Description

The Slipper and the Rose is a grand musical adventure in the tradition of The Sound of Music and My Fair Lady. This lavish production features Richard Chamberlain in a spirited retelling of the classic Cinderella fairy tale, and the Academy Award-nominated score is provided by the Oscar-winning song-writing duo the Sherman Brothers (Mary Poppins, The Jungle Book, Chitty Chitty Bang Bang). The Slipper and the Rose is a brilliant mix of fantasy and realism that will enchant viewers of all ages. No musical collection would be complete without this romantically delightful film.Audio commentary by director Bryan Forbes (The Stepford Wives, King Rat). Video interview with the Sherman Brothers. Promotional featurette--Cinderella Story: The Making of "The Slipper and the Rose." Available for the first time on home video in its complete, full-length version. 143 minutes. AC-3 Soundtrack. 16x9 anamorphic widescreen transfer. ... Read more

Reviews (93)

Better than Roger's and Hammerstein's!
I found this movie one day on the Disney Channel while flipping throug the channels. I only saw the last hour or so, but I was enthralled. I have looked for it for 2 years. Then I discovered it's finally on video. I bought it at once, naturally. This is the most romantic version of the famous tale that I've ever seen. Richard Chamberlain does an outstanding performance as the prince. He's handsome, charming and witty. I'm surprised more of the princesses didn't agree to come to the bride finding ball. Gemma Cravens is the perfect Cinderella: beautiful, sweet, and kind. A princess in her manner and character. Edward and Cinderella are the perfect couple. Their love is touching. And I like all the twists and turns in the story that leave you wondering if maybe the prince won't marry his beloved Cinderella. But of course he does, but the two go through a lot. They have their problems and separations. It's not all roses for them. Though this is a fairy tale, it doesn't seem like it. It's all very believable. And very well done. It didn't lack anything at all. It's just a wonderful, romantic tale, and a joy to watch. Love really does find a way!

HOORAY! A must have for every video library!
I, like most viewers, saw this years ago, and it has been in my heart ever since! I am so thrilled that it is finally being released and others will become acquainted with, what I consider, the greatest Cinderella story ever! The casting is absolutely superb, Richard Chamberlain and Gemma Craven are the epitome of this famous prince and his leading lady! Equally enjoyable is the fairy godmother, whose character is like icing on the cake! The story is very romantic, but also very believable, as each character deals with the demands of protocol. The scenery and musical score speak for themselves! Absolutely superb! I've been singing the songs for years! ("Once I Was Loved", "Rainbows Raced Around The Room," and "The Family Crypt song," which is hilarious, are favorites!) Buy this movie today! It's one you don't want to miss!

A SECRET KINGDOM.....FAR -A-WAY.........SOMEWHERE!
THE SLIPPER AND THE ROSE was one of the last of the great romantic musicals. It is an enchanting production, produced on a grand scale;with lavish, detailed costumes, a talented, all-star cast, and a marvelous academy award-nominated musical score, by the famous Sherman brothers. The musical is pitched as a Cinderella story; but no one pays much attention to Cinderella, as this version focuses mostly on her Prince. Richard Chamberlain steps up to the plate and steals the show; with his stately good looks, beautiful baritone voice, and graceful dance routines. From the very first scene, when he rides up to the castle on his magnificent horse, all eyes remain fixed on this amazingly talented actor; who was born to play royalty. He and the famous Christopher Gable, deliver an unforgetable song and dance routine in the royal family crypt, that is not only a visual delight, but a challenging athletic endeavor as well. Bryan Forbes directed this fanciful, witty, production with his usual "eye for detail". He treats his audience to majestic snow scenes, stately castles and cathedrals, romantic gardens, and a Cinderella ball scene that has "rainbows racing around the room, and shooting stars that begin to zoom"! Gemma Craven is an acceptable Cinderella, but her mediocre talents are overshadowed by the amazing talents of her co-star, Richard Chamberlain. This is a fun, visually pleasing, romantic Cinderella story, told from the Prince's perspective. As always, the regal, romantic Richard Chamberlain, rounds up his audience, and very capably whisks them away to a Secret Kingdom ......far-away....Somewhere!

Very disappointing.
After winning an autographed copy several years ago, I had to wait a long time to unite this DVD with a DVD player. I have always enjoyed the Sherman Brothers' work, from Mary Poppins to 1776, even the Tiki Tiki Tiki Tiki Tiki Room. I was also looking forward to finally watching Michael Hordern onscreen, after falling in love with his voice in the BBC's radio version of The Lord of the Rings (he was a spectacular Gandalf). Now, after all that buildup, what a tremendous letdown. I'm about 40 minutes in and bored out of my skull. The jokes are flat, the lyrics monosyllabic and predictable, the melodies are entirely forgettable, and the acting is entirely two-dimensional.

Not recommended for anyone over the age of 5.

With the best Fairy Godmother ever
I remember seeing this when I was young, but couldn't remember the name of it. I was delighted when I found it again. While some of the songs in this are not the best work ever in a musical, ("Proticoligorically Correct" comes to mind, which in my opinion drags the movie down a bit), the acting of the cast in the rest of the film more than makes up for it. The showstopping song and dance of "Position and Positioning" is particularly fine, and does bring back memories of the rooftop dancing from "Mary Poppins," which was also the work of the creative team on this film.

