# Rosemary's Baby: How does it hold up? **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [June 18, 2013, 5:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rosemarys-baby-how-does-it-hold-up/661290 "2013-06-18T17:31:59Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![MovieMogul](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f08c70/32.png) [@MovieMogul](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MovieMogul)\ **Post date:** [June 18, 2013, 8:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rosemarys-baby-how-does-it-hold-up/661290/21 "2013-06-18T20:47:44Z")
> [@woodstockbirdybird](#): > > It holds up OK. I recently got the Criterion Collection Blu-Ray. The feeling of paranoia is intense and well-done, though the ending is kind of goofy by modern standards. What does this mean? “By Modern Standards” Because by modern standards, we would see a CGI devil baby who would not hesitate in eating one of the celebrants while the gushing blood would cover the rest of the cheering crowd in an orgy of viscera and gratuitousness. So “by modern standards”, I will take old school heart-breaking and muted over in-your-face and stupid any day. ---
**Author:** ![Annie-Xmas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ecc23a/32.png) [@Annie-Xmas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Annie-Xmas)\ **Post date:** [June 18, 2013, 9:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rosemarys-baby-how-does-it-hold-up/661290/22 "2013-06-18T21:01:17Z")
> [@Sherrerd](#): > > My interpretation is that it’s plain old patronizing patriarchalism…Women Are Naturally Hysterical and that sort of thing. The doctor was following the conventional wisdom that Her Husband Will Know Best. I don’t think we were meant to believe the doctor was part of the conspiracy–but that may be a matter of opinion. Perhaps Polanski was going for deliberate ambiguity. > > For those who’ve read the book: is this question answered, there? Abraham Sapirstein, the doctor (and devil worshipper) that Rosemary is referred to, is a very highly thought of doctor. It’s implied that the other doctor called him and got the “pre-partum psychosis” diagnosis. The third painting on the wall was of St. Paul’s Cathedral in flames. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Lovely\_Margo\_Lane](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/34f0e0/32.png) [@The\_Lovely\_Margo\_Lane](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Lovely_Margo_Lane)\ **Post date:** [June 18, 2013, 9:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rosemarys-baby-how-does-it-hold-up/661290/23 "2013-06-18T21:01:32Z")
> [@Morbo](#): > > One scene that was a little dated to me was when John Cassavettes basically blamed the “rough sex” from the night before on how loaded he was, as if that was a justification for forcing himself on her. I think that bit is perfect - this, plus the bit at the very beginning where he mocks Elisha Cook, Jr. and a few other choice bits say so much about his character and about the marriage. Basically, he wasn’t corrupted by the satanists, he was a prick all along who cared about his ambitions, his pleasure, his ‘wittyness,’ not about his wife or anyone else. The satanists glommed on to the couple because it took just a nudge to get him on their side, as much as because of any particular qualities (or lack) that Rosemary posessed. > [@Sampiro](#): > > A question about Charles Grodin’s character (Rosemary’s original doctor): > > Rosemary confides to him about the plot to kidnap her baby and he seems to take her seriously, but then he brings Guy in. Is this because he decided she was mentally disturbed or was he part of the conspiracy? The reason I wondered if he’s part of the conspiracy is that he really did seem to believe her for a moment. I don’t think he’s in the conspiracy, he doesn’t need to be. He’s part of the patriarchy, holding up the societal norms (bitches be crazy, mostly) that the satanists are taking advantage of. > [@MovieMogul](#): > > A truly misogynistic movie would brush away or trivialize that element, but the audience (men and women alike) are meant to identify specifically with her and her helplessness and disorientation (especially towards people she’s grown to trust and take at face value). Her husband is obviously a horrific and self-centered person, but let’s be honest–this is just at the dawn of Women’s Lib so a highly patriarchal and narcissistic worldview would not be uncommon among men his age, especially ones as insecure as he clearly is. > > Maybe Levin sympathizes with and justifies all his male characters in the book (I wouldn’t know), but Polanski clearly doesn’t. They are evil at worst, condescending at best. And that is quite unambiguous throughout the film. Yep. The satanists aren’t presented as having access to particularly powerful magic - they are able to conjure the devil, but not to do much else that a similarly connected group of wealthy folks with access to doctors and drugs couldn’t have done without supernatural assistance. ---
