复制娇妻

Again - this comment might contain a handful of grammatical mistakes but it's too late (aka 3am) for me to care so please bear with me if you decide to read it through.

這個電影能做的feminist film studies analysis實在是太多了，我甚至覺得我可以依照這個電影寫個五千字出來，可惜我已經不是（半吊子）film major了......

配合 That feminist manifesto <I want a wife> 觀看更佳。

First of all: women do not need to be "men" in order to justify their greatness; brilliance itself should be genderless, and so is power in its essence.

Second of all: both men and women need someone who truly appreciates and is compatible with them - as a partner and as a friend.

And third of all: family/love life and work life can be balanced. It's not the issue of being "men" or "women" (though the binary upbringing for men and women is indeed part of the problem). Navigating a married life is an issue of initial compatibility of the two parties, the extent of love/appreciation that you have for each other, the willingness to work out a solution base on what you have that suits you both, and, for the last resort, the courage to leave for someone more suitable. It's hard, but it's possible, and it takes two to navigate unless you're willing to settle down with a robot.

True, some men's imagination of "someone who truly appreciate them" is very limited as portrayed in the film: a woman who'd attend to them wholeheartedly and some other men who'd engage in silly aggressive activities with them. Plus the echo chamber effect in the Stepford area, the Stepford men have evolved into this patriarchal alpha male stereotype: self-centred, narcissistic beings that objectify women, thinking they're taking men's place by becoming independent/great. A lot of patriarchal values they've managed to absorb from their upbringing plus some brainwashing could achieve that pretty easily.

Now onto the women: they really need to find better men to be in a relationship with. It's even harder because decent men are SO rare due to them being raised in patriarchal values. But seriously though, the creation of "the Stepford society" derives from the dissatisfaction of Claire's marriage, and she somehow fails to imagine an alternative to this most conservative romantic ideal in which socially-constructed gender roles are reinforced in the most disgusting way. Free-will, individuality and intellectual capacity of women are no longer in the equation (literally - erased). Claire imposed her will on all of them.

“Human stupidity plus advanced technology. Trust me, it's unbeatable.” ~ Doctor Who (lol)

Family is the smallest "unit" of a society, and the Stepford phenomenon is typical of the families where women are empowered (aka "becoming men" in men's terms, lol), challenging men's position to the point where men performed another level of systematic oppression upon women - biohack. Though a woman started it, the already-existing misogyny in our society is so handy to be put into use by her to create this seemingly-ideal, homogenised hell.

The film itself is a micocosm of the patriarchy. It includes elements of total objectification and systematic oppression of women through the vessel of science fiction. By presenting Bobbie, the woman who'd totally rejected the dichotomy of gender roles and Joanna, the woman who "used-to-feed-off-of-gender-division-but-is-now-really-ambivalent", the film presents two different viewpoints on the patriarchy. By presenting Claire, the film made it clear that a patriarch doesn't have to be a man. It's a solely value-based, gender-blind casting and everyone can easily veer into it if you have enough power.

The ending of this film is very telling as well. Clearly the men are not ALL stupid - some of them worked in Disney, Microsoft, etc., but in the end, the gender roles are as clean cut as before but simply in reverse: women in charge doing what they like, men are being oppressed and taking on all the houseworks.（aka 同態復仇，aka 一刀切家庭煮夫，aka it's still a binary, aka NO）Yes, I admit the female part of me really enjoyed seeing men getting tortured like how they've tortured the women and they deserve it, but the film fails to envision a better future where gender roles/barriers are completely shattered and people can get together for the sake of compatibility. The nuance of human/couple relationships fail to be addressed. (I don't blame it tbh - the film itself is 15 years old and it's hard for people to imagine a world like that even now, let alone then.) Would the men learn anything through oppression? Is it productive? I doubt it. Though those fat, bald, sexist and misogynistic men are so damn helpless, women should just...idk, compell them to housework for a period of time simply for torturing them, then get a proper divorce with good financial deal and find someone better.

In terms of audiovisual arrangements: I really liked how the film employ the stereotypical, light vanilla colours and their semantics to create this deeply artificial environment. The rain, thunder and the light/dark contrast are handled well too.