Even those actors who don't have any lines to speak of add to the fun, including the Queen mother of "the other bride," whose facial expressions while her husband and the King of Euphrania discuss the problem of their disobedient children make me laugh every time I see it.

The leads do a wonderful job in this, particularly Richard Chamberlin, who portrays a very kind and thoughtful prince. As with many veteran actors, you can almost see what he is thinking when he is onscreen. (Veteran, indeed; I still find it hard to believe that he was 40 when he played this role!) The fact that we actually get to know the prince is one of the things that make this retelling of the tale superior to others. He has at least as much screen time as does Gemma Craven, and it adds to the richness of the story.

Gemma Craven, as the main character, does a fine job, managing to stay just this side of sappy. Often with the Cinderella story, I feel the urge to slap the girl silly, most often because the actress in the role is sort of "parroting" goodness. Ms. Craven's performance leaves you believing that Cinderella is simply a noble being, willing even to sacrifice her own happiness for the good of the people in her homeland, and trying to ensure that the man she loves will not be miserable when he finds she has done so. You can't help being delighted for her when things turn out right in the end.

The best performance by far, though, in this movie is that of Annette Crosby as the Fairy Godmother. Rather than the sugary-sweet version that we are served up in the other versions of the Cinderella story, Ms. Crosby's performance is delightfully tart and very funny. This version also finally explains the reason for the "leave before the stroke of midnight" stricture, which has always been an irritating point in the classic fable. *Why* does Cinderella have to leave before midnight? The explanation in this version at least makes sense.

For fans of the Cinderella myth, this is a good version to choose. ... Read more

Amazon.com

High on the list of best POW movies, King Rat bears some comparison to that compound over by the River Kwai... but this is an entirely more cynical exercise. In a Japanese prison camp, a brash American corporal (George Segal) runs a variety of money-making operations, much to the amazement of a young British officer (James Fox). Director Bryan Forbes, who adapted James Clavell's novel, follows different POWs through various strands of plot, each episode seemingly designed to highlight the dog-eat-dog nature of men held in close confinement. (In one pointedly black-comic sequence, it becomes man-eat-dog.) This was one of Segal's breakthrough roles, and his modern style fits the movie's anti-heroic, '60s approach. It was Oscar®-nominated for art direction and cinematography, which may sound odd for such a bleakly confined location, but the lucid starkness of the camp justifies the nods. The John Barry score, while apt, is similarly stark. --Robert Horton ... Read more

Reviews (14)

Extraordinary Film Essential Viewing
King Rat appeared around the same time as "The Train". While both attempt an unsentimentalized view of war and it's heroes, "The Train" (an excellent film) is ultimately an action piece about victory. "King Rat" on the other hand, is about survival.

Over the last twenty-five years I've read the book twice and seen the movie at least five times. I don't care what the differences are anymore - both book and film are exceptional works. Different, but definitely equal. Experiencing either will be a harrowing, heart-breaking, but ultimately rewarding experience.

Set in Changi prison camp (and based on Clavel's real-life experiences there) King Rat is the story of a young British officer (James Fox) who finds himself working for the camp hustler (George Segal). Together they are harassed by camp Provost Martial Tom Courtney determined to catch Segal (Corporal King) breaking regulations.

The adaptation and direction by Bryan Forbes (who had to make allowances for the conservative sensibilities of a sixties audience) is simply amazing: King Rat is about the heat, disease, suffering, and madness. These aren't the stiff-upper-lip-discipline-or-die men of "Bridge On The River Kwai". The soldiers in King Rat are wretched, pathetic, and despairing. There is no sentimentality here, neither in front of, or behind the camera. Forbes' lens is unflinching -- it's the audience who has to look away.

The cast alone makes this film worthwhile: George Segal (for the uninitiated, Segal was once a rising star), Tom Courtenay, James Fox, Patrick O'Neal, Denholm Elliot, James Donald, Tod Armstrong, John Mills, Gerald Sim, and Leonard Rossiter to name a few. They are all at their best. There are no disappointments here. In fact, I think it is the cast that makes me prefer the film to the book. Tom Courtney is much better at realizing his character than Clavel can write him. While Clavel (who lived this harrowing experience) may have known these people, it's the cast who have personalized and personified them. And so, while Forbes may have cut significant material from the book, I think the soul of the work is stronger. This is most apparent in the last line of dialog: in the book it is delivered by Tom Courtney's character, but in the film it is given to James Fox.

But what is most amazing is that, after thirty-five years and the likes of "Patton", "Full Metal Jacket", "Platoon", "The Odd Angry Shot", and "Saving Private Ryan", "King Rat" still holds it's own. IF you are a connoisseur of films (war or otherwise) this is a must see.

He Gave You Hate, Gray!
Survival. This film of POW's in Singapore's Changi prison is about survival. Mostly British POW's, there is one hustler among them, an American Corporal named King. He is the King Rat...the black marketeer, the guy "on the ball", trading with the Malay & Japanese guards, and always working schemes. He is pursued by the POW Provost Marshals , envied and resented by other POW's, even as they employ his services as a go-between for themselves.

