The Los Angeles Times:

After this initial setup, however, "The Women" becomes unfocused as it stumbles over all the points it wants to make. Given English's writing skills, the dialogue doesn't help as much as it should, tending too much toward one-liners that aim for raunchy whenever possible.

Never particularly believable, the story quickly unravels into schematic contrivance and wish-fulfillment fantasy. The actresses all try hard to bring a project they clearly believe in to life, but that is rarely enough.

It's hard to say what's sadder, that "The Women's" intended audience had to wait 14 years for a film like this or that that long wait has been almost for naught.

Entertainment Weekly:

The Women is such an arduous patchwork of ''issues'' it ends up a Frankenstein's monster of a chick flick. The movie is a feminist lesson instead of what it should have been (and once was): a tough, synthetic, high-gloss entertainment that wears its heart on its lacquered fingernails.

Time:

But that does not address the piece's fundamental problem, namely that it is not now and never has been funny. Or even human. In the previous movie version, as in this one (and I'll bet in the play itself) all the actresses strike comedic poses. They sashay about, rolling their eyes, pouting their lips, making big gestures and talking really fast. It's essentially an antique theatrical manner, the falsity of which the movie camera, dialing in for its close-ups (and even its two shots) exposes as relentlessly now as it did 69 years ago. No one ever gets to act — and this is a cast rich in good actresses — if by acting you mean the expression of authentic emotions. They are caught up in a zip-zap frenzy of words — and it is interesting how many lines in this script can be traced back to the Boothe original, which would not have been all that difficult to improve upon.

USA Today:

It's as if English missed the point. The Women was not about the healing bonds of friendship. It was about humorous revenge. Though aspects of the 1939 comedy seem silly and shrill now, they were at least consistently entertaining. Where the original was deliciously loopy and melodramatic fun, this one is watered-down, sappy and earnest.

Salon:

The original, bitchier, less girlfriendy version of "The Women" was a product of a less empowered era. This new version is meant to reflect how far we've come, with ads encouraging us to gather our friends and see it together. Of course the filmmakers want to rally female viewers en masse, because you can be damn sure that nothing with a penis is getting anywhere near this thing.

And yet, contrary to what Hollywood or Washington or Madison Avenue may believe, women don't, in fact, possess a hive mind. We don't all like yoga and eat sticks of butter when we're depressed, and we don't all travel in packs to see crappy movies. Human nature is complicated like that. Why isn't my gender rioting in the streets over this femmey stereotyping BS? I can only hope it's because we've got our hands full fending off the widespread belief that we'll put anybody with two X chromosomes in the White House.

The New York Times:

At the heart of the hectic story is Mary’s discovery that her husband is having an affair with Crystal (Eva Mendes), a gold-digging vixen who works at the perfume counter at Saks Fifth Avenue. The strain of top-down class resentment in the way her character is portrayed — mean, selfish, cheap and vulgar — is perhaps the most shocking thing about the movie, and also, perhaps, the most honest. At bottom, this is less a movie about defending a marriage or battling for a man than it is about the protection of social privilege. Out in the suburbs, the loyal servants stand by their mistress (and seem to have no private lives or desires of their own), while in the city the lower orders scheme and gossip and connive to steal what can never be rightfully theirs.

And of course, the heroic women of “The Women” will not concede without a fight. But rarely has class struggle, or catfighting, for that matter, been so tediously waged. And rarely have so many fine actresses been enlisted in such a futile cause. They all deserved better, and it hurts especially to watch Ms. Bening and Candice Bergen (who plays Mary’s mother) lend their wit and dignity to a project that has so little of its own.

Telegraph:

When George Cukor directed his version of Claire Boothe Luce's play The Women in 1939, he stuck to its main conceit by making the entire movie a male-free zone – unless you count some sexually ambiguous lapdogs in the opening sequence. This week's remake, written and directed by Diane English, obeys the rule reverently (until its final scene), a curious choice for a film that holds womankind in such open contempt. If you don't have anything nice to say about an entire gender, why restrict your options so?

Daily Mail:

To fit in with political correctness and the taste for female bonding which made such a hit out of Sex And The City, an acerbic satire on shallow socialites has been transformed into a cosy celebration of friendship among smug, middle-class women.

This is not an improvement.

The Mirror:

The Women boasts the novelty of not featuring a single man in the entire film, save for a newborn baby boy, while most of the conversation revolves around sex, shopping and plastic surgery which are, apparently, the secrets of a fulfilled life.