The colour of Joanna's clothes (black---pink) has obvious implications such as gender-conformingness/being sucked in by Stepford, etc., but Joanna's hairstyle at the end of the film really grabbed my attention. It's short, but it's blonde - it signifies her growth. She'd evolved from being a callous tv personality to a point where any shreds of feminity was rejected by her (signified by short, black hair) as well as trying to be perfectly obedient and totally submissive (signified by long, blonde hair). This version of herself is a combination of both: being totally free to express herself however she wants. It's very nicely handled.

Moving on to personal babblings: 老科幻萬歲，twists and turns都安排得當且有年代感十足的喜感。還有美國爛俗奶油香草淡彩色 and their semantics，真的是一個很有意思的電影。

Given that it is a film made in 2004 based on a novel written in 1975: this franchise is truly streets ahead.

(Using the Community reference because, yeah, I found this film through Britta saying Steppwolf Wives in the marriage episode; and when I was rewatching that particular clip on Youtube I found the explanation/film in the comments section xD)

为了课堂作业而看的这部电影，这一个半小时对我来说简直是煎熬，全程无语…

立意其实是不错的，可以引发观众对性别、家庭角色，身份标签的思考，就是…拍的也太烂了…

它讲述了一群被妻子压制的丈夫们聚集在一起建造了一个小镇，并秘密的通过植入脑芯片改造自己的女强人妻子变成一个只专注于家长里短的贤妻良母。最后他们发现他们的男性领导者是一个机器人，整个事件的操控者是一位因为女性——因为过于注重事业而疏忽了与丈夫的关系，导致丈夫与自己的秘书通奸，最终她痛下杀手……

因为感情纠纷😅，就要把全世界女人改造成机器人，随后还要把全世界的男人改造成机器人。这动机也太牵强了！

麦克面对叛变的男主，只有一句“我以为我能信任你了！”好家伙，电影全程看下来我都没有感受到男主真正的被这群男性同化，麦克对男主甚至没有进行过进一步了解就匆匆的告诉了他全部的计划…这群男性也是服了，他们没有意识到自己在犯法么？就因为老婆太强了就要把她们改造成机器人？他们都是名校出身，大公司ceo，难道连基本的生活常识都无法辨别？

影片结尾我也是服了，一个如此重要的核心实验室，随意的让男主进出，并且没有任何防御机制，点点手指就能把全部女性复原，如此精密的仪器室傻瓜式操作流程？别忘了影片简介里写的是科幻片标签…这情节的设计感也太严重了！影片看到20分钟，基本就能猜到接下来的全部剧情。

里面人物的智商也是让人捉急。从男主告诉女主“我辞掉了工作，即便我是副董事长”我就要开始喷饭了。好家伙，副董事长说辞就辞？还有，你他鸭的不是副董事长吗？你不是你老婆的上司？你凭什么要改造你的老婆？

最让人吐血的是寻找Sarah的情节，随意进出别人家就算了，听到做爱的声音不仅没有主动避让，反而还想上去看看？？这是哪门子的人才？为了推动情节节操都不要了！

此外，女主的演技也太差了，全程就这几个表情，看的让我生理性不适

总结：翻拍的很差

克莱尔说她爱麦克，她爱男尊女卑的小镇生活。但是我不这么认为。

她爱的是自己。她想满足的是这样一个执念：如果我是一个淑女，保持肉体的年轻美丽，精神的沉闷无趣，丈夫就会爱我。

克莱尔是顶尖的脑壳专家和基因工程专家，这样的人才是聪明拔尖的，美丽富有魅力的。但是克莱尔的丈夫并不能欣赏她人格散发的魅力，反而把克莱尔的出色的社会成就当成是威胁。

他懦弱自私，在婚姻里因为一个肉欲年轻的女人背叛了克莱尔——他毫不留情地对美丽聪明的克莱尔展现了他无趣低贱的品味——一个肉欲年轻的女人，对他无聊的大脑没有智商上的威胁他就可以接受。

克莱尔是多么爱她的丈夫，因而丈夫这个可笑的举动轻易打碎了她对自我的认知——她的骄傲和魅力在她最爱的人面前一文不值。这是何等的委屈和可怜！

她的梦就是基于这样一个执念。

但是她自私的一面在于当她一个人在这个小镇生活的时候，她希望吸引更多的人来这个小镇。把并不愿意做淑女的女人改编成机器人，和她们自私的老公一起完成一场男权的狂欢和对女人尊严的蔑视。

因而我并不可怜她。她是被男权掌控的思维残害了，但是她无权去借着自己的心结残害更多的女人。