A naive young British Officer, Marlowe, meets the King and is drawn into his world, first as a translator (he speaks Malay), and slowly becomes Corporal King's only true friend. He comes to admire King's undaunted will to survive and his ingenuity and courage. In the episode of the watch sale, King gives Marlowe a lesson in how things really work that is an eye-opener to him and us.

Beautifully played by a very young James Fox as Marlowe, and an equally young George Segal as Corporal King, the movie is harrowing and yet often very funny. King's schemes and maneuvers, while illegal as camp rules, keep everyone engaged and some of the episodes are rife with gallows humor (as in the special "stew" feast and the "delicacy" reserved for sale to officers only).

The rest of the cast is fine with John Mills, Patrick O'Neal, James Donalds and Tom Courtney standouts. The direction by Bryan Forbes is excellent, capturing the terrible conditions of the camp and the insipient insanity and despair of the prisoners.

James Clavell was in Changi prison, and he knew a man like Corporal King. The book may have been somewhat different, but the movie captures the essence of Clavell's experience and his admiration for the man's guts and spirit and unwillingness to surrender and be defeated by Changi. A terrific, unsentimental film. 4-1/2 stars.

You are what you eat
Well, Corporal King did not actually eat rats - he sold that particular delicacy to the officers.

Based on the excellent book by James Clavell, this is a great story of life in a Japanese-run prison camp in Singapore.

George Segal plays corporal King, who is the big wheeler-dealer of the camp, buying and selling various items such as watches, ripping off anyone he can, but also handsomely paying off his cronies.

He develops a friendship of sorts with one particular British prisoner, and later helps keep his arm from being amputated.

Upon being liberated (led by none other than "Family Feud" host Richard Dawson), King realizes that he will be going back to being the low rung on the ladder (as a corporal), and shares none of the other prisoner's joy of freedom.

There are quite a few great performances, particularly from George Segal (the man who once french-kissed his dog on the Johnny Carson show).

Of course, as is usually the case, the book is much better, but this is still a darn good movie.

Why is this movie so underrated?
I do not understand why this movie isn't better known and more respected. It is an excellent film, as are several of Bryan Forbes' British films, all of which I recommend. When I first saw this film, I was almost outraged that I'd never heard anything about it, and I see I'm in good company. Why is Stalag 17 considered a classic of American cinema while King Rat (a much better and more complex film, in my opinion) languishes in semi-obscurity? I've never seen any significant criticism on it, which is particularly unusual for a war film (and, in some sense, anti-war film.) At least they've finally put it on DVD, and the transfer here is excellent, even if there aren't really any extras. Interestingly, the company that produced this DVD seems to be pushing George Segal's presence as the selling point of King Rat, and the back of the box doesn't even mention James Fox's character(!) (Perhaps the macho POW film audience would be put off by the relationship between Segal's and Fox's characters? I don't know.) Segal's performance is indeed great, but it isn't the only reason to watch this film, which is excellent in every major respect: technically, dramatically, and thematically. (I'm usually nearly in tears by the end, too-- I don't know whether that's true for everyone, though.) One more thing: I have not read the novel, but you should bear in mind that they ARE separate works of art, even if the film is adapted, and therefore needn't be judged against each other. I think King Rat succeeds marvellously in its own right.

Anyone for an egg???
There have been many great war movies and most people would surely agree that movies such as Patton, Platoon, Saving Private Ryan, All Quiet on the Western Front, and Paths of Glory should be included, but sad to say I have never seen "King Rat" on any greatest list (either war related or just generic great movies). Oh, but it should be! On the face of it, "King Rat" is the story of an American corporal (George Segal) imprisoned in a Japanese POW camp. He may be a corporal in actual rank, but he is the Commander-in-Chief of the entire camp when it comes to surviving. He is the instigator and beneficiary of every scheme immaginable to survive as best he can. He not only has to persevere against the Japanese, but also the other allied prisoners in the camp with him who consider him no better than the Japanese. I will not go into all of the schemes that he concocts for his personal survival and comfort, but there is one in which he is offhandedly (or so it seems) preparing lunch for himself and a fellow prisoner, that has to be seen "and heard" to be believed. I have probably 1,000 movies in my collection and have seen many more than that, which simply means that I have been exposed to hundreds and hundreds of memorable scenes: 2001: bone thrown into the air, Butch Cassidy: jumping off the cliff, Dr. Strangelove: riding the bomb, Doctor Zhivago: collapsing on the tracks with Lara almost in reach, and of course Psycho: the shower, but I defy anyone to watch the egg scene in "King Rat" and not be profoundly moved. It affects me deeply just thinking about it. ... Read more

Reviews (73)

You'll Just Die If You Don't See This Movie
Whether or not you've actually seen it, you'll probably have heard of "The Stepford Wives". Based on Ira Levin's novel, it was produced in the 1970s and has endured in the public consciousness ever since. Indeed the terms "Stepford" and "Stepford Wife" are now part of our vernacular. If you're in any doubt what these expressions mean, just imagine a woman who is the perfect male fantasy...a wife who cooks, cleans and keeps her husband's home to perfection whilst remaining an object of beauty, with well-preserved looks, sexy outfits and just the right-sized cleavage. A female who is there to service her man's every need - domestic, emotional, sexual - whilst never questioning her role as devoted housewife.The film tells the tale of New York housewife and photographer Joanna Eberhart, who moves with her lawyer husband Walter (sexy name - not!) and their two kids to the seemingly idyllic rural town of Stepford. Very soon Joanna becomes disenchanted with her surroundings, missing the liveliness of New York. Her feelings of isolation are compounded by the fact that the other women in the town appear content to stay at home for their husbands as loyal house fraus, with no outside interests whatsoever. Also, all new male arrivals in Stepford are invited to join "The Men's Association", an organisation from which the town's women are strictly excluded. Whatever goes on there remains a mystery; the women aren't told.