**Author:** ![delphica](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e9a140/32.png) [@delphica](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/delphica)\ **Post date:** [June 18, 2013, 9:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rosemarys-baby-how-does-it-hold-up/661290/24 "2013-06-18T21:07:08Z")
> [@Sampiro](#): > > I thought the dream sequences were some of the most “realistically dreamlike” (if that’s not an oxymoron) ever in a movie. The Pope at her bedside saying “I understand you were bitten by a mouse” was perfect and an actual weird congregation of things that would come together in a dream. That line is right from the book, and one of those things that has stayed with me in all the years since first reading it, because it is, as you say, so PERFECT for that weird calm that often comes with fantastic events. Like if you are ever so ill with a fever that you hallucinate, it could be very scary but sometimes the experience seems more detached and almost soothing. I have said that line to myself during times when I was in situations that seemed surreal. And almost always when chocolate mousse is served. Anyway, I confess I don’t remember the film very clearly (maybe I was bitten by a mouse), but I think the book has held up fairly well. Sure, a lot of it is dated and it’s hard to be surprised by any of the plot – even if you’ve never read it, at this point it’s just a cultural thing that people know Rosemary’s baby is also the devil’s baby. But the creepy parts remain very creepy, even when the suspense isn’t really there. I agree that Ira Levin was a sexist jerk … but in ways he probably didn’t even intend, the book does a great job of showing what life was like in real life for a lot of women. Rosemary (and this is another awesome thing about the book) is an adult woman who doesn’t have much agency and her frustration with her lack of recourse comes through so strongly. In addition to being impregnated by the Devil, married women at that time couldn’t, in many cases, get a mortgage or loan without the consent of their husbands, consult with a doctor and have any expectation that information would remain confidential, or in some states, be raped by their husband in the eyes of the law, even violent rape. In light of all that, having the Devil’s baby just seems like one more crappy thing to put up with. ---
**Author:** ![Annie-Xmas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ecc23a/32.png) [@Annie-Xmas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Annie-Xmas)\ **Post date:** [June 18, 2013, 9:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rosemarys-baby-how-does-it-hold-up/661290/25 "2013-06-18T21:10:20Z")
Making Donald Baumgert, Guy’s theatrical rival who gets the role he really wanted, suddenly go blind was supernatural assistance. When Rosemary is putting the pieces together, she wonders why Guy would go along with the plan. What could he possibly get from it? Then she realizes she’s known all along. Asking the question was simply a way to acknowledge what she already knew. The blindness of Donald Baumgert. If you believed. ---
**Author:** ![Sampiro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/2acd7d/32.png) [@Sampiro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sampiro)\ **Post date:** [June 18, 2013, 9:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rosemarys-baby-how-does-it-hold-up/661290/26 "2013-06-18T21:15:02Z")
Trivia: Donald Baumgert was voiced by Tony Curtis. I always assumed the tannis root, and the odd necklace it was kept in, had some kind of supernatural properties as well. (There’s no such thing as tannis root- it was cooked up by Levin, and even in the book it’s clear it wasn’t actually a root but something the witches didn’t want identified.) ---
**Author:** ![Annie-Xmas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ecc23a/32.png) [@Annie-Xmas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Annie-Xmas)\ **Post date:** [June 18, 2013, 9:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rosemarys-baby-how-does-it-hold-up/661290/27 "2013-06-18T21:17:26Z")
Further trivia: Mia Farrow was a very good friend of Tony Curtis, and did not know he was visiting her on the set the day the telephone scene was filmed. She is real life wondering “I know that voice. Who is that?” Her bewilderment comes across perfectly. ---
