Featured Audience Ratings

• Pierluigi P

  
  Uneven attempt to reach the level of unsettling paranoia and commentary on women's lib against conservative/intrusive community of "Rosemary's baby" (based on a novel by the same author).

• Daniel M

  
  Whenever classic films are poorly remade, they have the side effect of putting audiences off seeing the originals. Many who saw Frank Oz's ghastly remake of The Stepford Wives would have been so bored or enraged that they would have steered well clear of the original, believing… More
  Whenever classic films are poorly remade, they have the side effect of putting audiences off seeing the originals. Many who saw Frank Oz's ghastly remake of The Stepford Wives would have been so bored or enraged that they would have steered well clear of the original, believing it to be no better. It would be a shame if many came to this conclusion, since they would be depriving themselves of a smart and suspenseful film, which is still chilling and unnerving more than 35 years on. While the remake boasted an all-star cast and was directed by a muppet (in more ways than one), the pedigree of the original Stepford Wives is mainly to be found behind the camera. It is based on the novel by Ira Levin, author of Rosemary's Baby and The Boys from Brazil. Levin was a master at taking a contemporary subject (in this case the male backlash against feminism) and playing it for a mainstream audience through smart and subtle allegory. Levin's novel is adapted for the screen by William Goldman, who would win an Oscar the following year for his work on All The President's Men. He approaches the source material and subject matter with intelligence, acknowledging the need to play certain scenes with a straight face while leaving room for humour to emerge naturally. And the film is helmed by Bryan Forbes, best known for producing The Railway Children and directing Whistle Down The Wind. This film sees Forbes refining the thriller techniques of Séance on a Wet Afternoon, and returning to the theme of female manipulation that he first explored in The L-Shaped Room. When The Stepford Wives was first released, many critics complained about its slow pacing; there was, they believed, not enough in the novel to fill out two hours, and by drawing out the action the final act was not as tense as it should be. In fact, the gentle pacing of the film is one of its most distinctive features compared to other thrillers, and one of its greatest strengths. We are drawn in very slowly, almost unconsciously, so that our plight mirrors that of the female characters. The only difference is that we emerged with our minds intact, and our spines more than a little tingled. Forbes' intention with this film was to make "a thriller in sunlight." While Chinatown found inspiration in the smoke and shadows of film noir, The Stepford Wives is a close precursor to David Lynch in its all-too-perfect imagining of American suburbia. Stepford embodies the American Dream to such an extent that it cannot possibly be right: every house has its mailbox and white picket fence, and the children go to school on bright yellow buses. By shooting the majority of the action in bright daylight, Forbes makes us second-guess about our expectations of Stepford. Even as we pick up on all the chocolate box features that would repulse us or put us on alert, we are bit by bit won over by the seeming goodwill of the town's inhabitants. As the film moves on and the creeping sense of dread grows, both we and Joanna are torn between dismissing our feelings as paranoia and believing them to be the truth. It only becomes an edgy horror movie in its last 20 minutes, and even then there is an unnerving reserve to it: there is only one tiny bit of blood, and no explosions or pyrotechnics when Bobby starts to go wrong. The Stepford Wives is at its heart a dark satirical allegory of the male backlash against feminism. The Men's Association, both as an institution and in its activities, is a reaction to the political and social freedom that women have demanded and increasingly enjoyed since the early-20th century. The men's response is one of cowardice; rather than embracing women's new-found freedom, they look on them as an inferior species, whose independence should be controlled, and whose purpose should be restricted to cooking, cleaning, gossiping and sexual pleasure. Whilst its allegorical device may be both extreme and bizarre, it would be wrong to dismiss The Stepford Wives as heavy-handed. Rather than characterise misogyny or sexism as something distant or extreme, the film attacks the extent to which the inferior position of women has been normalised. Joanna's husband joins the Men's Association with the very best intentions, wanting to get involved in the local community. The majority of scenes featuring women are set in kitchens, dining rooms or other purely domestic settings; we are challenged to explain why we expect such conversations to be staged in this way. The fact that so many (male) critics denounced the film as "chauvinistic" shows how much it touched a nerve when first released. From another angle, The Stepford Wives examines the pressures surrounding women to confirm to male expectations in society. Joanna and Bobby find it difficult recruiting women to their cause because the women have their expectations of life shaped by those of their husbands. Even without its famous twist, the film convincingly conveys how so much of the social order has been shaped by the expectations of men. This is most grotesquely demonstrated by the nature of the wives' replacements; not only have their personalities been diluted, but their physical attributes have been considerably enhanced. An illustration of both these themes is found in the role of photography. Joanna is introduced as a photographer, an activity which requires creativity, independence and ambition to succeed. In the opening scene, she takes a photo of a man crossing the street with a blow-up sex doll just before her husband gets in the car. What seems like an innocuous non-sequitur takes on an eerie quality as things moves on. As Joanna's independence is stifled in Stepford, so too is her art, as she is unable to sell her prints to a dealer during a brief return to New York. Like many low-budget sci-fi or horror efforts, The Stepford Wives benefits from not having too many famous faces in its cast. Katherine Ross is terrific as Joanna, having just enough presence and charisma to be commanding without overpowering. Paula Prentiss is a good match for her as Bobby, channelling Diane Keaton's performances with Woody Allen in her quirky, fun-loving attitude. There is also good support from Nanette Newman, whose mechanical repetition of "I'll just die if I can't get this recipe" rivals anything in Westworld. The one real problem with The Stepford Wives is its final act, in which Joanna infiltrates the Men's Association. Having spent so long creating unease through subtle diversions from reality, the film turns to classic horror tropes to really Hammer things home (pun intended). Joanna arrives at the Men's Association in the middle of a storm, complete with cheap lightning effects and heavy rain. The building itself is like an old-school gothic spook-house, with dark corridors and moments with mirror that wouldn't look out of place in The Haunting. Normally this ready a reversion to horror convention would spoil a film's good work. But you find yourself wanting to forgive The Stepford Wives because of how hard it has worked to get to this point. Crucially, even when surrounded by all these clichés, the film doesn't lose sight of its substance for the sake of a few cheap shocks. The revelation of Joanna's pulchritudinous, dead-eyed double is terrifying whatever its surroundings. The Stepford Wives is a really great film whose message has lost none of its chill or bite. Forbes brings the substance of Levin's novel to life with respect for the audience's intelligence, allowing us to question everything we see and unnerve ourselves in the process. The unsettling atmosphere thus created is enhanced by great performances and naturalistic acting, particularly by Katherine Ross. It's not perfect, nor is it Forbes' finest work, but it remains essential viewing for sci-fi & horror fans.

