wives living in the houses around them all seem to be too perfect, with bland, character-less personalities. Everyone that is, except her new friend Bobbie (Midler), who as a cranky, sarcastic, non-exercising alcoholic still has some semblance of personality and independence. As Joanna and Bobbie investigate their neighbors further, they discover that there is indeed something artificial about them, something... robotic, the result of the husbands banding together to replace their human wives with cyborg copies who are subservient, sexually compliant and devoid of any distinguishing character traits. Will Joanna and Bobbie be the next ones replaced by perfect robotic clones? (Roger Bart plays a gay confidante of Kidman's character who ends up getting "straightened out"; Walken and Close play a couple; Lovitz plays Midler's husband)
I think Nicole Kidman has replaced Bruce Willis's long heralded "Movie A Month" stint. Congratulations, Nicole.
All she needs is a record deal, and she will easily cinch the "Beyonce Knowles Award" for the Annual Media Overload awards.
nobody can beat Madonna. She'll be jumping out of cereal box one day.
But Nicole's really really good.
She's really good, but not as good as people say she is.
I think I'll have much more respect for somebody like Charlize Theron after "Monster."
Quote from: mollynobody can beat Madonna.
If given the opportunity, I would...to a bloody pulp.
...with a tire iron?
Quote from: SoNowThen...with a tire iron?
Why risk damaging a perfectly good tire iron?
that trailer doesn't work
Quote from: CinephileI think I'll have much more respect for somebody like Charlize Theron after "Monster."
Hmmm, well wait until you see that. I made the unfortunate mistake of watching 'Trapped' on cable last night. She needs to be stopped.
Quote from: taz.that trailer doesn't work
You mean as a marketing tool (which I agree with 'cause it gives away the 'reveal' for thos who don't know the story), or that doesn't show? I just rechecked them and they're playing fine.
damn mac, your wit is killing me. :lol:
Quote from: taz.that trailer doesn't work
Thank God.
New trailer here. (http://progressive.stream.aol.com/aol/us/moviefone/movies/2004/stepfordwivesthe_016405/stepfordwivesthe_trlr03_dl.mov)
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdn.digitalcity.com%2Fmoviesimages%2F40678649-00091-07034-400cbb49&hash=0973958bafefa995dbce4ab3d2195ed90ef7eac9)
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdn.digitalcity.com%2Fmoviesimages%2F4067861c-00294-07034-400cbb49&hash=c0a54d3b6aa474ee248f302fd999c8ae79d77f65)
I saw this in the theatre the other day and it looks hilarious
Quote from: MacGuffin
As Joanna and Bobbie investigate their neighbors further, they discover that there is indeed something artificial about them, something... robotic, the result of the husbands banding together to replace their human wives with cyborg copies who are subservient, sexually compliant and devoid of any distinguishing character traits. Will Joanna and Bobbie be the next ones replaced by perfect robotic clones?
Bravo! Bravo Good Sirs! Finest piece of upcoming cinema I or my associates have heard of. Three cheers to the fine gentlemen behind this truly magnificent work.
It looks like a really interesting movie to me. I didn't like the first one very much, so maybe this will be better.
Welcome to Stepford. No crime, no poverty and no pushing.
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fsneakpeekcom.tripod.com%2F%2Fsitebuildercontent%2Fsitebuilderpictures%2Ffirstlookstepford.jpg&hash=8964d7475c82d8aed299625f531bb4ab7168552c)
Too bad instead of looking like that she has that horrible short haircut in the movie
'Stepford Wives' Hits More Trouble
The remake of The Stepford Wives has hit further delays - director Frank Oz is fighting scheduling difficulties with Nicole Kidman to bring her back for more scenes. After filming on the re-working of the '70s comedy thriller wrapped earlier this year, Oscar-winning Kidman started work on the Sydney Pollack movie The Interpreter. However, last month a test screening of the film was met with negative reviews, so the cast and crew have been forced to reshoot. The Stepford Wives is set for release next month, but Bowfinger director Oz is trying to get three days out of Kidman's busy filming schedule to return for re-shoots. One film crew member tells New York's Metro magazine, "Frank's sense of detail can just be insane. He's used to puppets."
that doesn't sound good...
nor did it turn out good - this movie was painfully, dreadfully, horribly boring
Quote from: ewardnor did it turn out good - this movie was painfully, dreadfully, horribly boring
i disagree. i dont think that it was boring, but it wasn't really any good either
not really spoilersthe plot twists that might work in the book did NOT work in the film. the last few scenes were pretty dreadful to watch. and even worse was the dialogue in them. it reaked of "let's explain this to the audience in the easiest way for them to understand". but this is not to say the film was all bad, though. a lot of it was really funny, and, except in the afformentioned scenes at the end, kidman was excellent as she always is. not entirely a waste of time, but i wouldn't pay for it either.
i didnt laugh once. didnt even crack a smile.
...i saw the tv spot
this looks like something that i would take a girl to if i wanted her to make her think that i had bad taste so that way she would break up w/ me........
this is a frank Oz joint.........which means talented cast /so-so movie......
his only good film was dirty rotten scoundrels.
Quote from: ewardi didnt laugh once. didnt even crack a smile.
Why did you go see it ?
Being a fan of the original, I was not looking forward to this film. And while it was a bit better than I expected, the far superior original is a very good horror film, but this version does away with all that and goes the (black) comedy route. What made the original great was the suspense in finding out what was going on. There is none of that here; it pretty much was given away in the trailer. The original was also a very satiric comment on Women's Lib and ERA. It was reflecting the times in which it was made. Here, it's almost a product of the times, with jokes about reality tv, SUV's, etc. If the comedy had come from paroding the roles women have now, it would have been a better film, but the best jokes are homosexuality and Jewish related (and Midler and Close are the best here). In fact, a better suited storyline was about making the gay male "wife" straight. That would have been a better exploration of the times. But I didn't believe Kidman and Broadrick as a couple, and thus didn't believe why she was even with him or even married him in the first place. For a strong independent women, she was very weak.
Quote from: meatballQuote from: ewardi didnt laugh once. didnt even crack a smile.
Why did you go see it ?
i actually was quite looking forward to it, plus i see all the movies free
eh.
I really didn't like this movie. It avoided anything that may have been remotely thought-provoking and just played the one note idea for cheap laughs. Granted, there were a few good one-liners and Bette Midler was really funny, but in the end, it was just boring fluff with none of the substance it should and could have had. I was disappointed.
My fav line was when Bette Midler said she stuck with Xanex because it's a classic.
This movie was made by rich Hollywood stars and was meant to be watched by their peers. To me, the statement this movie made was we are so annoyed with the banality and superficiality of our rich worlds, we are going to spend money and make a movie about it because we can. I think of all the low budget indy films out there that have something to say and I feel bad for them. Maybe I cant relate to spending $200/hr on shrinks, and getting the latest and greatest drugs, and having so much money I could have a house with a robotic dog if I chose to. I thought many middle class Americans relied on 2 incomes for their survival.
I dont think this movie had any relevancy to today's issues. The time period in which it was originally made was poignant and made a statement. But in today's world it seemed irrelevant. It should have been something more to do with the gay community. Those are the issues of our day (the gay marriage debate etc). McGuffin had a good thought. "In fact, a better suited storyline was about making the gay male "wife" straight." Or something along those lines. Any more suggestions?
The acting was not believable, the writing was a regurging of standard jokes today (the AOL rip- no wonder she's slow) and the plot was outdated. However, it is nice to know that Nicole Kidman, the Channel couture girl, can look just as bad in ill fitting Gap clothes as the rest of us.