OCTOBER 31, 2014 4:43PM
Rosemary's Remake - Happy Halloween!
ROSEMARY'S BABY
Released: 2014
Director: Agnieszka Holland
Writers: Scott Abbot, James Wong, based on the novel by Ira Levin
Notable Cast: Zoe Saldana, Patrick J. Adams, Carole Bouquet, Jason Isaacs, Stefano Cassetti
Plot: Modern 4 hour mini-series adaptation of the classic novel by Ira Levin focusing on young Rosemary Woodhouse's suspicions that her neighbors may belong to a Satanic cult who are hell bent on getting one thing: the baby she is carrying. (source: imdb)
Commentary: Broken record time: I find 1968's Rosemary's Baby to be one of the best horror thrillers in existence. I would not be easily pleased by any remake at all.
But I'm actually okay with this 2014 reimagining, even though I can safely point to why Polanski's version is superior.
Of course, not everyone agrees with me. Let's listen to the sage words of brilliant cinema critic 'Modernhorrorrox' of the imdb message boards, who claims is it not as "boreing" as the original:
Who knows, maybe he's right? I first saw the original in 1984 or so, and I was riveted for the whole 2+hours. Never once did I want any of the scenes - the shopping, the haircut, the party, Guy and Rosemary's relationship moments - to hurry up or be cut from the film as the mystery and horror unfolded. The build up was just too good. But maybe I was just a weird kid?
Anyways, here's why RB 2014 is different enough from the source material, making it both worthwhile and not its own masterpiece:
The Paris setting - the original is a quintessential New York City movie. So if your goal is to make your remake distinct and unique, this was a good decision. I doubt this will become a quintessential Paris movie, but it is a successful bid to add some sexy European sophistication to the story. More on that later.
Rosemary and Guy - I haven't cared much for Zoe Saldana's acting, but she did great here. From what I've read, Saldana insisted on changing the naive, childish waifishness that Mia Farrow brought to the role - as well she should for a film set in 2014. She also insisted she "doesn't like old guys", hence a younger Guy (hah! see what I did there). Hey, don't complain, women are always on the receiving end of that in Hollywood.
That said - Guy Woodhouse? A struggling writer instead of struggling actor. Played by Patrick J. Adams, he was just a leaden sad-sack hipster that I disliked from the get-go. John Cassavettes was charming, talented, funny, weasilish, attractive and actually made you like the character until well into the middle of the film.
Mon Dieu! Tres sexy! - I'm about to commit a serious heinous traitorous blasphemy. I am an enormous fan of Minnie and Roman Castevet in the original. Sidney Blackmer was so confident and menacing as Roman/Steven Marcato, and you can't tell me Ruth Gordon as Minnie ins't the hottest Scream Queen cougar ever!
But then, this remake presented us with Roman and 'Margaux' Castevet. And they're too elegant and beautiful not to fall for their satanic seductions.
Gorgeous former Bond Girl Carole Bouquet as Margaux Castevet is a timeless and classically beautiful woman. Roman, as played by Jason Isaacs, was debonaire and suave.
There was a very sexual atmosphere to this miniseries, with Rosemary's haunting dreams and visions of the "Man With Blue Eyes" and his orgies. Even the ceremonial pregnancy was kinda hot.
The Castevets were all over the Woodhouses in suggestive and inappropriate ways, implying some kind of swinging. Embarassingly, I have to admit I would've swung with them.
MODERN HORROR ROX LOL! - let's now consult again with the distinguished cinema critic 'Modernhorrorrox' of the imdb message boards on why the 1968 version of Rosemary's Baby doesn't quite meet the standards of greatness:
Where would we be without his keen insight into the art of filmmaking?
RB 2014's director, Agnieszka Holland is very impressive. Just take a look at her imdb page. Europa, Europa and Blue (her part of the Three Colors trilogy of films) were terrific.
That's why I'm surprised she wasn't able to craft a mystery and a thriller in her own way that at least approaches what Polanski did.
Look, we're taken out of Rosemary's POV several times, right down to seeing Guy openly conspiring with the Castevets and seeing Margaux cast some kind of spell in order to get rid of the Hutch analogue, Rosemary's friend played by Cristina Cole.
