The Stepford Wives

2004

Action / Comedy / Horror / Sci-Fi / Thriller

42
Rotten Tomatoes Critics - Rotten 25% · 175 reviews
Rotten Tomatoes Audience - Spilled 30% · 100K ratings
IMDb Rating 5.4/10 10 73035 73K

Please enable your VPΝ when downloading torrents

If you torrent without a VPΝ, your ISP can see that you're torrenting and may throttle your connection and get fined by legal action!

Get Private VPΝ

Plot summary

What does it take to become a Stepford wife, a woman perfect beyond belief? Ask the Stepford husbands, who've created this high-tech, terrifying little town.

Director

Top cast

Nicole Kidman as Joanna Eberhart
Robert Stanton as Ted Van Sant
Christopher Walken as Mike Wellington
Andrea Anders as Heather
720p.BLU 1080p.BLU 720p.WEB 1080p.WEB
853.97 MB
1280*720
English 2.0
PG-13
Subtitles us  
23.976 fps
1 hr 32 min
Seeds 8
1.71 GB
1904*1072
English 5.1
PG-13
Subtitles us  
23.976 fps
1 hr 32 min
Seeds 39
852.65 MB
1280*714
English 2.0
PG-13
Subtitles us  
24 fps
1 hr 32 min
Seeds 2
1.71 GB
1920*1072
English 5.1
PG-13
Subtitles us  
24 fps
1 hr 32 min
Seeds 34

Movie Reviews

Reviewed by TheFilmCritics.org 6 / 10

A polished suburban nightmare wrapped in pastel perfection

A polished suburban nightmare wrapped in pastel perfection, Stepford Wives finds plenty of style in its glossy world but struggles to make its sharpest ideas as clever as they could be. The film’s premise remains a fascinating one: exploring identity, conformity, and the pressures of perfection, and it presents those themes through a colorful, almost surreal comedic lens. One of the movie’s strongest assets is its production design. The immaculate homes, extravagant costumes, and picture-perfect neighborhoods create a visually appealing atmosphere that feels intentionally artificial. The cast also brings considerable charm, with enough talent and chemistry to make the bizarre situation entertaining even when the material falls short. Unfortunately, the film often feels like it is holding back the comedy. The concept is ripe for bigger laughs and sharper satire, but many of the jokes feel too safe for a story this outrageous. The movie also takes a rather simplistic approach to its themes, portraying traditional values almost entirely as something sinister rather than exploring the more complicated reasons people might be drawn to them. The biggest weakness is the lack of explanation behind the film’s central sci-fi twist. The mechanics of what is actually happening are left frustratingly vague, with questions about whether the characters are robots, programmed humans, or something else entirely. The technology raises more questions than the movie cares to answer, creating plot holes that are difficult to ignore. Still, Stepford Wives has enough personality to make it an enjoyable, if uneven, experience. Its stylish presentation, capable cast, and satisfying conclusion help smooth over some of its flaws, but the film’s missed opportunities keep it from becoming the biting satire its premise promised.
Reviewed by Wuchak 3 / 10

_**Confused comedic remake of the original 1975 film**_

_**Confused comedic remake of the original 1975 film**_ A couple (Nicole Kidman & Matthew Broderick) moves from the Big Apple to Stepford, Connecticut, where many of the wives of the village are wholly dedicated to their husbands, home & garden and keeping themselves well-groomed and primed for sex. The husband joins the mysterious all-male organization of the town which seems to be up to something fishy. Bette Midler plays Joanna’s best friend while Glenn Close & Christopher Walken are on hand as high society leaders. “The Stepford Wives” (2004) is a confused comedic remake of the iconic 1975 film. It starts out like it might be a fun farce, and it is to some degree, but it’s hindered by an annoying stereotypical “gay” character and doomed by befuddled writing, the result of bad-management wherein rewrites and reshoots ruined the story's continuity and created plot holes. The most glaring example is the implication that the wives are replaced by robots; for instance, one woman is used as an ATM machine. At the end, however, Joanna (Kidman) discovers they've just been brainwashed by microchips inserted in their brains. If the latter is true, why was there an android version of Joanna? Do the men have a choice of a robot model or a human-with-a-microchip model? Do they choose “accessories”? It’s never elucidated. The film runs 1 hour, 32 minutes, and was shot in Connecticut and New York/New Jersey. GRADE: D+
Reviewed by CinemaSerf 5 / 10

Despite an A-list cast, this is a really

Despite an A-list cast, this is a really poor and disjointed film that is much more about the stars than it is about any cohesive story. Television executive "Joanna" (Nicole Kidman) has burned the candle at both ends for too long, has a bit of a breakdown, and is shunted off to the manicured hedges and lawns of Stepford in Connecticut by her rather insipid husband "Walter" (Matthew Broderick). It doesn't take them long to realise that this is conceivably the most sterile, charm free place on the planet. All their neighbours have wives who would vie for the most vacuous woman prize - doting on their looks, their dresses, their hair, their gardens - whilst their men folk, under the watchful eye of "Mike Wellington" (Christopher Walker) and his uber-glamorous wife "Claire" (Glenn Close) seem to live the life of Reilly. Luckily, "Bobbie" (Bette Midler) offers "Joanna" the vaguest of lifelines as the only other voice of near sanity in this oasis of feminine perfection, but how long before they succumb too - or can they resist the mysterious effects of the spa and the gentleman's club? There is really very little to like or enjoy in this. For it to have worked, it would have required much more humour and charisma on screen. The narrative meanders in just too flat and stolid a fashion, with little for us to get our teeth into. Middler has probably the best chance at injecting a degree of personality into the thing, but even she struggles with the wordy dialogue and the lacklustre delivery. It looks good, effort has certainly been expended there - but the rest of this is just poor and disappointing. The 1975 film isn't great, but it's way better than this.
Read more IMDb reviews

9 Comments

Be the first to leave a comment