Fortunately Joanna meets the effervescent and rebellious Bobby Marco, another recent arrival in Stepford who shares her concerns about the strange behaviour of the women in the community. Together they decide to set up a consciousness-raising group and rally to get the local women involved...almost to no avail! At the first meeting of the wives, the other women prefer to agonise over the cleanliness of their kitchens and talk about the wonders of "Easy-On" starch spray and baking. One other recruit is found though; a feisty redhead called Charmaine who feels restricted by her husband Ed's demands. However after a weekend away with him, Charmaine returns strangely altered, allowing her hubby to bulldoze her much-loved tennis court and confessing that she all she wanted to do was "please Ed...and boy am I gonna please him". Weird.

Mystified, Joanna and Bobby seek an answer to the zombie-like behaviour of the local women, wondering if "something in the water" might be responsible. They enlist one of Joanna's ex boyfriends, who is a scientist, to help, but this fails to pay dividends. Joanna soon comes to the frightening realisation that the town's wives undergo a change in personality after they have been resident in Stepford for roughly three months... and her time is almost up...

I won't give any more away but this is a thought-provoking and intriguing movie!! Although low on action, the film builds its sense of momentum through a growing feeling of paranoia: are the women in the town somehow being "substituted" for drone-like replacements? Or are all of Joanna's anxieties inside her own head? If you're looking for a fast-moving film you might be disappointed, but the cleverness of the movie lies in its subtlety and the way in which the events take place in a seemingly normal domestic setting.

Another reason for this movie's success lies in the acting. Katherine Ross (also of "The Graduate") puts in an intelligent, sympathetic performance as a woman who feels increasingly hemmed in by the claustrophobia of Stepford, and you really root for her as she feels she might be next on the list for "conversion". Paula Prentiss is great as Bobby, a funny, bubbly and tomboyish character determined not to become "one of those pan-scrubbers" and the rapport between her and Joanna is believable and touching. Given her determination to escape Stepford, Bobby's last few scenes are all the more poignant; I won't say any more but they make for some of the film's best moments! The supporting cast do a good job: amongst these are Peter Masterson as Walter, becoming gradually less supportive of his wife's feelings and fears and more and more influenced by the demands of the "Men's Association"; and Nanette Newman as Carol Van Sant, one of the wives who starts behaving very oddly at a barbecue, continually proclaiming "I'll just die if I don't get that recipe" (!!) Newman's role as a wife is all the more ironic considering all those "Fairy Liquid" adverts she once did (remember?!)

The movie has also attained a kitsch/camp quality over time, mostly due to the fact that it was made in the 1970s! This doesn't spoil the subtler elements to the film, rather makes it all the more entertaining! A large part of the camp appeal is down to the wives themselves - their appearance, behaviour and dialogue. According to this movie, men would like nothing better than to see their wives dressed in frilly blouses (still showing off their assets), flowery dresses and big floppy hats - hilarious. The wives all say things like "I really shouldn't say it, but I just love my brownies" (that's cakes in case you were wondering) and constantly praise their husbands' performances in the bedroom department: "You're the King....you're the Master"!! No comment!

To summarise this is a very enjoyable movie, which, as I have already mentioned, shows the dangers of male fantasies coming true and the perils that women must face having to exist in a patriarchal society. Go buy it...but don't get any ideas about changing your girlfriend...okay?!

I'll simply die if I don't get this recipe!
THE STEPFORD WIVES was a unique film. It set out to make a horror film where clean spotless sunlit kitchens were just as scary as rainy spooky old mansions at midnight. Made in the mid 1970s during a wave of feminism and controversy over the ERA Ammendment - it never got the acclaim it deserved for it's building creepiness and Sci Fi twists. The remake is what it is, but here's where most people first glimpsed Stepford - a very real suburb where homemaking is a science.

Katharine Ross(in an EXCELLENT turn)plays Joanna Eberhard who moves from NYC to Stepford with her husband and two daughters. She's a photographer and homemaker who's dabbled in the women's movement but never really taken up the cause. She begins to realize the women of Stepford are all obsessed with housework, and worse ... subservient and servile to their husbands. She joins up with another woman who finds this all strange, Bobbie -- played oustandingly by Paula Prentiss. Together they find out a string of clues that maybe not all is well in Stepford, and the seemingly benign suburban bliss may be MANUFACTURED by the creepy Men's Society that every husband is a part of.

Bryan Forbes took over this project after speculations Brian De Palma should film it. He made a very effective treatment of the novel, but added his own touches. His wife Nannette Newman influenced the costumes by demanding rather than proposed Playboy bunny outfits the wives should look Victorian with hats and gloves and long dresses - creepy and sexy. Tina Louise (Ginger on Gilligan's Island) also makes a great cameo as Charmaine - one of Joanna and Bobbie's radical friends who transforms to a Stepford Wife by startingly ripping up her tennis court for a pool her husband wants.