**Author:** ![jsc1953](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/5daacb/32.png) [@jsc1953](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jsc1953)\ **Post date:** [June 18, 2013, 9:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rosemarys-baby-how-does-it-hold-up/661290/28 "2013-06-18T21:19:23Z")
> [@Sampiro](#): > > Trivia: Donald Baumgert was voiced by Tony Curtis. > > I always assumed the tannis root, and the odd necklace it was kept in, had some kind of supernatural properties as well. Did not know that. I’d say tannis root is only supernatural in the same way that eye of newt is supernatural. It’s the raw material that can be used with the proper other ingredients and incantations – foul and horrible knowledge only obtained by consorting with the Evil One. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Lovely\_Margo\_Lane](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/34f0e0/32.png) [@The\_Lovely\_Margo\_Lane](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Lovely_Margo_Lane)\ **Post date:** [June 18, 2013, 9:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rosemarys-baby-how-does-it-hold-up/661290/29 "2013-06-18T21:23:52Z")
> [@Annie-Xmas](#): > > Making Donald Baumgert, Guy’s theatrical rival who gets the role he really wanted, suddenly go blind was supernatural assistance. When Rosemary is putting the pieces together, she wonders why Guy would go along with the plan. What could he possibly get from it? > > Then she realizes she’s known all along. Asking the question was simply a way to acknowledge what she already knew. > > The blindness of Donald Baumgert. If you believed. Oh, yes, for sure. I wasn’t meaning to say that they _weren’t_ working spells (though they certainly could have taken Baumgart out in some other way if need be), just that it wasn’t the **devilish magics** that really screwed Rosemary over, it was **devilish magics** plus a much bigger helping of restrictive patriarchy. The satanists could have been stringing Guy along with promises of bigger things they had no intention of delivering, or they could be advancing his career through earthly means (poisoning rivals, using financial connections or Hollywood-chapter satanists to get him jobs etc). Thus, in my read of the film, the actual existence of the devil and the ability of the satanists to access his power could have been removed without changing the substance of the story. OTOH, the patriarchal structure of society and Rosemary’s marriage could not be so easily excised. ---
**Author:** ![woodstockbirdybird](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/woodstockbirdybird/32/7905_2.png) [@woodstockbirdybird](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/woodstockbirdybird)\ **Post date:** [June 18, 2013, 9:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rosemarys-baby-how-does-it-hold-up/661290/30 "2013-06-18T21:40:20Z")
> [@MovieMogul](#): > > What does this mean? “By Modern Standards” > > Because by modern standards, we would see a CGI devil baby who would not hesitate in eating one of the celebrants while the gushing blood would cover the rest of the cheering crowd in an orgy of viscera and gratuitousness. > > So “by modern standards”, I will take old school heart-breaking and muted over in-your-face and stupid any day. I mean it’s a bit corny and laughable and not at all chilling - the rest of the movie was pretty good at keeping the suspense ratcheted up, but it fell flat in the final scene. “By modern standards” in this instance meant the “shock” doesn’t really work. IMHO. ---
**Author:** ![jsc1953](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/5daacb/32.png) [@jsc1953](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jsc1953)\ **Post date:** [June 18, 2013, 9:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rosemarys-baby-how-does-it-hold-up/661290/31 "2013-06-18T21:46:38Z")
> [@The\_Lovely\_Margo\_Lane](#): > > … it was **devilish magics** plus a much bigger helping of restrictive patriarchy. > > The satanists could have been stringing Guy along with promises of bigger things they had no intention of delivering, or they could be advancing his career through earthly means (poisoning rivals, using financial connections or Hollywood-chapter satanists to get him jobs etc). > > Thus, in my read of the film, the actual existence of the devil and the ability of the satanists to access his power could have been removed without changing the substance of the story. OTOH, the patriarchal structure of society and Rosemary’s marriage could not be so easily excised. That’s certainly an interesting read, although a very different movie – if you remove all the supernatural elements, you’re left with a story of power and influence and the role of women in society – kind of a combination of Ibsen and The Godfather. Fortunately 🙂 we actually have a fairly straight-forward supernatural horror story. ---
