I think it did work in that it became less about sex and more about the perfect docile, submissive housewife, and an illusion of dreamlike perfection, but someone always has to suffer to maintain the image. Of course the actresses were all beautiful as well. I would love to read the book, I' ll have to look in the kindle store!
With all due respect, the casting of Nanette Newman was perfect in the original 1975 version. Her character as the robot version of Carol Van Sant still showed a flawed version of the real Carol Van Sant that the audience never meets, a robot recovering alcoholic. Obviously, her husband and the robot creator, "Dis", didn't get all the kinks worked out with her fantasy version. Maybe she was the first one turned. And the long prairie-like dresses with cleavage was also an inspired choice. It cemented a look in our zeitgeist of what a "Stepford Wife" looks and acts like. I love the 1975 version. I hated the 2004 version. Even though I am a huge Nicole Kidman fan, she could not save that screenplay. The original version is a classic study on feminism, women's liberation, toxic masculinity, and so much more.
Fair enough. I just find it fascinating that William Goldman thought it was a terrible mistake, and that Ira Levin agreed that it misrepresented his novel. It's a great chapter in Goldman's book, as he recalls biting his tongue, thinking the director's going to ruin the movie he's written. Or not. "Nobody knows anything."
As someone who's only ever seen the 2004 version, this was an interesting video. I'd love to see the 1970s version or read the book. Thank you for the video. 😊
Thank you. It's easy to find the whole 1975 film on RUclips at the moment, and the other day I also noticed the 1980 TV movie sequel, Revenge of the Stepford Wives!
The movie is perfect. It is terrifying. There is absolutely nothing wrong with the casting. Watch the 2001 making of documentary. It explains everything about how the film was made including the casting.
I thought the original was great. Those men wanted to own their wives. They wouldn't want to share them with others. They wanted the ideal life for themselves. They did not care about their wives. You couldn't get new men and their wives to stay in Stepford if it was a Playboy type mansion scenario. Kids and dogs always find out. It had to be on the down low. The new series should have been about replacing the children and the pets. They didn't want any of that messy part of life.
I think it did work in that it became less about sex and more about the perfect docile, submissive housewife, and an illusion of dreamlike perfection, but someone always has to suffer to maintain the image. Of course the actresses were all beautiful as well. I would love to read the book, I' ll have to look in the kindle store!
With all due respect, the casting of Nanette Newman was perfect in the original 1975 version. Her character as the robot version of Carol Van Sant still showed a flawed version of the real Carol Van Sant that the audience never meets, a robot recovering alcoholic. Obviously, her husband and the robot creator, "Dis", didn't get all the kinks worked out with her fantasy version. Maybe she was the first one turned. And the long prairie-like dresses with cleavage was also an inspired choice. It cemented a look in our zeitgeist of what a "Stepford Wife" looks and acts like. I love the 1975 version. I hated the 2004 version. Even though I am a huge Nicole Kidman fan, she could not save that screenplay. The original version is a classic study on feminism, women's liberation, toxic masculinity, and so much more.
Fair enough. I just find it fascinating that William Goldman thought it was a terrible mistake, and that Ira Levin agreed that it misrepresented his novel. It's a great chapter in Goldman's book, as he recalls biting his tongue, thinking the director's going to ruin the movie he's written. Or not. "Nobody knows anything."
As someone who's only ever seen the 2004 version, this was an interesting video. I'd love to see the 1970s version or read the book. Thank you for the video. 😊
Thank you. It's easy to find the whole 1975 film on RUclips at the moment, and the other day I also noticed the 1980 TV movie sequel, Revenge of the Stepford Wives!
@@culturewarp Thanks for the tip.
The movie is perfect. It is terrifying. There is absolutely nothing wrong with the casting. Watch the 2001 making of documentary. It explains everything about how the film was made including the casting.
I thought the original was great. Those men wanted to own their wives. They wouldn't want to share them with others. They wanted the ideal life for themselves. They did not care about their wives. You couldn't get new men and their wives to stay in Stepford if it was a Playboy type mansion scenario. Kids and dogs always find out. It had to be on the down low. The new series should have been about replacing the children and the pets. They didn't want any of that messy part of life.