You get the film in widescreen, and the transfer is passable for a movie of this age. Colors are 1970s soft and there is grain, but it looks fine. You get a 12 minute featurette with all the principle players, and they explain how the movie was made and what it was like. Some people say the pacing was slow, but this was the 1970s! I think its suppposed to develop slowly like the novel, and you get to know the characters. The last ten minutes are completely shocking, and no test audiences made them whimp out (cough cough - the remake's ending was reshot). This was a politically relevant well-crafted film with great acting! Superb in every way! Check out the source novel by Ira Levin as well.

A great, but very slow-moving picture.
After seeing the new version of The Stepford Wives (which, incidentally, I loved) I had to seek out the original, which I haven't seen since I was a kid. I was very impressed by most of the performances, most notably Paula Prentiss, who was absolutely magnetic. Although the story was absorbing, and the direction was good, the movie, not unlike Rosemary's Baby, seemed to go nowhere fast. Foot after foot of tape passed through my VCR, but the story unfolded so slowly, it was hard to remain interested........all in all, a must-see because of it's pop-culture influence.

THE STEPFORD WIVES DVD -KATHARINE ROSS
AN EXCELLENT MOVIE ALL AROUND!!! FROM THE STORYLINE TO THE ACTING. DEFINITELY SCARY AT TIMES AND AT TIMES FUNNY. KATHERINE ROSS IS OUTSTANDING IN HER ROLE AS WELL AS PAULA PRENTISS. YOU CAN ALSO CATCH TINA LOUISE(GINGER FROM GILLIGANS ISLAND)AND HER BIG HAIR. A GREAT MOVIE, A MUST SEE!!!

Terrific adaptation of the book
I watched this movie because of the excellent book by Ira Levin. I haven't seen the remake yet, but it will be hard to top this version. This movie is very faithful to the book. There are some changes made, but they remain true to the book and help make it a better movie.

The acting is pretty good. I really found myself caring about what happens to Joanna and Bobbie, her best friend. Having read the book, it was great to see these characters brought to life in a way that rang true. It was almost worse knowing what happens to these characters before you actually see it because you really do want things to turn out OK for them.

It was also very well-written. It starts out kind of slow, but once it digs its hooks in, it keeps you glued to the TV. I also like the way they dealt with the subject of women's desire to be an individual and not some cookie cutter housewife with no life at all. It was done very creatively and it was clever as well.

I highly recommend this movie. It is very creepy and there are some very intense moments. Just because it's rated PG does not mean it wimps out on the suspense. This is one of the most suspenseful movies I've seen in a whil and it's one of the best book to film adaptations I've ever seen. ... Read more

Amazon.com

Aside from boasting one of the great evocative titles in film history, Séance on a Wet Afternoon (1964) works up a surplus of dread with a minimum of devices. Kim Stanley was nominated for an Oscar^® for her performance as a London medium who bulldozes her weak husband (Richard Attenborough) into kidnapping a little girl; the goal is not ransom money, but a chance to prove Stanley's clairvoyant gifts to the police, and thus bring her the respect she has always deserved. The suspense is keen, yet the movie's real achievement is detailing the stifling marriage between two deluded, dependent middle-aged people. Attenborough is heartbreaking as a human doormat, and Stanley's Method intensity brings the movie into a genuinely unnerving realm (she didn't work in movies again for nearly two decades). The story was remade, with intriguing changes, by Japanese director Kiyoshi Kurosawa as Séance (a.k.a. Korei, 2000). --Robert Horton ... Read more

Reviews (73)

You'll Just Die If You Don't See This Movie
Whether or not you've actually seen it, you'll probably have heard of "The Stepford Wives". Based on Ira Levin's novel, it was produced in the 1970s and has endured in the public consciousness ever since. Indeed the terms "Stepford" and "Stepford Wife" are now part of our vernacular. If you're in any doubt what these expressions mean, just imagine a woman who is the perfect male fantasy...a wife who cooks, cleans and keeps her husband's home to perfection whilst remaining an object of beauty, with well-preserved looks, sexy outfits and just the right-sized cleavage. A female who is there to service her man's every need - domestic, emotional, sexual - whilst never questioning her role as devoted housewife.The film tells the tale of New York housewife and photographer Joanna Eberhart, who moves with her lawyer husband Walter (sexy name - not!) and their two kids to the seemingly idyllic rural town of Stepford. Very soon Joanna becomes disenchanted with her surroundings, missing the liveliness of New York. Her feelings of isolation are compounded by the fact that the other women in the town appear content to stay at home for their husbands as loyal house fraus, with no outside interests whatsoever. Also, all new male arrivals in Stepford are invited to join "The Men's Association", an organisation from which the town's women are strictly excluded. Whatever goes on there remains a mystery; the women aren't told.

Fortunately Joanna meets the effervescent and rebellious Bobby Marco, another recent arrival in Stepford who shares her concerns about the strange behaviour of the women in the community. Together they decide to set up a consciousness-raising group and rally to get the local women involved...almost to no avail! At the first meeting of the wives, the other women prefer to agonise over the cleanliness of their kitchens and talk about the wonders of "Easy-On" starch spray and baking. One other recruit is found though; a feisty redhead called Charmaine who feels restricted by her husband Ed's demands. However after a weekend away with him, Charmaine returns strangely altered, allowing her hubby to bulldoze her much-loved tennis court and confessing that she all she wanted to do was "please Ed...and boy am I gonna please him". Weird.

