TrueJoshNight Truly Dreadful Film

Spoonixel Amateur movie with Big budget

TaryBiggBall It was OK. I don't see why everyone loves it so much. It wasn't very smart or deep or well-directed.

Murphy Howard I enjoyed watching this film and would recommend other to give it a try , (as I am) but this movie, although enjoyable to watch due to the better than average acting fails to add anything new to its storyline that is all too familiar to these types of movies.

Sam Panico Ira Levin's 1972 novel, The Stepford Wives, and the 1975 movie that was based on it are both cultural phenomena. Even the phrase "Stepford wife" has entered into our lexicon. So why did things have to stop after one movie? Luckily, NBC aired this sequel on October 12, 1980.Whereas the original Stepford wives were androids, the new ones are controlled by drugs and hypnosis. That's why the town of Stepford has the lowest divorce and crime rate in the U.S. And it's also what brings reporter Kaye Foster (Shannon Gless, TV's Cagney and Lacey) to town.The town is against outsiders, who enjoy the quiet surroundings they live in. And oh yeah, the fact that others than 4 sirens a day to tell them to take their pills, they don't have to tell their wives to do anything. They've become the perfect wives - complaint in all ways.Kaye meets two other outsiders, Megan Brady (Julie Kavner, Marge Simpson!) and her policeman husband, the dim-witted Andy (Don Johnson, singer of "Heartbeat." Oh yeah and Miami Vice, A Boy and His Dog and The Magic Garden of Stanley Sweetheart). Unlike the other women in town, Megan is sarcastic (and near caustic at times) to her husband. She becomes Kay's research assistant.The Stepford Men's Association, run by Dale "Diz" Coba (The Andromeda Strain), is in charge of town. They even send Barbara Parkinson (Audra Lindley, Mrs. Roper from Three's Company) to run her down with her car. Afterward, all she can do is repeat the same words and appears to be controlled.Meanwhile, Wally the hotel manager (Mason Adams, God Told Me To) confesses that he wants to leave his wife but can't. She's been programmed to be someone he no longer wants her to be.Meanwhile, Andy gets the job with the Stepford Police and we see his wife got through the Stepford process. Soon, she's wearing a frilly dress, as well as cooking and cleaning with no complaint. As long as she takes her pills and doesn't drink, all will be well. Kaye sneaks in to watch their initiation ritual and barely escapes with her life.Kaye then frees Megan by boozing her up. They try to use Wally to escape town, but even though they had already planned on him betraying them, they are still caught. Kaye manages to get a gun and hold Diz at gunpoint while Megan continually rings the siren. As the Stepford Wives overdose on pills, they become violent and attack their men.Andy returns to help save the day as the women of the town push Diz off a balcony and tear him to pieces as Kaye leaves.This was directed by Robert Fuest, who also brought us The Abominable Dr. Phibes, Dr. Phibes Rises Again and The Devil's Rain! It's not a bad effort, but a lot of his quirkier touches are absent. Genre vet James MacKrell also shows up (he played Lew Landers in both Gremlins and The Howling).One of my issues with this movie - and any of the Stepford stores - is that it's a really simplistic view on feminism. At the risk of mansplaining, I think that women can choose wherever they want to be - in the workforce, at home raising a family, not raising a family, doing all of the above. Or none! By placing the battle between liberated career women and drones who only exist to cook and clean, these stories simplify the very complicated battle of the sexes.That doesn't mean I didn't enjoy this, though! It has some great tension throughout and makes me miss when movies like this would air regularly. This was released on VHS in the 1980's after Don Johnson's Miami Vice fame and even retitled Terror in New York when released internationally. In fact, the version I watched on YouTube has a really poor computer graphics title for this that is just dubbed in!

Stepfordlife Good Lord! The only reason to watch this is possibly Sharon Gless. And if you haven't seen the 1975 original (which was even better than the book)…possibly this would have been a mildly entertaining movie. But for the true Stepford fan it's just so damn frustrating to watch. The 1987 "Stepford Children" while still a bit silly was a truer sequel in keeping with the original plot. I'm not sure how they could have called this one a sequel. Stepford really never got it's due in the sequel or remake departments (including the confusingly edited and equally frustrating 2004 version). I was so excited to see that one but the editors took so much out and even had the nerve to tease us with a trailer which was full of "cut-outs"…See the 1975 version.

richard.fuller1 With the recent remake of the original Stepford Wives, this time as a comedy with Nicole Kidman, Bette Midler, Christopher Walken, Glenn Close and Matthew Broderick, there may be interest in in the original with Katherine Ross and Paula Prentiss, as well as this 1980 sequel with Sharon Gless, Don Johnson and Julie Kavner, yes, she who does the voice of Marge Simpson. I would see this version first before I would see the original 1975 movie. Normally I do not care for women vs. men programs done in such a moralistic light, but I am aware of sexism in society and that there is beliefs and opinions that women "should be more supportive, obedient and submissive" to their men, with the men not having to reciprocate. Having since seen the original, which seemed more like a spoof on tv commercials to me than anything else, this one did seem to delve more into women being doting housewives. Gless was a single woman who came to town. That alone upsets this whole cart. I wonder how Stepford handled that? Does someone get a concubine in the process? We did glimpse an unnamed couple attempting to flee at the very beginning. They don't make it. I was misled to think this was a couple shown in the original, which they weren't. Also, this one did take the approach that the women aren't replaced with robots, they are drugged.The first Stepford was more of a Twilight Zone movie as well. This one sought to give the wives their revenge. Granted, had the robots of the first one rebelled, it might have been interesting, but then it could also have simply been "Westworld, the Women."Nevertheless, nothing failed in this sequel. The siren going off for the women to take the medication could have been absurd, but it was kept low-key, as was the women in the lacy outfits and aprons.I only truly grasped there was something impractical about the dresses when Kavner commented to Gless about it in the car.Yes, Revenge was nearly a totally different movie from Stepford Wives, different motives, different outcome, but there has been sequels that pretty much follow the same path as the original and those are no fun.Want to see the women lose? See the 1975 movie.Want to see the men lose? See the 1980 sequel.There is a third, horrendous movie, called Stepford Children, with Barbara Eden, Don Murray and Tammy Lauren. Avoid this one at all costs. It doesn't add anything further to this concept.

siderius OK, so the plot is far-fetched, lame and offensive - the movie is a hoot! Keep in mind that I would watch anything with Sharon Gless - but she and Julie Kavner are a good team. A young Don Johnson appears as bland and clued-out Kavner's cop husband. Sharon, the reporter, arrives to do a story on the perfect town of Stepford. She hires Julie as an assistant who promptly gets nabbed by the Stepford gang. Her husband is in on it, of course. Sharon sets out to save Julie - Don and the whole town set out to stop her. Lots of chases, peril and the bad guys get what they deserve. Save it for a rainy day when you want a taste of some familiar TV faces in their early years.