For pity's sake, in 1968 the seduction of Guy Woodhouse was left for you to imagine between Roman's "why don't you join me for a drink in the study?" and the curl of cigar smoke when Rosemary returns to their presence. Here, we have Roman take Guy out to a douchey Parisian Hellfire Club and throw a whole bunch of T&A and dreams of famous writerhood his way. You can't tell me that the latter is a better artistic choice.
To build any kind of sense of isolation, paranoia and fear, especially around a pregnant woman who may or may not be going insane, that's just not the way to do it.
Suggest it, imply it, but don't show it.
Remember the amazing tidbits and mysteries around the Black Bramford (the Upper West Side's Dakota building) that we were recounted in the original film? Pearl Ames. The Trench sisters. Keith Kennedy. The death of Terry. These were told, not shown. We had to fill in the blanks ourselves and I don't know about you but my imagination ran wild, and there are STILL long and heated discussions about whether or not Terry killed herself and how.
Well, in 2014 we actually get to see a scene of the Trench Sisters killing a guy in order to gobble him up for dinner. And we even open with a scene of the Terry analogue in the film jumping out of the window. She's given a husband who stalks Guy and Rosemary and is nuts and WARNS THEM! WARNS THEM! Until of course, The Castevets twitch their nose and he's done for.
To modernhorrorrox's delight, we get some gore and running blood and slow-mo "coincidence-fu" scenes of mayhem. Was Holland trying again to make her remake distinct?
I have to think that this was mandated by higher ups trying to reach the Modernhorrorrox's of today.
What We're Afraid Of: There is of course that boogeyman that runs throughout my blog series this year: economic anxiety. The story of Rosemary's Baby in any incarnation, novel or film, is the story of a Faustian bargain for material gain, and one that the bargainer might have to pay for, but we won't see the consequences to him.
The great beast greed will lead your conscience to whore your own spouse out to the devil.
But 2014 also had an interesting theme: reproductive rights. This Rosemary, and her poor doomed friend, fought for hers very strongly against decisions that men were trying to make for her. This is a good new spin on the material.
Happy Halloween to my readers! Thanks for joining me these 31 Days.
Chillerpop takes all questions and comments via Twitter (@Chillerpop) or via Facebook
TIP:
Enter the amount, and click "Tip" to submit!
Comments
You know Rosemary's Baby was far fetched... the remake-- but I still liked it. LOL
HAPPY HALLOWEEN
HAPPY HALLOWEEN
Same Linda!
Anything with Ruth
Gordon in it is an instant classic. I am very leery of sequels,
especially when the original is well done. Nevertheless, Hollywood is
obsessed with sequels because most "suits" are afraid to take chances on
new ideas, and the hollywood execs know they can bank a certain number
on a sequel.
RATED
RATED
R&R for a job well done. ;-)
This should be fun to see. Thanks!
I liked your analysis
of why the original, a true classic in my opinion, was superior,
especially the point about suggesting instead of showing.
Interesting spin. Thanks for this post!
You are bang on about
the original "Rosemary's Baby": a true classic (can I also throw in how
much I love the film's haunting theme music with a trilling-Mia Farrow).
So I wanted to read what you had to say about this remake as my
feelings were like yours: I'm not sure I wanted to watch the remake as
the original is so perfect all on its own. So your comparative approach
to the two was interesting, especially since you found some aspects to
like about it.
Ever see the TV movie sequel from circa 1977: "Whatever Happened To Rosemary's Baby"? It seemed fairly ridiculous to my mid-teens self but I'm sure now it could very well be a full-on howling-with-laughter Fest.
Thanks for producing this 31-day series of entries, Chiller. Really enjoyed them and appreciate all the time and work that goes into them.
Ever see the TV movie sequel from circa 1977: "Whatever Happened To Rosemary's Baby"? It seemed fairly ridiculous to my mid-teens self but I'm sure now it could very well be a full-on howling-with-laughter Fest.
Thanks for producing this 31-day series of entries, Chiller. Really enjoyed them and appreciate all the time and work that goes into them.
Thanks jmac, Abrawang, algis, zanelle, and VA.
VA, I have seen parts of "Look What's Happened..." awful. How about that satanic mime dance? Heh!
VA, I have seen parts of "Look What's Happened..." awful. How about that satanic mime dance? Heh!
Testing testing 1 2 3!
No comments:
Post a Comment