Mystified, Joanna and Bobby seek an answer to the zombie-like behaviour of the local women, wondering if "something in the water" might be responsible. They enlist one of Joanna's ex boyfriends, who is a scientist, to help, but this fails to pay dividends. Joanna soon comes to the frightening realisation that the town's wives undergo a change in personality after they have been resident in Stepford for roughly three months... and her time is almost up...

I won't give any more away but this is a thought-provoking and intriguing movie!! Although low on action, the film builds its sense of momentum through a growing feeling of paranoia: are the women in the town somehow being "substituted" for drone-like replacements? Or are all of Joanna's anxieties inside her own head? If you're looking for a fast-moving film you might be disappointed, but the cleverness of the movie lies in its subtlety and the way in which the events take place in a seemingly normal domestic setting.

Another reason for this movie's success lies in the acting. Katherine Ross (also of "The Graduate") puts in an intelligent, sympathetic performance as a woman who feels increasingly hemmed in by the claustrophobia of Stepford, and you really root for her as she feels she might be next on the list for "conversion". Paula Prentiss is great as Bobby, a funny, bubbly and tomboyish character determined not to become "one of those pan-scrubbers" and the rapport between her and Joanna is believable and touching. Given her determination to escape Stepford, Bobby's last few scenes are all the more poignant; I won't say any more but they make for some of the film's best moments! The supporting cast do a good job: amongst these are Peter Masterson as Walter, becoming gradually less supportive of his wife's feelings and fears and more and more influenced by the demands of the "Men's Association"; and Nanette Newman as Carol Van Sant, one of the wives who starts behaving very oddly at a barbecue, continually proclaiming "I'll just die if I don't get that recipe" (!!) Newman's role as a wife is all the more ironic considering all those "Fairy Liquid" adverts she once did (remember?!)

The movie has also attained a kitsch/camp quality over time, mostly due to the fact that it was made in the 1970s! This doesn't spoil the subtler elements to the film, rather makes it all the more entertaining! A large part of the camp appeal is down to the wives themselves - their appearance, behaviour and dialogue. According to this movie, men would like nothing better than to see their wives dressed in frilly blouses (still showing off their assets), flowery dresses and big floppy hats - hilarious. The wives all say things like "I really shouldn't say it, but I just love my brownies" (that's cakes in case you were wondering) and constantly praise their husbands' performances in the bedroom department: "You're the King....you're the Master"!! No comment!

To summarise this is a very enjoyable movie, which, as I have already mentioned, shows the dangers of male fantasies coming true and the perils that women must face having to exist in a patriarchal society. Go buy it...but don't get any ideas about changing your girlfriend...okay?!

I'll simply die if I don't get this recipe!
THE STEPFORD WIVES was a unique film. It set out to make a horror film where clean spotless sunlit kitchens were just as scary as rainy spooky old mansions at midnight. Made in the mid 1970s during a wave of feminism and controversy over the ERA Ammendment - it never got the acclaim it deserved for it's building creepiness and Sci Fi twists. The remake is what it is, but here's where most people first glimpsed Stepford - a very real suburb where homemaking is a science.

Katharine Ross(in an EXCELLENT turn)plays Joanna Eberhard who moves from NYC to Stepford with her husband and two daughters. She's a photographer and homemaker who's dabbled in the women's movement but never really taken up the cause. She begins to realize the women of Stepford are all obsessed with housework, and worse ... subservient and servile to their husbands. She joins up with another woman who finds this all strange, Bobbie -- played oustandingly by Paula Prentiss. Together they find out a string of clues that maybe not all is well in Stepford, and the seemingly benign suburban bliss may be MANUFACTURED by the creepy Men's Society that every husband is a part of.

Bryan Forbes took over this project after speculations Brian De Palma should film it. He made a very effective treatment of the novel, but added his own touches. His wife Nannette Newman influenced the costumes by demanding rather than proposed Playboy bunny outfits the wives should look Victorian with hats and gloves and long dresses - creepy and sexy. Tina Louise (Ginger on Gilligan's Island) also makes a great cameo as Charmaine - one of Joanna and Bobbie's radical friends who transforms to a Stepford Wife by startingly ripping up her tennis court for a pool her husband wants.

You get the film in widescreen, and the transfer is passable for a movie of this age. Colors are 1970s soft and there is grain, but it looks fine. You get a 12 minute featurette with all the principle players, and they explain how the movie was made and what it was like. Some people say the pacing was slow, but this was the 1970s! I think its suppposed to develop slowly like the novel, and you get to know the characters. The last ten minutes are completely shocking, and no test audiences made them whimp out (cough cough - the remake's ending was reshot). This was a politically relevant well-crafted film with great acting! Superb in every way! Check out the source novel by Ira Levin as well.

A great, but very slow-moving picture.
After seeing the new version of The Stepford Wives (which, incidentally, I loved) I had to seek out the original, which I haven't seen since I was a kid. I was very impressed by most of the performances, most notably Paula Prentiss, who was absolutely magnetic. Although the story was absorbing, and the direction was good, the movie, not unlike Rosemary's Baby, seemed to go nowhere fast. Foot after foot of tape passed through my VCR, but the story unfolded so slowly, it was hard to remain interested........all in all, a must-see because of it's pop-culture influence.

