Rijndri Load of rubbish!!

Protraph Lack of good storyline.

Livestonth I am only giving this movie a 1 for the great cast, though I can't imagine what any of them were thinking. This movie was horrible

Ella-May O'Brien Each character in this movie — down to the smallest one — is an individual rather than a type, prone to spontaneous changes of mood and sometimes amusing outbursts of pettiness or ill humor.

muckydog2 Great ideas are few and far between. This is a great idea. Written at a time when women's liberation was finally emerging from a 1960s where possibly the most blatant (Technicolor) sexism was portrayed in popular culture and men were still of the generation that assumed theirs was really the dominant sex. (Yes , some still do, I think they are called Neanderthals?)The expectation was for women to act accordingly - at home and work. The world was still absolutely patriarchal. Only the hidden power of women - at home and work - was still lingering in the subconscious. Ready to emerge. And in the 1970s I think there was real progress.This film just asks a question, what do you want from a partner? A real person, given power to choose, another human being to share lifes ups and downs, a partner and soul mate, or that which is given pleasing shape and kitchen duties? There is of course only one answer, or should be unless tradition, peer pressure and convention expose the frailty of the male ego to the point of murder? Trust, role play and many other topics are touched upon, the savage final reel shattering the idyllic suburban setting is more Twin Peaks / Blue Velvet - and one wonders how much influence this may have had.This is a truly beautiful film to look at, the camerawork , performances and direction are all first rate and produce a memorable, and finely crafted masterpiece in the art of film making. 10/10 (I rated it 8/10 on the absolute scale - compared to the modern remake for instance which takes the premise to an altogether different place - with its plastic, robotic, modern Hollywood manufacture - even before the story starts - it's a 10 in comparison

TheLittleSongbird Ira Levin's bestseller is still very intriguing, thought-provoking and creepy, with a suspenseful story. It was wholly deserving of a film to do it justice, and this 1975 film does so splendidly. The 2004 re-make however is best avoided, not only was there no point to it but it is an incredibly poor film in its own right even with talented actors on board.'The Stepford Wives' (1975) is the real deal and well worth seeing. Maybe it starts a touch too slow, though generally the deliberately leisurely pacing didn't bother me. While it is well done and clever, with a final third that delivers on the quiet thrills, the twist didn't quite have the impact it could have done due to knowing it beforehand (hard not to with it being a famous one). Otherwise, it is a very good film and anybody who saw the 2004 film first will definitely want to check the 1975 "original" out to get the bad campy taste out of their mouths and instead be intrigued and chilled to the bone.While 'The Stepford Wives' may not be the most visually audacious of films, it is still very slick and atmospheric. Really liked the thriller in sunlight bright colours and the stormy night setting later on was a perfect contrast. The music score doesn't enhance but fits very well.Bryan Forbes directs very thoughtfully, while the script is intelligent and delivers on the suspense, the witty and clever satire and the deliciously macabre humour. The story intrigues and has plenty of suspense and thrills before delivering on the later chills and shocks that still hold up now.All the cast excel as the interesting and sometimes offbeat characters. Katharine Ross shines as the lead, and there are very good performances from Tina Louise Patrick O'Neal. Paula Prentiss has the most colourful character and is on dynamite form playing the character like she knows that is the case.Overall, very good with a lot of impact. It may have been only a moderate success at the time but its now reputation as the cult film favourite is deserved and it is not hard to see why the Stepford concept/term is a fairly popular one in science fiction. 8/10 Bethany Cox

Matt Smitty This movie is like a decent lifetime movie. It isn't really horror, more like a hitchcock style of horror or mystery. A woman and man basically move to a town and at the end of the movie discover that all of the wives have been turned into robots. Thats literally all there is to the storyline, a very basic and simple storyline. The movie is also fairly simple but what carries it along is the dialogue, it is feminine and has an ASMR quality.. Not a bad movie.

Craig Zimmerman Based on the novel of the same name by Ira Levin, The Stepford Wives film begins when Joanna Eberhart (Katherine Ross) moves with her husband and children from New York City to the small village of Stepford.Joanna finds that nearly all of the wives in Stepford are placid drones whose only ambition is cooking and cleaning. The Stepford Wives is very much a 1970's film with overtones of environmental pollution,powerful corporate conspiracies,sexuality, and of course feminist dogma.I disagree with the heavy-handed feminist message of the film which is that most men would prefer their wives to be obedient maids rather then equal partners.There are a few good moments in The Stepford Wives though. Tina Louise does very well with a small role and it's hard not to feel pity for her when she confesses that her husband never really loved her.