Would the ultimate chick flick be a film full of tantalizing men, idealistic romances and extraordinary clothes? Or would it be a movie void of all men that tries to portray real female emotion? Well, if one is looking for the former, The House Bunny may suit them more because Diane English's new film, The Women, is quite the latter. The Women follows the love lives of four New York City socialites - don't get too excited; This is definitely no Sex and the City. These women learn of one of their husbands's infidelities and struggle with how to vindicate his unfaithfulness, if it can even be done.
English's movie is a remake of George Cukor's 1939 film of the same title. Both films are labeled as being pro-feminist because, as the title suggests, it is solely about women. In fact, not a single man ever appears on screen. Even all the extras are female. The 1939 movie delved into the ideas of a woman's pride and her marital responsibilities, the latter of which at the time were mostly being a good mother and supporting her husband. Pride played less of a role in their societal commitments. In 1939 divorce, a main theme of The Women, was unheard of and definitely looked down upon; Women had to go as far as Reno to even legally be divorced. Cukor addressed the struggles and repercussions of a man's infidelity to his wife in interesting and even groundbreaking fashion. So how does English even try to touch upon a subject that is as common as doing laundry in today's culture? Not easily.
The remake of The Women has been in the works for almost 13 years, changing hands from different directors to numerous different actresses. The final product's cast includes Meg Ryan, Eva Mendes, Annette Bening, Debra Messing and Jada Pinkett Smith, and cameos from Candice Bergen and Bette Midler. And after many years of various tweakings, the film holds a close resemblance to Cukor's while still maintaining its own flare. Many of the same lines were kept because the quips written by the original screenwriter, Clare Boothe Luce, were too clever to be redone. Even some scenes were reproduced, such as the opening scene that shows two small, bowed and coiffed dogs barking at each other. It is a shot that exemplifies the film's theme that women are bitches. But much of the original movie has been changed. The women are powerful working women, who hold luncheons at their Connecticut estates to raise money for Central Park's protection and are the head editors of fashion magazines. Though they still gossip incessantly, they do so over power lunches and quick shopping trips. Saks Fifth Avenue replaces the original's beauty salon, Lexuses replace 1939 town cars, and Birkin bags hang elegantly on most women's arms.
But there's something missing in English's adaptation. Meg Ryan's doe-eyed pouts don't come close to the original Mary Haines, who had Norma Shearer's sad eyes and soft face. The light that surrounded Shearer was soft, gentle and her eyes were glossy; its black and white composition was an element that gave the film true emotion. But English's color adaptation just comes off as corny; there's an inability to reach the same level of significance in this modern version. This is in part due to some of the ridiculous situations that come off as hilarious instead of serious. An example is Mary's 10-year-old daughter, who is supposed to be a mother's perfect dream, but who actually burns tampons because she is fed up with her womanhood, wears gobs of eyeliner and skips school. The absurd idea of a young girl doing such things leaves one laughing, not worrying.
Though some of this acting may be overdone, some of the actresses do hold up their end of the film. Bergen's and Midler's small roles are fantastic. These experienced actresses ham up their roles as Upper East Side mother and fervid, experienced divorcee, respectively. Likewise, Smith is hilarious as the women's gay friend who parties hard and never censors her feelings about being a lesbian, often adding much of the comedic relief to The Women's plot.
And Bening's edgy personality makes her the perfect bitch who would rather sell out her best friend than lose her job. But though such edginess seems great, it doesn't last. Everyone seems to go soft by the end of the movie. Bening loses that cunning personality, and all the characters seem to come to terms with a chauvinistic world, a lesson definitely not portrayed in the original.
Thirteen years of deliberating over this revision of The Women may have resulted in some good casting choices, but there is a reason it took so long to get only this far. Maybe if The Women had waited another few years to ruminate and work out some of the obvious kinks it could have come out holding more of a semblance to the profoundness of Cukor's work. But maybe it is just not a film that can remain relevant in today's culture; maybe it is a film that should have been left alone after its original release in 1939.