THE STEPFORD WIVES DVD -KATHARINE ROSS
AN EXCELLENT MOVIE ALL AROUND!!! FROM THE STORYLINE TO THE ACTING. DEFINITELY SCARY AT TIMES AND AT TIMES FUNNY. KATHERINE ROSS IS OUTSTANDING IN HER ROLE AS WELL AS PAULA PRENTISS. YOU CAN ALSO CATCH TINA LOUISE(GINGER FROM GILLIGANS ISLAND)AND HER BIG HAIR. A GREAT MOVIE, A MUST SEE!!!

Terrific adaptation of the book
I watched this movie because of the excellent book by Ira Levin. I haven't seen the remake yet, but it will be hard to top this version. This movie is very faithful to the book. There are some changes made, but they remain true to the book and help make it a better movie.

The acting is pretty good. I really found myself caring about what happens to Joanna and Bobbie, her best friend. Having read the book, it was great to see these characters brought to life in a way that rang true. It was almost worse knowing what happens to these characters before you actually see it because you really do want things to turn out OK for them.

It was also very well-written. It starts out kind of slow, but once it digs its hooks in, it keeps you glued to the TV. I also like the way they dealt with the subject of women's desire to be an individual and not some cookie cutter housewife with no life at all. It was done very creatively and it was clever as well.

I highly recommend this movie. It is very creepy and there are some very intense moments. Just because it's rated PG does not mean it wimps out on the suspense. This is one of the most suspenseful movies I've seen in a whil and it's one of the best book to film adaptations I've ever seen. ... Read more

Reviews (73)

You'll Just Die If You Don't See This Movie
Whether or not you've actually seen it, you'll probably have heard of "The Stepford Wives". Based on Ira Levin's novel, it was produced in the 1970s and has endured in the public consciousness ever since. Indeed the terms "Stepford" and "Stepford Wife" are now part of our vernacular. If you're in any doubt what these expressions mean, just imagine a woman who is the perfect male fantasy...a wife who cooks, cleans and keeps her husband's home to perfection whilst remaining an object of beauty, with well-preserved looks, sexy outfits and just the right-sized cleavage. A female who is there to service her man's every need - domestic, emotional, sexual - whilst never questioning her role as devoted housewife.The film tells the tale of New York housewife and photographer Joanna Eberhart, who moves with her lawyer husband Walter (sexy name - not!) and their two kids to the seemingly idyllic rural town of Stepford. Very soon Joanna becomes disenchanted with her surroundings, missing the liveliness of New York. Her feelings of isolation are compounded by the fact that the other women in the town appear content to stay at home for their husbands as loyal house fraus, with no outside interests whatsoever. Also, all new male arrivals in Stepford are invited to join "The Men's Association", an organisation from which the town's women are strictly excluded. Whatever goes on there remains a mystery; the women aren't told.

Fortunately Joanna meets the effervescent and rebellious Bobby Marco, another recent arrival in Stepford who shares her concerns about the strange behaviour of the women in the community. Together they decide to set up a consciousness-raising group and rally to get the local women involved...almost to no avail! At the first meeting of the wives, the other women prefer to agonise over the cleanliness of their kitchens and talk about the wonders of "Easy-On" starch spray and baking. One other recruit is found though; a feisty redhead called Charmaine who feels restricted by her husband Ed's demands. However after a weekend away with him, Charmaine returns strangely altered, allowing her hubby to bulldoze her much-loved tennis court and confessing that she all she wanted to do was "please Ed...and boy am I gonna please him". Weird.

Mystified, Joanna and Bobby seek an answer to the zombie-like behaviour of the local women, wondering if "something in the water" might be responsible. They enlist one of Joanna's ex boyfriends, who is a scientist, to help, but this fails to pay dividends. Joanna soon comes to the frightening realisation that the town's wives undergo a change in personality after they have been resident in Stepford for roughly three months... and her time is almost up...

I won't give any more away but this is a thought-provoking and intriguing movie!! Although low on action, the film builds its sense of momentum through a growing feeling of paranoia: are the women in the town somehow being "substituted" for drone-like replacements? Or are all of Joanna's anxieties inside her own head? If you're looking for a fast-moving film you might be disappointed, but the cleverness of the movie lies in its subtlety and the way in which the events take place in a seemingly normal domestic setting.

Another reason for this movie's success lies in the acting. Katherine Ross (also of "The Graduate") puts in an intelligent, sympathetic performance as a woman who feels increasingly hemmed in by the claustrophobia of Stepford, and you really root for her as she feels she might be next on the list for "conversion". Paula Prentiss is great as Bobby, a funny, bubbly and tomboyish character determined not to become "one of those pan-scrubbers" and the rapport between her and Joanna is believable and touching. Given her determination to escape Stepford, Bobby's last few scenes are all the more poignant; I won't say any more but they make for some of the film's best moments! The supporting cast do a good job: amongst these are Peter Masterson as Walter, becoming gradually less supportive of his wife's feelings and fears and more and more influenced by the demands of the "Men's Association"; and Nanette Newman as Carol Van Sant, one of the wives who starts behaving very oddly at a barbecue, continually proclaiming "I'll just die if I don't get that recipe" (!!) Newman's role as a wife is all the more ironic considering all those "Fairy Liquid" adverts she once did (remember?!)

