Does anyone else feel like this film is actually sexist toward men? Like all they really secretly want is a woman like a robot? I mean, the new & improved bodies, ok, but the complete absence of anything and everything else? Being a feminist doesn't mean hating men, or stereotyping them right back.
shareNo, it isn't.
It is about a small group of men who joined a cult.
Of course that's the literal plot, but this movie is about social satire & commentary, especially regarding feminism at that time in history. It has a LOT more to say, I think :)
shareOf course. Walter is a monster but Joanna isn't portrayed as a saint.
The fact of the matter is, they are stuck in a bad marriage. Joanna obviously wants to leave and maybe Walter wants out as well. But neither of them are discussing it with one another. Both of them sulk and hope the other will magically read the other's mind.
The power balance tips because Walter joins a cult that promises him a wife that will never age and never leave.
It is a satire of both men and women.
It's not terribly flattering to humanity in general, but that's the whole point.
shareWell it's 2014 and were maybe just a little closer to the kind of robotics shown in this movie from 1975. I guess the question then is when the day comes that they can develope robotics to a point that they really seem human will some people actually take them over the real thing (Excluding getting rid of the actual wife or husband and replace with a robot that is. I mean if you're not doing well with your spouse in the first place would you really want to replicate him or her regardless if they'll obey your every command?). I'm sure there'd be a huge market for them if they were brought to some affordable price. Some would want them for the totall controll where others would want them because just like prostitution you just pay to go without having to play to go.
It's been a long time since I saw this (Much better than the 90's remake). But I think the author and the people making the movie could have made a movie that came across as much more plausable if instead of the original wives being replaced by robotics that we're many decades away from even coming close to producing to fool anyone as being human up close..... Would be to make the wives given some sort of treatment including some drug that kept them in a state of a hypnotic trance where their husbands wishes were their command to always follow. Then you have warm blooded bodies, and they will grow old with you, but if they're really attuned to your every need you could get a younger subject as a live in maid who is also there to fulfill your every wish. I mean if the guys are going to be using and abusing woman with their wealth then why wouldn't they have fresh replacement concubines too? The idea sounds better than a cold skinned life like Barbie doll that never ages and basically reminds you even more about your own mortality as you do age
I think they did a Stepford Wives Two (Not that remake), but I know nothing about it. If I had anything to do with it the theme would be based around, "Be careful what you wish for because you just might get it." Where the husbands regret trading in their living wives for these maga Barbie dolls. In my version some of the husbands would be like the wives in the original and start to notice some of the men changing. Eventually discovering that the company is concerned that some of the husbands might go public so they decide to create a perfect community of all robots. A real show place to recruit others to work for them. The question then is do we find the men all taken over too like the women in the first? Or do they blow the thing wide open? My version would have the men ending up with the same fate their wives had
[deleted]
"This movie was also made in a time where sexism was much worse than it was today so don't blame the writer for being heavy as she was right to do so."
The author of "The Stepford Wives" (Ira Levin) was male, not female. Also, if sexism was so egregious when it was made, why the need for hyperbole?
It does in fact reflect the reality of the contemporary west, which is that people (both men and women) are prepared to believe the worst about men but not women. In the 1930s and 40s motion pictures had far more female villains than in the 1970s, or today. Feminist cinema theory focuses heavily on the decline in women's roles from the 1950s onward but completely ignores the wholesale disappearance of villainesses. What kind of roles do they suppose Bette Davis, Joan Crawford or Barbara Stanwyck built their careers on?
if sexism was so egregious when it was made, why the need for hyperbole?
No, it was not a "voice in the wilderness". 1975 was declared "The Year of Women" by the United Nations, and the feminist movement was gathering steam. Abortion had just been legalized throughout the United States and questioning gender roles (at least so far as they affected women- 40 years later we're only starting to question misandry) was hardly a novel or revolutionary act by 1975.
shareHuh. i was born during 'The Year of Women'.
http://www.cgonzales.net & http://www.drxcreatures.com
[deleted]
[deleted]
I came to this forum because in the past week I've seen two men on YouTube claim that someday women will be obsolete. So unfortunately, some men are fantasizing about a Stepford wife scenario. What a creepy world that would be.
share[deleted]
And you, as a fake and phony female are fantasizing about a Stepford husband scenario. What a creepy world that would be. It's already creepy enough with you in it.
Exorcist: Christ's power compels you. Cast out, unclean spirit.
Destinata:💩
Does anyone else feel like this film is actually sexist toward men?
Not really, the men are portrayed as sad bastards but notice who's missing. No working class men and no hereditary rich, they're all white (as I remember) and petty bourgeois.
Marlon, Claudia and Dimby the cats 1989-2005, 2007 and 2010.
You have a point. If the film was about women who inhumanely traded in their husbands for robots, it would be considered humorous. I think many women are naturally inclined to believe, or have been taught, that their gender is more pure.
share