The Women - Review

Discuss this movie on our message board!

Length: 114 min

Rated: PG-13

Distributor: Picturehouse Entertainment

Release Date: 2008-09-12

Starring: Meg Ryan, Annette Bening, Debra Messing, Eva Mendes, Jada Pinkett Smith, Cloris Leachman

Directed by Diane English

Produced by Diane English

Written by Diane English

Visit the movie's Official Site!

Reviewed by Mack Rawden : 2008-09-12 21:40:01

The Women is a film so hot and bothered for itself, so wet for its manless premise that it never seems to realize what an disorganized failure it really is. It melodramatically saunters through nearly every cliché ever conceived about women and proves absolutely nothing other than writer/director Diane English’s complete incompetence. Gossip, women hating each other, babies, being passive aggressive, spending too much money, body image issues, careers vs. family, marriage, daughters, mothers, infidelity. This goddamn soap opera with more star power covers it all--poorly--and with enough cattiness to make you thank God you don’t live in a sorority. Like a vapid Pez Machine, The Women dispenses superficial life advice like, “There’s a fine line between an outfit and a getup”, “Nobody hates Saks”, and “Don’t be bitter, it leads to Botox” without ever realizing how selfish and trite those statements make their authors look when belted out at inappropriate moments. This film could have been empowering, could have been a real classic, but instead it will go down as a regrettable stain on the handbag of at least five talented actresses.

Mary Haines (Meg Ryan) is a mother and wife to a fabulously wealthy Wall Street whiz. She seems to have it all until a garrulous manicurist (Debi Mazar) unwittingly tells her of an affair her husband is having with the perfume spritzer (Eva Mendes). Her mother (Candace Bergin) tells her to get out of town for a few weeks. Her friends (Annette Bening, Debra Messing, and Jada Pinkett Smith) tell her to confront the lying bastard. She eventually follows everyone’s advice. That, in and of itself, is the basic premise. Each of the other characters have their own poorly developed and uninteresting side stories, but it seems pointless to inform you of the ins-and-outs when they all lack depth and come off as hastily-thrown together asides.

Oh what could have been. The Women is arguably the greatest collection of actresses assembled since the original 1939 version starring Joan Crawford. Unfortunately, Meg Ryan, Jada Pinkett Smith, Annette Bening, Candice Bergen, Carrie Fischer, and Bette Midler all awkwardly stumble through their scenes without any sense of characterization, leaving only Cloris Leachman and Debra Messing to provide any whiff of substance. Actually, any whiff of substance might be selling Cloris Leachman short. She is the entire life force behind this movie, the only one who seems to give a damn about timing and facial expressions.

Enough about the acting, though. It may not be Oscar-worthy, but the epicenter of this movie’s failure lies with Diane English, who may very well be the worst filmmaker this side of Ed Wood. Take for example the opening sequence in which Annette Bening’s character goes shopping. We’re given an entirely pointless scene of her dog barking at another dog, followed by video game-like graphics denoting the price of each item, as well as her desire to buy said product. A recurring theme, I thought? Nope. At no point do we get anything like this again. In fact, the entire film feels like Diane English ran from the editing room screaming, “Look what I just figured out how to do.” And on-and-on-and-on it goes, making The Women seem like some third grade filmmaking project by a scatter-brained overachiever who found different functions on Photoshop as she went along.

And then there’s the score. Cumbersome, intrusive, and bizarre at points, it frequently squashes the paltry amounts of momentum the film gets going. It stops and starts without warning and probably would have been better left entirely on the cutting room floor. Peter Bretter could have done more in a half hour just using his dark and ominous tones.

The Women is a movie obsessed with its own femininity. For Diane English, being a woman goes beyond just sultry glances and mothering children. In a sense, that’s the problem. You know the obligatory movie scene in which a man is running full speed because he’s late for a job interview and he stops to look at the cleavage of a woman bending over? Well, this movie is the female version of that scene extrapolated out for an hour and a half. It’s hyper-feminism--to the point where it intentionally makes most of its own characters seem like silly little girls. They cry, they fight over nonsensical matters, they stop speaking to each other, they binge-eat, they obsess over men. It’s the type of feminism where women go to the store to confront an adulterous harlot--but not before stopping to look at purses.

