I've been coming across a lot of movies with twist endings that can decide the fate of a film recently. Some of the twist endings make a movie better, force you to go back and re-examine it: "Memento," the awesome-but-underappreciated "Identity," and, of course, "The Sixth Sense." Then there's movies whose endings are tacked on for no apparent reason other than to liven up standard proceedings: Tim Burton's "Planet of the Apes" remake, and now "The Stepford Wives."

Without trying to give too much away, I will say that there are two seperate twists. The first comes when you find out what the Stepford Wives really are, which, when you think about the rest of the movie, doesn't make sense when it's revealed (an ATM machine woman comes to mind). The second, the BIG twist, serves only to compound the previous confusion and answers no questions, and leaves us with even less of an idea of what the women of Stepford are than we got from the previews. I was with two friends, and neither of them could tell me who was what and why at the end.

That said, all the movie before the last twenty or so minutes is fairly standard comedy with some social commentary. I laughed hard a couple of times, I chuckled a lot, and it was diverting but nothing great. The film is given a lift by a few great performances, notably Bette Midler, who has a great sense of comic timing. Jon Lovitz is, as always, criminally underused in a throwaway part, Matthew Broderick is. . . well, he's Matthew Broderick. Nicole Kidman does a good job, as expected, and I continue to admire her daring in her choice of films. Then there's Christopher Walken. He's nearly always good for a creepily intense moment or a weirdly funny scene or just a totally whacked-out monologue ("See this watch? This was your Daddy's watch."). Here though, he seems to have been "normalfied" or something, and despite the fact that he was the villain, I actually forgot that I was watching Christopher Walken. I was kind of disappointed in that, but he gives a good performance all the same.

All in all, some people will like it, some people will get bored, most will laugh, and anyone who pays attention will be totally confused by the end. That, combined with the fact that it has nothing that begs to be seen on the big screen, give it ** out of 4.

I like Nicole Kidman's hair, but I didn't like the film much. this film is based on the 1975 film, inwhich I didn't see. I see this film as nothing more of a fashion statement than a movie about men who yern for the 1950"s, by brainwashing their wives to be their domestic slaves.

Stepford Wives has a charming star-filled cast and included a lot of laughs. Don't look too deeply into the plot. Just enjoy the movie for the comic relief.

Unfortunately, The Stepford Wives is a confused cinematic experience, which was saved for me only by a few chuckles, some pretty cinematography and a toffee Magnum.

While the 1950s images of brides, happy housewives and post-war consumerism used during the opening credits promised much and provoked a thought (“do I have time to get some popcorn?”), the characters were so unanimously unlikable, even the ones you’re supposed to like, and caricatured that the film failed to deliver.

Without any exaggeration, and recognising the film is based on over the top stereotypes, I was near shock to realise Nicole Kidman’s network executive Joanna Ebehart wasn’t an automaton for any part of the movie since her “Manhattan career bitch in black” could have been invented by the most misogynist robot maker in the world: i.e. Ball Breaking Androids ‘R’ Us.

Pull a string and she’d probably say, when not spouting American television supremo speak that is, “Must emasculate, must neglect children, must take over the world” (insert laughter in manner of neurotic female Dr Evil).

When a male victim of one of Joanna’s reality shows attempts to shoot her while screaming words to the effect that he should do away with all women, there’s nothing at that point or after to suggest we shouldn’t believe she hasn’t been threatened with what she deserves.

At the close of the movie, when she’s working again, but is softer and with a short blonde bob that is a middle ground between her previously dark hair and the long flaxen locks worn when pretending to be a Stepford Wife, the audience understands this is one modern gal who has learnt her lesson.

Of course, husband Walter, played by Matthew Broderick, already realised he didn’t want to be married to an acquiescent bombshell with microchips in her brain, which evidently makes him a “man”, but hardly goes down as the feminist awakening of our time.

In any instance, the filmmaker decides in the final scene to confirm the depoliticisation of the movie, which was hinted at earlier, by putting Joanna and Walter’s woes down to an unrealistic longing for perfection, rather than war between the sexes.

Before schmaltz sets in, however, we’re incited to dislike, along with Joanna and purposely or not, the “Wives”, their husbands, conservatives, sell-out homosexuals, Walter and obnoxious kids.

Indeed, The Stepford Wives has a misanthropic tone about it that left me wondering who I should, in the American vernacular, be rooting for.

Making Glenn Close’s character responsible for “Stepford” might be an attempt not to alienate male viewers; after all, she dies, while members of the Men’s Association only have to push trolleys around a supermarket for their sins.

All things considered, I give The Stepford Wives two out of five and recommend you see Shrek 2 instead, because it has got the cutest little cat in it.

This is a very good movie. All the characters were really well and did really great jobs!!!