The movie has also attained a kitsch/camp quality over time, mostly due to the fact that it was made in the 1970s! This doesn't spoil the subtler elements to the film, rather makes it all the more entertaining! A large part of the camp appeal is down to the wives themselves - their appearance, behaviour and dialogue. According to this movie, men would like nothing better than to see their wives dressed in frilly blouses (still showing off their assets), flowery dresses and big floppy hats - hilarious. The wives all say things like "I really shouldn't say it, but I just love my brownies" (that's cakes in case you were wondering) and constantly praise their husbands' performances in the bedroom department: "You're the King....you're the Master"!! No comment!

To summarise this is a very enjoyable movie, which, as I have already mentioned, shows the dangers of male fantasies coming true and the perils that women must face having to exist in a patriarchal society. Go buy it...but don't get any ideas about changing your girlfriend...okay?!

I'll simply die if I don't get this recipe!
THE STEPFORD WIVES was a unique film. It set out to make a horror film where clean spotless sunlit kitchens were just as scary as rainy spooky old mansions at midnight. Made in the mid 1970s during a wave of feminism and controversy over the ERA Ammendment - it never got the acclaim it deserved for it's building creepiness and Sci Fi twists. The remake is what it is, but here's where most people first glimpsed Stepford - a very real suburb where homemaking is a science.

Katharine Ross(in an EXCELLENT turn)plays Joanna Eberhard who moves from NYC to Stepford with her husband and two daughters. She's a photographer and homemaker who's dabbled in the women's movement but never really taken up the cause. She begins to realize the women of Stepford are all obsessed with housework, and worse ... subservient and servile to their husbands. She joins up with another woman who finds this all strange, Bobbie -- played oustandingly by Paula Prentiss. Together they find out a string of clues that maybe not all is well in Stepford, and the seemingly benign suburban bliss may be MANUFACTURED by the creepy Men's Society that every husband is a part of.

Bryan Forbes took over this project after speculations Brian De Palma should film it. He made a very effective treatment of the novel, but added his own touches. His wife Nannette Newman influenced the costumes by demanding rather than proposed Playboy bunny outfits the wives should look Victorian with hats and gloves and long dresses - creepy and sexy. Tina Louise (Ginger on Gilligan's Island) also makes a great cameo as Charmaine - one of Joanna and Bobbie's radical friends who transforms to a Stepford Wife by startingly ripping up her tennis court for a pool her husband wants.

You get the film in widescreen, and the transfer is passable for a movie of this age. Colors are 1970s soft and there is grain, but it looks fine. You get a 12 minute featurette with all the principle players, and they explain how the movie was made and what it was like. Some people say the pacing was slow, but this was the 1970s! I think its suppposed to develop slowly like the novel, and you get to know the characters. The last ten minutes are completely shocking, and no test audiences made them whimp out (cough cough - the remake's ending was reshot). This was a politically relevant well-crafted film with great acting! Superb in every way! Check out the source novel by Ira Levin as well.

A great, but very slow-moving picture.
After seeing the new version of The Stepford Wives (which, incidentally, I loved) I had to seek out the original, which I haven't seen since I was a kid. I was very impressed by most of the performances, most notably Paula Prentiss, who was absolutely magnetic. Although the story was absorbing, and the direction was good, the movie, not unlike Rosemary's Baby, seemed to go nowhere fast. Foot after foot of tape passed through my VCR, but the story unfolded so slowly, it was hard to remain interested........all in all, a must-see because of it's pop-culture influence.

THE STEPFORD WIVES DVD -KATHARINE ROSS
AN EXCELLENT MOVIE ALL AROUND!!! FROM THE STORYLINE TO THE ACTING. DEFINITELY SCARY AT TIMES AND AT TIMES FUNNY. KATHERINE ROSS IS OUTSTANDING IN HER ROLE AS WELL AS PAULA PRENTISS. YOU CAN ALSO CATCH TINA LOUISE(GINGER FROM GILLIGANS ISLAND)AND HER BIG HAIR. A GREAT MOVIE, A MUST SEE!!!

Terrific adaptation of the book
I watched this movie because of the excellent book by Ira Levin. I haven't seen the remake yet, but it will be hard to top this version. This movie is very faithful to the book. There are some changes made, but they remain true to the book and help make it a better movie.

The acting is pretty good. I really found myself caring about what happens to Joanna and Bobbie, her best friend. Having read the book, it was great to see these characters brought to life in a way that rang true. It was almost worse knowing what happens to these characters before you actually see it because you really do want things to turn out OK for them.

It was also very well-written. It starts out kind of slow, but once it digs its hooks in, it keeps you glued to the TV. I also like the way they dealt with the subject of women's desire to be an individual and not some cookie cutter housewife with no life at all. It was done very creatively and it was clever as well.

I highly recommend this movie. It is very creepy and there are some very intense moments. Just because it's rated PG does not mean it wimps out on the suspense. This is one of the most suspenseful movies I've seen in a whil and it's one of the best book to film adaptations I've ever seen. ... Read more