This movie is without direction. It’s without purpose. And it’s beyond terrible in almost every conceivable way. It doesn’t advance a cause or even shed light on how to handle specific issues. It’s like a slideshow presentation of every pamphlet in the guidance counselor’s office.

If you’re still considering paying to view this film, I’d advise you to bribe Gloria Steinem with five dollars to suck on her tampon. It’ll save you four bucks and leave you with the same feeling: who on Earth thought this was a good idea?

Latest Movie Reviews:

Four Christmases

Australia

Twilight (Katey's Take)

The Boy In The Striped Pajamas

Pray The Devil Back To Hell

Image Gallery for The Women

Comment on “The Women”

Note: This website is not meant for use by minors. The views expressed in the comments section below are not our own. This section is intended for discussion of the topic in the post above. Disagreement is encouraged, however comments which attack, insult, or threaten the author in a personal manner won't be published. Similarly, comments that we deem to be poorly worded, or wildly off topic will also not be approved and may be mocked. For free, uncensored, unfettered, and possibly dangerous discussion visit our forum.

Mich Dinsdale Says:
September 13th, 2008 at 15:22
I just saw this movie yesterday and loved it! Mr. Rawden, since you are not a woman, I have no idea why you were chosen to review this movie, obviously, you just 'won't get it'!

I'd highly recommend it as a girls night out movie!! Well done to Diane English who obviously knows how woman function!!

Brad Taylor Says:
September 14th, 2008 at 18:35
This is the best and most spot on review of this film I've seen. The movie is tedious, without direction, and squanders the actors talents. Anette Bening seems really uncomfortable in her role for some reason, and I agree that Chloris Leachmen is the gem who brings some realism and timing to her role. I wanted to like this movie, but the first half hour set the tone - with things that were never followed up on or pursued that appear to be part of the storyline, and then were just dropped. It may have taken 12 years to make this film, but it will take only 12 minutes to forget it.

Austyn Says:
September 16th, 2008 at 01:46
Wow. the scathing review actually makes me want to go see the movie more just so I can see exactly what pissed you off so much!

Self-indulgent chick-flicks are a drag, and at the end of the day, they only end up setting women back a decade or four. Though I will have to say that as a man (an assumption I'm making, because "mack" could go either way!), i am not sure you are allowed to give advice about what should or should not be done with a tampon. You use one first... then you get to use the imagery as part of a tirade... but not before. That was just gross.

Other than THAT, way to stick it to'em... i'll see the movie (and promise to pay as little as possible) and see if you were on to something or just being hateful.

Pamela Says:
September 16th, 2008 at 15:02
Most of the ratings on this page are too harsh - I found it entertaining, a bit slow in parts and the acting a bit play like with deliberate one liners. I did not know how to describe the direction until I watched the 1930’s version the next day. The direction and presentation of the lines is unsophisticated like a 1930's movie – simple and direct. All of these actresses are seasoned and professional, the direction was to emulate the 1930’s version with a modern touch and I believe it succeeded. The story line much better than the original and Bergman is terrific - she is her typical Murphy Brown no nonsense character and funny. The manicurist is terrific in her mono log & Debra Messing is great in her tongue in check portrayal of a woman with too many kids giving birth for one more time - come on rate the play for what it is, an unrealistic fairytale of a women at the bottom who makes it because she has the financial backing at her immediate access. Sit back and enjoy how far women have come since the 1930's version – I do not get these purists, who think the original was so great – it was a yawner. The movie is 100% a "Chick flick" no men in the film at all like the original, although much better whether you like Meg Ryan or not. The one guy in the theater behind me was laughing hilariously throughout the flick so some guys may enjoy as well! It’s light, entertaining and you do remember it the next day!!

