Content below includes excerpts of various reviews of  The Stepford Wives, released 6/11/04.
 

Excerpt from MLive.com, June 12, 2004 (Andrew Jefchak):

Oz has done some of the wackiest things this side of Tim Burton over the years, most notably Little Shop of Horrors (1986) and Bowfinger (1999). But here he manages to botch an opportunity for sinister humor, despite a potentially terrific cast that includes Nicole Kidman, Bette Midler and Christopher Walken...Midler gets some good lines, or maybe they were just good because few actresses can deliver caustic irreverence better than she. Walken is one of the few performers who can overact impressively and with little effort. Here, however, in the preposterous role of gender-altering genius, he plays it straight -- even when you wish he would start twitching and go into his "wristwatch" routine from Pulp Fiction.

Excerpt from the Portland Tribune, June 11, 2004 (Dawn Taylor):

Time, however, has not been kind to The Stepford Wives. Seen today, it comes off as terribly dated, and most viewers already know the big “surprise” payoff awaiting star Katherine Ross at film’s end — the term “Stepford Wife” itself became a well-worn descriptive phrase for a certain type of vacuous, traditional wife... So the question is, why a remake? Are there really still husbands out there who would prefer their wives were subservient automatons, endlessly cheerful with no concerns other than the care and comfort of their mates?... Well, anyone who’s ever listened to radio talk-jock Tom Leykis can tell you that yes, there are. Definitely... Christopher Walken waltzes through the film in one of his least memorable performances, and unfortunately, as either satire or black comedy The Stepford Wives has absolutely no teeth. But it’s an inoffensive, often amusing comedy — despite flying rather spectacularly off the rails in a weak, logic-less ending that was obviously re-shot and tacked on at the last minute.
 

Excerpt from the East Valley Tribune.com, June 11, 2004 (Craig Outhier):

Joanna’s (Nicole Kidman) henpecked husband, Walter (Matthew Broderick), admires how techie Mephisto Mike Wellington (Christopher Walken) and the other boys in town have roboticized their wives, and here, I think, is where Oz misses the boat. Does the Eisenhower ideal of the Hoover-pushing, lemonade-sipping housewife exist anywhere in the current zeitgeist?...If Ira Levin — who wrote the original source novel — were to update the Stepford wife, chances are he’d make her both accommodating and industrious — she not only performs in the bedroom but also runs her own lucrative vertical marketing business out of it. Oz has merely raised the hemline on her sundress. Big whoop.

Excerpt from the Duluth News Tribune, June 10, 2004 (Roger Ebert):

The Stepford Wives depends for some of its effect on a plot secret that you already know, if you've been paying attention at any time since the original film version was released in 1975. If you don't know it, stay away from the trailer, which gives it away. It's an enticing premise, an opening for wicked feminist satire, but the 1975 movie tilted toward horror instead of comedy. Here's a version that tilts the other way, and I like it a little better...Christopher Walken is Claire's husband and seems to be running Stepford; it's the kind of creepy role that has Walken written all over it, and he stars in a Stepford promotional film that showcases another of his unctuous explanations of the bizarre...Kidman plays a character not a million miles away from her husband-killer in To Die For, even though this time she's the victim. Bette Midler is defiantly subversive as the town misfit. And Walken is ... Walken.

Excerpt from MSNBC.com, June 10, 2004 (John Hartl):

Everyone tries too hard in the latest version of Ira Levin’s novel, The Stepford Wives, which inspired one semi-classic 1975 movie and three forgotten made-for-TV sequels. A clever, creepy feminist satire three decades ago, Levin’s story, about a Connecticut suburb populated by robotic housewives, has been so recklessly revised that the new movie loses its way long before the halfway mark....Midler has her rowdy moments, especially before her character turns robotic, while Walken, as always, projects such authority that he makes each of his scenes count. But the other actors are treated so wastefully that you suspect their key scenes are missing. Lovitz is barely present. While Close’s character provides the major new twist to the story, there’s no credible buildup to it; it feels tacked-on and desperate...It’s no secret that The Stepford Wives was less than a smooth production. Entertainment Weekly called it “problem-plagued,” while The New York Times recently reported that scenes were reshot as late as last month, and “the film has been one of the most troubled projects in years.”...Bryan Forbes’ 1975 adaptation of Levin’s book was never a blockbuster, and many critics dismissed it at the time, but it at least seemed to have been made by people who knew what they were doing. Oz and Rudnick’s 93-minute update is so juvenile and scattershot, especially when it reaches its fizzled finale, that it seems substantially longer than Forbes’ 115-minute original.