**Author:** ![E-DUB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/e-dub/32/403_2.png) [@E-DUB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/E-DUB)\ **Post date:** [June 18, 2013, 11:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rosemarys-baby-how-does-it-hold-up/661290/32 "2013-06-18T23:49:51Z")
Read the book or see the movie. You don’t have to do both. ---
**Author:** ![elfkin477](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/a9a28c/32.png) [@elfkin477](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elfkin477)\ **Post date:** [June 18, 2013, 11:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rosemarys-baby-how-does-it-hold-up/661290/33 "2013-06-18T23:58:35Z")
I liked it the same when I saw it when I was 28 as when I was 12. Which is to say not at all. I only watched it again because in the meantime I’d read the last chapter of the book, which describes the baby, and hoped that I’d missed something when I’d seen it as a kid. Nope. ---
**Author:** ![MovieMogul](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f08c70/32.png) [@MovieMogul](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MovieMogul)\ **Post date:** [June 19, 2013, 12:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rosemarys-baby-how-does-it-hold-up/661290/34 "2013-06-19T00:37:06Z")
> [@woodstockbirdybird](#): > > I mean it’s a bit corny and laughable and not at all chilling - the rest of the movie was pretty good at keeping the suspense ratcheted up, but it fell flat in the final scene. “By modern standards” in this instance meant the “shock” doesn’t really work. IMHO. Clearly, YMMV. But I don’t think the “shock” is the baby. The audience can see that coming. The shock is really in her reaction–not of horror, but of gradual acceptance and maternal love, rather than full-scale revulsion. That’s what makes the ending disturbing (and IMHO, not corny), and that is what lingers in the memory. ---
**Author:** ![miss\_elizabeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/838e76/32.png) [@miss\_elizabeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/miss_elizabeth)\ **Post date:** [June 19, 2013, 1:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rosemarys-baby-how-does-it-hold-up/661290/35 "2013-06-19T01:00:16Z")
> [@Dogzilla](#): > > I went through a phase where I was reading movies. Rather, I would find out a movie had been based on a book, so I’d go chase down the book and read that. Through that process, I learned how much I hate Ira Levin (the author of the book Rosemary’s Baby) because it turns out (I hadn’t noticed) that he’s a misogynist. All of the female characters are weak and totally told what to do and how to act. Same guy wrote The Stepford Wives, if that gives you any clue. That Rosemary’s baby was co-opted to become the Son of Satan or whatever, without any consent or knowledge on her part really pisses me off. You’d think the whole scheme would be much easier to pull off with the mama’s consent and participation. But they lied, obfuscated, gaslighted, and pretty much controlled and manipulated poor Rosemary during the entire movie. Every time I see one of the male characters (in the movie) patronize her (and every single one of them does it, even the doctor who’s on her side), I want to punch Ira Levin right in the throat. > > So for me, I can’t stand that movie, nor either of The Stepford Wives movies, nor anything else Ira Levin had a hand in (Sliver is another book by him that became a movie and which was all about one man using women for his personal entertainment. Ew.), and therefore, it doesn’t hold up at all. YMMV. This is jaw-dropping for me. I would say Ira Levin was one of the more feminist writers in his genre at that time. So many of his stories are darkly humorous, maybe the satire doesn’t come across? I mean, the Stepford Wives is (in my opinion) explicitly feminist. Yes, it’s also dealing with men’s reaction to feminism, but it’s mocking that backlash. I don’t know what to say. I’m kind of blown away that’s how it read to you, and it makes me want to go an re-read some of these books. But to me they always read as feminist as, say, The Handmaiden’s Tale (well, ok, that’s a bit of an exaggeration). ---