Shallow? Definitely. Any good? Not really. And you can’t help watching the thing without thinking of Sex And The City’s dumber cousin.

Premiere:

It would be sad if Tinseltown used this poorly executed remake as proof that there's no audience for female-driven films, because that's not the case at all. The women of America really are hungry for movies made by us, about us, and for us. And we're willing to pony up at the box office to prove it. But that doesn't mean that just any shoddy, "You go girl!" script can earn our loyalty. Please Hollywood: write truthfully for us, and from the heart. It's what Carrie Bradshaw would do.

Related: The Women— Witty Moments (1939) [YouTube]

'The Women' opens today, nationwide.

Gawker Media polls require Javascript; if you're viewing this in an RSS reader, click through to view in your Javascript-enabled web browser.

Will Kate Winslet Take A Flying Leap? [E! Online]

Earlier: Erica Jong Would Rather Be A Lesbian Than A Cougar
Erica Jong's Sister: "Fear of Flying Has Been A Thorn In My Flesh For Thirty-Five Years"

The Good:
Okay, the print may verge on "cow" but this retro silhouette looks amazing on Eva Mendes.
This is how objective I am being: Meg Ryan looks elegant. When did I develop such animosity towards Meg Ryan, anyway? When did we all? Yet, our dislike is implacable.
Debra Messing's frock has a lot going on, but she pulls it off.
I love how everyone's rocking these Mad Men shapes! Debi Mazar's print is in danger of giving me a seizure, but she's got the presence to work it.
Celeste Holm gets a permanent spot in "Good" for her turn in All About Eve.



Special Award:
Don't actually love Lucy Schwartz s outfit, but it's totally age-appropriate, which is a rarity in this day and age!


The Bad:
Jada rarely departs from the figure-hugging sheath, which admittedly looks rad on her. The beading on this one? Not so much. Also I can't stop thinking about how labor-intensive that beading must have been, and it makes me sad that I don't like it.
I have no compunction sticking Diane English's claret-colored frump in the "Bad" after she had the hubris to direct this movie. Yeah, I know: I haven't seen it. But I don't like her outfit.
Kat Kramer is a red-carpet fixture, a sort of really dowdy Phoebe Price whose actual mode of employment is unclear.
If understated elegance is not Erica Hubbard's goal, then, well, she's achieved...not doing that.
Uh oh! Someone forgot her pants!

[Images via Getty]

Tina Fey (30 Rock), Glenn Close (Damages), America Ferrera (Ugly Betty), Julia Louis-Dreyfus (The New Adventures of Old Christine), Felicity Huffman (Desperate Housewives), Mariska Hargitay (Law and Order: SVU), Kyra Sedgewick (The Closer), Minnie Driver (The Riches), Elisabeth Moss (Mad Men) and Jeanne Tripplehorn (Big Love): these were the women who were nominated for Emmys, by-in-large playing strong, capable, well-written roles. And what's more, most of these women are, gasp, over 35.

Are there so many more available roles for women of a certain age on TV because producing a television show is that much cheaper? Are aging bodies less obvious on the small screen, and so they're more acceptable? Are Hollywood honchos just stuck believing that women don't see movies, or that men don't want to see movies with anything but eye candy? It's probably a combination of all of the above, and even though those televised, meaty roles are something to be proud of, there is not a single black actress on the short list for Best Actress Emmy (there are two Latinas: Ferrera and Eva Longoria-Parker).

I know I've said this so many times before, but there is something concrete we can do to help: go see movies made by women, or made with women in respectable roles. I'd tell you to go see something specific this weekend, but the only recent release with a plucky female protagonist is Kit Kittredge, and if you're not a Jezemom, I'm guessing that holds limited interest for you. Sigh. We clearly have a long way to go.

Warner Brothers Decides To Embrace The Women [Deadline Hollywood Daily]
Why Won't Warner Embrace The Women? [Deadline Hollywood Daily]
Warner's Robinov Bitchslaps Film Women [Deadline Hollywood Daily]
Sarah Silverman Lands In The Top 10 List Of Emmy semifinalists For Best Comedy Actress! [Gold Derby LAT]
Looks like Mary McDonnell Of 'Battlestar Galactica' And Elisabeth Moss Of 'Mad Men' Are On The Emmy Top 10 List [Gold Derby LAT]

Earlier: Ultimate Chick Flick The Women Is Finally About To See The Silver Screen