

Rosemarys Baby Digital
-
anna
> 24 hourI really liked rosemary with zoe saldana. I like the fact that the movie wasnt exactly like the original. It was nice that the movie was filmed in such a beautiful place. So you have to watch and see. I gave it five stars because it was a little different, the acting was superb, where they filmed. And while I watched it, it made me feel you as though I wanted to take a trip there. I dont give away where it was filmed. Buy it and your see lol
-
Viva
> 24 hourYou cannot improve on the original, but Zoe Saldana is very appealing as the young woman who is taken in unwittingly by a coven that wants her to have a demonic child. Waiting for part two.
-
Randall Canter
> 24 hourI cant wait until the movie comes out on dvd which I bought and be very satisfied with this great show.
-
ericka
> 24 hourI love this movie!!!
-
John J. Schauer
> 24 hourWith all due respect to reviewer John Bowen, one does not need to be a person who hates all remakes to find this one sadly lacking. Yes, the production values are high and the acting is good. But it is now an entirely different, and far less effective, movie. For starters, to pander to todays audiences bloodlust, a lot of graphic gore has been added, something that was completely absent in the magnificent original. For instance, when Rosemary is told that her apartment building once housed the notorious Trench Sisters, who allegedly indulged in cannibalism, instead of learning about it through a casual reference in conversation, as in the original, here we have to be subjected to a flashback sequence showing the sisters kill and graphically dismember a man, blood squirting in their faces, a hatchet hacking off his arm, etc. And where Rosemarys friend Hutch, who tries to warn her, discreetly dies off camera in a coma in the original (and teasingly leaves us wondering what exactly happened), here he (changed now to an investigative police officer) has convulsions in his car with blood running out of his nose before being squashed like a bug by a large truck that smears him all over the pavement like a giant packet of ketchup. What was gained by this? More detrimental is the fact that this remake gives away too much, way too soon. What made the original such an effective chiller was the fact that so much was left ambiguous up until the end. The viewer of that version has to piece together the various bits of evidence at the same time Rosemary does, so that we share in her gradual discovery and growing horror. In the remake, it is quickly established upfront that the Castevets are evil Satanists who have supernatural powers and can grotesquely kill people at their whim, which they do in several additional scenes of gratuitous bloodshed. As a result, the final revelation that was so shocking in the original becomes entirely anticlimactic, almost beside the point. One is forced to ask why this remake was undertaken at all. Was it just to add visible bloodshed? Why didnt they just come up with a new story in which victims are mangled in graphic detail by Satanists instead of trashing what was and remains a masterpiece? In the hands of Roman Polanski, who adhered remarkably to the details of the original novel, Rosemarys Baby was an extraordinarily effective and subtle psychological thriller that actually made you think even as it more and more scared the bejeezus out of you. Agnieszka Holland, on the other hand, who directed this tasteless trash, has managed to transform it into just another gory slasher flick. No need to think, no need for innuendo, just buckets of blood to satisfy adolescent hunger for gross-out violence. Perhaps Holland should have renamed her hatchet-job Rosemarys Abortion.
-
Amari Sali
> 24 hourA part of me has such mixed feelings about all these remakes of various classic movies that now have Black starring characters. Not because I am against seeing diversity, but because I’d rather see money put into original media than rehashes of old media. Especially when, in films like Rosemary’s Baby, all that seems to change is the skin tone. There is no cultural adaptation, or even a recognition that something has changed in comparison to the original, it is just a darker face which once was played by a white person. For more on the film, look below. Characters & Story If you’ve seen the original, not much has changed structure wise. A young woman and her husband find themselves moving into a building with strange owners; the wife is unemployed, but not without things to do; and as her husband finds himself rising both economically and socially, she finds him changing in ways which makes him not seem like the man she fell in love with. And while, at first, she has a decent relationship with her neighbors, her landlords in this film, as time wears on they become odder and odder, and while she slightly questions things, she never pursues running away from the situation fully. This is despite multiple warnings, horrible nightmares, and coincidental murders which would be red flags for normal people. But with things going well, until nearly the end, there is the question of how ignorant is Rosemary and why was this film remade? Praise A part of me feels like Zoe Saldana should be applauded for becoming the new Halle Berry. Someone who looks “exotic,” has the ability to come off vulnerable or strong, and can bring that to any role. Something which helps ease the boredom which comes with watching Rosemary’s Baby, especially if you’ve seen the original. Criticism However, like with the many remakes that decide to put a physical racial spin on things, you are sort of left wondering what was the point? For while the Whitney Houston and Brandy starring Cinderella, Dorothy Dandrige in Carmen Jones, and maybe this year’s Annie maybe an exception, generally it just seems like the money put into these remakes could have gone to better places. Take for example: rather than do a remake of a well-known movie, and use the name of the movie and a few recognizable actors as the basis of why people should watch, why not make something original or inspired? What was really keeping Rosemary’s Baby from taking place in Louisiana and adapting things to which perhaps Hollywood’s perception of Voodoo could have been used in lieu of Satanism? I mean, while there are some remakes which many have fallen in love with, and would argue are on par, or better, than the original, when movies are simply new faces in old roles; a modern retelling; or even race swaps which either don’t seem culturally influenced, or are done for some shallow type of diversity, it makes me wonder who is the person so willing to throw money away on media like this? Overall: Skip It As said in the overview, just watch the original. For while Saldana certainly isn’t horrible as Rosemary, at the same time you can see she is more so channeling Mia Farrow than making this her role and trying to make you feel any of this is original. I guess, like the Psycho remake of the 90s, this film wanted to cash in on a known brand with new actors. Something which it doesn’t succeed in doing in any sense since the film tries to change things to create some sense of originality, but in the end it feels like no one really wanted to put their own spin on things and only changed things just enough so no one could say this was a modernized shot for shot remake to add onto its deserved criticism.
-
santurce
> 24 hourOriginal film was scarier this one was fine.
-
IVAN EDGAR PRATT
> 24 hourLazy director, the actors where very, Ive seen these actors in other film productions. Shooting new production of Rosemarys Baby in Paris was an excellent idea...but then the director got lazy, and ruin what could have been a good film.
-
annlequesne
> 24 hourvery good really enjoyed the movie
-
Roland
> 24 hourWaste of money and time