by Megan Hess
At first, Ira Levin’s novel The Stepford Wives seems made for the screen. His other most recognized works – The Boys from Brazil and Rosemary’s Baby – both became successful films featuring big-name stars of the day: Gregory Peck, for The Boys from Brazil (Schaffner, 1978) and Mia Farrow, in Rosemary’s Baby (Polanski, 1968). The Stepford Wives has become a movie two times now, but, like F. Scott Fitzgerald’s The Great Gatsby – another slim, power-packed volume with two cinematic retellings (Clayton, 1974 and Lurhmann, 2013, respectively) – filmmakers just cannot seem to get it right. This failure is not only because of Stepford Wives’ exquisitely subtle satire. In his afterword to the perennial edition, novelist Peter Straub states that the book is frequently misread because of its physical brevity, meaning many readers miss out on Levin’s “Olympian humor” (Straub). The first Stepford Wives film (Forbes, 1975) is too serious, while the 21st-century remake (Oz, 2004) sidesteps the seriousness entirely, hitting viewers over the head with humor.
One particularly unsubtle moment in the 2004 Stepford Wives (Oz).
As unsuccessfully as these films communicate the essence of Levin’s manuscript, they are not bad films, per se. As many find, adapting an excellent novel for the screen is a challenging task. In my mind, no big-screen experience can compare to reading Levin’s crystalline prose and experiencing the giftedness for plot that causes Stephen King to call him “the Swiss watchmaker of the suspense novel” instead of having it filtered through a screenwriter. However, one experience that can only be found in the cinematic adaptations is their portrayals of second and third wave feminist values and culture. The majority of gender studies scholars classify the modern feminist movement into three waves, each with their own distinctive flavors and concerns. In this piece, I will focus on second and third wave feminism, which took place during the 1960s’-70s’, and the 1990s-present, respectively.
Both The Stepford Wives novel and the first movie came about during the second wave, so it stands to reason that elements of second-wave feminism would appear in the film – and they do. For example, protagonist Joanna Eberhardt (Katherine Ross) and her friends Bobbie Markowe (Paula Prentiss) and Charmaine Wimperis (Tina Louise) attempt to hold a “consciousness-raising” session. This was a popular activity for late-20th century feminists, where women met in groups and discussed personal, political, and social issues. However well-intentioned Joanna, Bobbie, and Charmaine’s efforts, the other Stepford wives foil the meeting by monopolizing the discussion with cleaning tips. While Levin never explicitly states what leads the men of Stepford to begin killing their wives and replacing them with animatronic copies, it could be interpreted as a dramatic fear reaction to the second-wave feminist movement. Many women were no longer content to hold the same sociocultural roles they always had – roles which benefitted men. Their efforts to gain equality in educational and professional spaces threatened men’s status as the dominant group. Levin’s novel and the first film adaptation predate televangelist Pat Robertson’s infamous quote - "The feminist agenda is not about equal rights for women. It is about a socialist, anti-family political movement that encourages women to leave their husbands, kill their children, practice witchcraft, destroy capitalism and become lesbians” (Bentz, 1) – but his statement accurately describes how many men and women were feeling as the second wave rose up and continued to flourish. The 1975 Stepford Wives also retains the whitewashed quality of second-wave feminism. Late in Levin’s novel, after most of her other friends have been turned into robots, Joanna befriends Ruthanne Henry, a new resident and the first African-American woman in Stepford. The Stepford Wives movie removes her from the plot entirely. While the 2004 version of The Stepford Wives has minor characters of color, it is, for the most part, equally white-centric, one of the only qualities it shares with its predecessor.
