Reviews

I will need to re-watch the original when I get a chance, because I like things that analyze relationships between men and women. The only improvements on this over (what I remember of) the original were the implication of "programmable kitchens" and the ending - showing that the originator of Stepford was a woman who replaced her husband with a robot. The implication of both Stepford movies is that robots would be more pleasing because all conflict would be removed. My own opinion is that (except for raising children) the traditional family is the wrong concept. Two people can live together perfectly happy if they do activities together but with their own means and only spend as much time together as they both wish. That way, the only possible conflicts are in how much time they choose to be together. I tried it once before (with some success, and I still wish him well) but he originally found me too aggressive, and he needs to remain geographically bound, so I am now 3 months into another (even better) relationship with a man who has all the best features of the other, with definite improvements. My only programming of a man is stating exactly what I was looking for online -and I found him. Robots would be totally wrong for any thinking person, because giving pleasure is part of experiencing it.

The movie that I believe this may be was on an adult channel back before Cable companies existed- so pardon that my memory is not so great. It was very well written and was a very dark version of the original Alice with a woman who became obsessed with a green man in an old mirror she discovered. He lured her in to a very surreal porn world with pools of excrement, but also some attractions. I also recall one scene where she was reclined on a dining table with the buffet food covering her body, while acquaintances (all elegantly clothed) dined off of her. It was one of the few X rated movies that I saved (when I had a Beta DVR).

I was favorably impressed by this movie (which I watched because it was based on Dickens). I greatly disagree that Dickens was like a Disney of his day (as one reviewer stated). He was trying to emphasize the wrongs of society at his time as this film also does. It is also very good to base a new plot on a real classic. I was pleased that I did not have to witness graphic scenes (while still knowing what occurred).

I do not consider this a classic, so have not saved it to my collection (most of my friends/family would not appreciate it -but many of them also do not read/enjoy Dickens). It had the horrible taste of poverty and all that it can bring as well as the evil characters that he liked to point out. The "senator" although making an attempt to contact- it was never clear to me just what he hoped to accomplish, as he ultimately made no attempt to provide any alternative to Oliver, but return to that life.

Another reviewer made light of the fact of Oliver's life (father unknown) but made no mention of the many foster homes (some probably unmentioned) before he arrived there. I understand from my studies how immensely difficult all that could have been for a young man with no real roots.

As a lover of the surreal (in art and film) I was pleased to discover this film on IFC. It is definitely a keeper. Most of the other reviews tell the general plot (not all correct) so I won't bother to bore anyone with that. The main thing is the alternate worlds concept which is brought on by Ana's impending illness, and the way she manages to link with someone else after being so "alone", and finally with her family, which I believe is still at least a little troubled. It only can be called a horror movie in that it has frightening scenes but is a fantasy (with a little hint of "coming of age" only because Ana is a pre-teen who "hates boys"). I heartily recommend it to those who appreciate the stretch of their imagination.