**Author:** ![woodstockbirdybird](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/woodstockbirdybird/32/7905_2.png) [@woodstockbirdybird](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/woodstockbirdybird)\ **Post date:** [June 19, 2013, 1:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rosemarys-baby-how-does-it-hold-up/661290/36 "2013-06-19T01:00:28Z")
My whole problem was with her reaction - rather than the acceptance being gradual, it seemed to be immediate, which I found unbelievable given her reservations during the rest of the movie (and also corny, with the maternal instinct overcoming all her morality). But it didn’t ruin the whole thing for me. Overall, I like it. ---
**Author:** ![jsc1953](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/5daacb/32.png) [@jsc1953](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jsc1953)\ **Post date:** [June 19, 2013, 1:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rosemarys-baby-how-does-it-hold-up/661290/37 "2013-06-19T01:20:08Z")
> [@E-DUB](#): > > Read the book or see the movie. You don’t have to do both. Isn’t that rather universally true of all books & movies? ---
**Author:** ![Rodgers01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/b19c9b/32.png) [@Rodgers01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rodgers01)\ **Post date:** [June 19, 2013, 8:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rosemarys-baby-how-does-it-hold-up/661290/38 "2013-06-19T20:33:57Z")
> [@miss\_elizabeth](#): > > This is jaw-dropping for me. I would say Ira Levin was one of the more feminist writers in his genre at that time. So many of his stories are darkly humorous, maybe the satire doesn’t come across? I mean, the Stepford Wives is (in my opinion) explicitly feminist. Yes, it’s also dealing with men’s reaction to feminism, but it’s mocking that backlash. I don’t know what to say. I’m kind of blown away that’s how it read to you, and it makes me want to go an re-read some of these books. But to me they always read as feminist as, say, The Handmaiden’s Tale (well, ok, that’s a bit of an exaggeration). Thanks, this was my reaction as well. Granted, it’s been a while since I read an Ira Levin novel, but I remember both Stepford Wives and Rosemary’s Baby very clearly, and neither was sexist at all. The whole point was that he was writing about women trying to fight against and overcome the inherent sexism of their surroundings. Accusing Levin of being sexist because Rosemary is condescended to by her husband and doctors is like accusing the writer of “Invasion of the Body Snatchers” of being pro-alien invasion. ---
**Author:** ![Rodgers01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/b19c9b/32.png) [@Rodgers01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rodgers01)\ **Post date:** [June 19, 2013, 8:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rosemarys-baby-how-does-it-hold-up/661290/39 "2013-06-19T20:35:41Z")
Oh, and yes the movie holds up wonderfully. Polanski is a master at maintaining just the right tone. He draws you in bit by careful bit, never going over the top, just hitting every note perfectly. Love that movie. Also: anyone who likes “Rosemary’s Baby” might also like Polanski’s “The Tenant,” which has a similarly eerie, surreal tone. The earlier “Repulsion” with Catherine Deneuve is the other part of his “apartment trilogy,” but to me it isn’t as successful as the other two. ---
**Author:** ![MovieMogul](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f08c70/32.png) [@MovieMogul](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MovieMogul)\ **Post date:** [June 19, 2013, 8:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rosemarys-baby-how-does-it-hold-up/661290/40 "2013-06-19T20:51:21Z")
> [@Rodgers01](#): > > Also: anyone who likes “Rosemary’s Baby” might also like Polanski’s “The Tenant,” which has a similarly eerie, surreal tone. The earlier “Repulsion” with Catherine Deneuve is the other part of his “apartment trilogy,” but to me it isn’t as successful as the other two. Interesting. I find _Repulsion_ the best of the three–a nightmarish window into the gradual erosion of sanity, and one of the best (and most disturbing) final shots in all of cinema. A vivid fever dream of a film, and the one most dependent on his skills as a director. _The Tenant_ I enjoy, but find the most dissimilar of the three, though it owes quite a lot to Kafka, making it more surreal and divorced from the real world (which is what makes the other two more effective, to me). Plus, Polanski’s choice to cast himself in the lead is a little problematic, IMHO. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rosemarys-baby-how-does-it-hold-up/661290.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rosemarys-baby-how-does-it-hold-up/661290.md?page=3)