Karen Says:
September 16th, 2008 at 17:30
Saw the movie last night and really loved it, was like sitting down with your best friends chatting and living life only seeing it in person. The mixture of the actresses were great. Makes for a great night out with the girls! I like chic flicks as they are called because it gives you a outlet from the real world so have fun and enjoy chic flicks! Kinda like football is to men, lets them feel like one of the guys.....

Geoff Says:
September 22nd, 2008 at 11:52
I loved it!

Did anyone ever claim 'The Women' as a feminist tale? Don't think so. The original play and movie show women as: feisty, preposterous, catty, honourable, mendacious, smart, silly, aggressive, hurt, hurtful ... in short, as complete people. And the modern film does exactly the same. With better shoes.

JULIE Says:
September 22nd, 2008 at 16:03
I saw this movie and it was horrible.I totally agree with the critics, and I found it painful to not see any MEN in the whole film.

I was a bore, and if i could ask for my money back i would.

devil Says:
September 24th, 2008 at 01:52
It's not as good as the original (of course), but it's not horrible, either. There are funny parts, but overall it's a bit too twee.

The worst part, hands down, is Meg Ryan's distracting appearance. She's absolutely hideous from all the terrible plastic surgery. And those awful, AWFUL hair extensions! Meg Ryan's never been much of an actress, anyway, and she should NEVER have been considered for this role. Norma Shearer must be rolling over in her grave.

The best part of this movie are the references to the original. If you haven't seen the 1939 classic, you might want to skip this one.

Ellie Says:
September 25th, 2008 at 10:08
I haven't seen this film yet but it looks ace, i think girls are going to love it...including me. I'm going to see it this weekend and will enforce it upon my boyfriend for his male perspective.

Why does a movie need a man in it? The film is called 'The Women' it looks to me to be about 'Women' coming together and proving men are not always needed but they need one to make the film? Shhh. Don't be silly.

Try watching 12 Angry Men, great film. No Women.

Val Says:
September 28th, 2008 at 03:29
I loved the entertaining, talented 1939 version where they were believable and one could actually CARE what happened to them. This movie was a bizarre combination of shrieking women at their worst, regurgitating feminist propaganda of what a modern woman should be. Already an overachiever who neglected her daughter to be the perfect function organizer, Meg Ryan who looks old enough to know better, decides she didn't put her career first and that was the missing link to her unfulfilled life. Her cheating husband begs to come back to this empowered woman of course, and the daughter is also proud of her new still busy career mom. A promising future for all I'm sure. Debra Messing's contribution to this movie was miniscule except for the delivery room where she actually outshrieked her "friends" which was no small feat. I've never seen so much kissing and hugging with no genuine affection or sense of bonding. Cloris Leachman did a great job as an employee who didn't want to get involved with her employers. If only the others had been as honest about their unwillingness to commit to their parts. The movie is a great promotion for Saks and their handbags though!

Maria Says:
September 28th, 2008 at 22:02
This review is SPOT ON - so true. It was just a terrible movie with a lot of great actors. The advice in the story is trite and completely wrong on so many levels – it perpetuates our society’s very misunderstandings on seeking fulfillment. I don't always have to agree with the lifestyles and "lessons" in movies to enjoy them but this movie was barely entertaining. It had maybe three humorous anecdotes in the entire film. It's a cheap, knock-off of Sex in the City - except older and not funny. The writing was weak, the dialogue empty and the story-line off base. Here's the wrong advice our society keeps receiving from Hollywood - be selfish and try to find fulfillment in "finding yourself" through working...since we ALL can relate to having rich husbands on Wall Street and never having to work a day in our life ORRRR the polar opposite - work so hard, your bitter, self-centered, arrogant and all alone. Here's some advice world, only Jesus Christ can fulfill you - not a job, not a husband, not a girlfriend, not a handbag, not your daughter thinking you're "cool." The best advice in this movie was the fact that she decided to give a go at working toward restoring her marriage. But on an entertainment level - please, at least make me laugh, cry or something when I pay $9.50 to watch something!

Back to The Women

The Women - Review

Comment on “The Women”

Leave a Reply