Both The Stepford Wives novel and the first movie came about during the second wave, so it stands to reason that elements of second-wave feminism would appear in the film – and they do. For example, protagonist Joanna Eberhardt (Katherine Ross) and her friends Bobbie Markowe (Paula Prentiss) and Charmaine Wimperis (Tina Louise) attempt to hold a “consciousness-raising” session. This was a popular activity for late-20th century feminists, where women met in groups and discussed personal, political, and social issues. However well-intentioned Joanna, Bobbie, and Charmaine’s efforts, the other Stepford wives foil the meeting by monopolizing the discussion with cleaning tips. While Levin never explicitly states what leads the men of Stepford to begin killing their wives and replacing them with animatronic copies, it could be interpreted as a dramatic fear reaction to the second-wave feminist movement. Many women were no longer content to hold the same sociocultural roles they always had – roles which benefitted men. Their efforts to gain equality in educational and professional spaces threatened men’s status as the dominant group. Levin’s novel and the first film adaptation predate televangelist Pat Robertson’s infamous quote - "The feminist agenda is not about equal rights for women. It is about a socialist, anti-family political movement that encourages women to leave their husbands, kill their children, practice witchcraft, destroy capitalism and become lesbians” (Bentz, 1) – but his statement accurately describes how many men and women were feeling as the second wave rose up and continued to flourish. The 1975 Stepford Wives also retains the whitewashed quality of second-wave feminism. Late in Levin’s novel, after most of her other friends have been turned into robots, Joanna befriends Ruthanne Henry, a new resident and the first African-American woman in Stepford. The Stepford Wives movie removes her from the plot entirely. While the 2004 version of The Stepford Wives has minor characters of color, it is, for the most part, equally white-centric, one of the only qualities it shares with its predecessor.
The women of Stepford, all dressed up for their morning aerobics class (Oz, 2004).
Instead of successfully bringing the chilling cautionary tale of Stepford into the new millennium, the 2004 Stepford Wives received a poor critical reception because it was “heavily re-edited and re-written following test screenings, with new scenes shot and others deleted. The attempts to cater to audience tastes backfired as the new edits and scenes created continuity errors and major story problems” (IMDB). The most significant rewrite – besides the reveal that town matriarch Claire Wellington (Glenn Close) is behind the swap - is a new ending, where Joanna escapes being turned into a robot, and things end happily for most everyone involved. The 2004 Stepford Wives is unquestionably inaccurate when compared to the original manuscript, but spot-on in the way it captures tenets and traditions of third-wave feminism. Instead of a housewife, 21st-century Joanna Eberhardt (Nicole Kidman) is a high-performing TV executive. Part of the reason she finds the Stepford women so odd and backward is because they do not jive with her vision of “women can do anything.” However, the high value third-wave feminism puts upon freedom of choice also explains why she does not begin to seriously question the Stepford status quo until much later. 2004 Stepford Wives is much more sexualized than the first Stepford Wives film, which speaks to the sex-positivity of third-wave feminism, and even has two Stepford husbands - one half of the town’s (and the movie’s) only gay couple[1], as well as Claire’s husband, Mike (Christopher Walken). Joanna keeps her maiden name because that is more commonly seen today than it was in the 1970s,’ although still less common than women taking their spouses’ name.
As I have displayed here, film adaptations of The Stepford Wives take on qualities of the dominant feminist culture. I believe that this is inescapable, due to the nature of the source material, which was so heavily steeped in a time period where the movement flourished. Even if another filmmaker were to attempt to remake the film and be as accurate to the source as possible during the creative process, I believe that modern values and attitudes would still be present.
Works Cited
Bentz, Leslie. “The Top 10: Facebook “Vomit” Button for Gays and Other Pat Robertson Quotes.” CNN.com. Cable News Network \ Turner Broadcasting System, Inc. 9 July 2013. Web. 11\19\16.
N.a. The Stepford Wives (2004) – Trivia. IMDB. N.d. Web. 11\18\16
Straub, Peter. Afterword. The Stepford Wives. By Ira Levin. New York. HarperCollins. 2002. Print.
[1]Whether this is a gesture of inclusivity or tokenism is up to individual interpretation.
As I have displayed here, film adaptations of The Stepford Wives take on qualities of the dominant feminist culture. I believe that this is inescapable, due to the nature of the source material, which was so heavily steeped in a time period where the movement flourished. Even if another filmmaker were to attempt to remake the film and be as accurate to the source as possible during the creative process, I believe that modern values and attitudes would still be present.
Works Cited
Bentz, Leslie. “The Top 10: Facebook “Vomit” Button for Gays and Other Pat Robertson Quotes.” CNN.com. Cable News Network \ Turner Broadcasting System, Inc. 9 July 2013. Web. 11\19\16.
N.a. The Stepford Wives (2004) – Trivia. IMDB. N.d. Web. 11\18\16
Straub, Peter. Afterword. The Stepford Wives. By Ira Levin. New York. HarperCollins. 2002. Print.
[1]Whether this is a gesture of inclusivity or tokenism is up to individual interpretation.