• Jameson W

  
  I really like this film alot. I have not read all of the novel, but I have read enough of it to know that this adaptation is more in sync with the mood and tone of the book. It's dark, and quite disturbing. The new one is equally as entertaining, but I prefer this dark, creepy… More
  I really like this film alot. I have not read all of the novel, but I have read enough of it to know that this adaptation is more in sync with the mood and tone of the book. It's dark, and quite disturbing. The new one is equally as entertaining, but I prefer this dark, creepy adaptation better than the satirical 2000's version. Very good film!

• AJ V

  
  I loved this movie, it's a lot better than the new remake. It's creepy and kinda weird, but I loved it.

• Conner R

  
  A really sad and morbid outlook on the future of male dominance, a true horror story. While it certainly puts you in the feminist perspective and makes you feel so much love and compassion for the characters, there is something very cynical being said about who is in control. It is… More
  A really sad and morbid outlook on the future of male dominance, a true horror story. While it certainly puts you in the feminist perspective and makes you feel so much love and compassion for the characters, there is something very cynical being said about who is in control. It is such a great piece of film-making on top of the incredible story, it is truly a staple of the 70s. The long shots and slow pacing is one of its greatest assets. Of course, how can you mention the movie without bringing into account Katharine Ross' performance. She brings such a huge screen presence, but does it very subtle and calm. What is the real surprise of the film is that it doesn't feel like the typical horror movie. It feels like a sweet family drama with lots of soothing music and happy faces, that's what makes it so unique and powerful in my opinion. You fall victim the same way Joanna does.

• Megan S

  
  I liked this version way better than the remake. But I liked the remake of the new version better than this one. Not because it was better but because it satisfied the feminist in me.

• Daniel P

  
  A brilliant, dense, dark and difficult satire of a male- and corporately-dominated society, hard to sit through due to its minimalism but with an ending that does not disappoint! A classic film based on a controversial novel and one which, from what I've read, is not to be judged… More
  A brilliant, dense, dark and difficult satire of a male- and corporately-dominated society, hard to sit through due to its minimalism but with an ending that does not disappoint! A classic film based on a controversial novel and one which, from what I've read, is not to be judged by its recent (2004) remake.

• xGary X

  
  Unsettling and comic by turns, a post feminist social satire in which egotistical small town men are trading their wives individuality and free will for baking skills and an increased bra cup size. As relevant now as it was then.

• Drew S

  
  A very different thriller. Unmatched in tone or atmosphere by most of its 1970s counterparts, and unique enough to still stand on strong legs even today, this Stepford Wives is certainly better than its lousy remake.

• Michael G

  
  While this movie really isn't good, it's still better than what I saw of the remake.

• Sunil J

  
  I liked it but it's pretty dark and creepy.

• John M

  
  Forget about the horrible 2006´s remake and watch this one. Eventhough I knew what was happening, it has a good premise, engrossing plot, and a steady build up of fear and tension that keeps this flix as a intelligent psychological thriller about man looking for the perfection. The… More
  Forget about the horrible 2006´s remake and watch this one. Eventhough I knew what was happening, it has a good premise, engrossing plot, and a steady build up of fear and tension that keeps this flix as a intelligent psychological thriller about man looking for the perfection. The movie presents the struggles and anxieties (feminism of its time) that modern women faced and the ideals that they valued. The cast is good, as well as, the acting, specially Katharine Ross the main star. Maybe the pace is a little slow but it turns faster as the movie run.

• alan j

  
  A decent, watchable but slow moving drama does not really keep you guessing but offers up some unsettling and creepy moments....at almost 2 hours in length seems too drawn out; as implausible as the plot is, the acting and overall strangeness should hold your interest to the dark… More
  A decent, watchable but slow moving drama does not really keep you guessing but offers up some unsettling and creepy moments....at almost 2 hours in length seems too drawn out; as implausible as the plot is, the acting and overall strangeness should hold your interest to the dark conclusion..

• Linda K

  
  Considering the popular Feminist movement in the 70s, Bryan Forbes' film represents a bizarre depiction of women trapped in a world of men. It is a controversial portrayal which might offend some people, mainly women, but could also raise some questions about gender issues. It is… More
  Considering the popular Feminist movement in the 70s, Bryan Forbes' film represents a bizarre depiction of women trapped in a world of men. It is a controversial portrayal which might offend some people, mainly women, but could also raise some questions about gender issues. It is indeed an interesting film to see!

• Audrey L

  
  I loved this horror film,yes-horror film.The recent remake of this movie really made me gag.

• Barry L

  
  Scared me rigid as a kid.

Read all 16 featured audience ratings