"Polanski never really struck me as a filmmaker who believed in a purely external manifestion of evil - say, as John Car
-
Archived from the IMDb Discussion Forums — Rosemary's Baby
franzkabuki — 9 years ago(December 16, 2016 08:23 PM)
"Polanski never really struck me as a filmmaker who believed in a purely external manifestion of evil - say, as John Carpenter for example - or who would need the mediation of a figure like The Devil to explain the evil Man commits against Man".
Yes, that's generally true of course - but then again one might say that, for instance, that Bulgakov wasn't exactly that kind of an author either and yet he chose to bring Satan smack in the middle of then-contemporary Moscow. So I guess sometimes you adapt if it serves some other purpose or if you find aspects in it that make it fascinating enough in different ways Of course, Polanski originally wanted to turn directing RB down because he did not believe in that Christian mythology, didn't have any personal access to it. So it would follow that he changed his mind because a) he saw some metaphoric possibilities there or b) he chose to look at it as an exercise in paranoia (which it sort of is under both readings, no?).
And I guess I ultimately go with option A simply because, above all, within this particular story I find there being a literal coven next door more potent. As for the narrative problems I mentioned well, I don't really want to go too far down that road of picking the story apart, but just two things - firstly, the whole notion of Guy having raped her seems a bit difficult to understand. Why would he suddenly go crazy and steal something he could get for free any time? Especially as up to that point, he'd shown fairly little interest in Rosemary anyway, to the point of neglect, preferring to concentrate on his career. Secondly, even before the rape scene, before Rosemary had any reason to be paranoid about anything, there was a tremendous amount of strange and suspicious stuff going on in the building - bit too much for my tastes to be wholly coincidental. And Guy's behaviour becomes increasingly sneaky and suspect right after their first dinner with the Castevets (as someone noted, he "often behaved as if he wanted to hide from the camera"). Surely, he didn't plan the violation of his sleeping wife ahead over such an amount of time?
But, yeah, I did say I wouldn't want to drag it out This is the way I see things here, though.
"facts are stupid things" Ronald Reagan -
fiatlux-1 — 10 years ago(October 01, 2015 04:03 PM)
kaskait often posts odd things here.
The fact of the matter is: Guy is not the Devil. The Devil raped Rosemary, she bore his child. The end.
As to why Ro did not rage against Guy, that's more complicated. The novel goes into it a little more, the film not so much.
Rosemary was raised in an
extremely
religious & strict household. God was much more like a dictator than a loving God in that household.
Ro escaped her house against her parent's will. She was needy & lonely, and met Guy at her job.
He surely seemed like a father figure to her.
She took the vows seriously, and 'obeys' him as we see in the film. She is extremely subservient, and a little simple-minded. She has many friends yes, but has few interests other than caring for Guy. He's her whole world.
In the novel, Ro does leave Guy for a few days to 'think things over'.
Initially she blames him, then gets needy again & forgives him.
So long story short, she justifies his behavior in her mind. She's afraid to leave him.
I'd say this cloud is Cumulo Nimbus.
Didn't he discover America?
Penfold, shush. -
LetThemEatCake01 — 10 years ago(October 01, 2015 07:23 PM)
The way Guy treated her as if she was a child and she followed suit, repulsed me. What's more sickening is that, that's the way 99.9% of households were back then, and even today it is the same thing I guess.
-
ghostdeen — 10 years ago(October 03, 2015 02:19 PM)
Mmmmm yes and no. I think there was definitely more a philosophy of "father knows best" back then, when the women's lib movement was just in its infancy, but I'm sure it varied from household to household as it does now. Also, even if, in most households, the husband would have the final say the vast majority of men wouldn't have made the decisions Guy made. He's an extreme example of a total sociopath having near-complete control over his spouse. I'm always a little surprised, though, that people focus on how subservient Ro is at the beginning, but don't really address how she goes against Guy and Saperstein near the end. She certainly steps up then.
-
InherentlyYours — 10 years ago(March 04, 2016 02:44 AM)
'that's the way 99.9% of households were back then, and even today it is the same thing I guess.'
Thats incorrect. It's not the same thing today, and it was not then. This must disappoint you. Best not to guess. -
BobbyDupea — 9 years ago(June 23, 2016 07:33 AM)
The way Guy treated Rosemary is supposed to repulse you - that is the whole point of the movie: his ambition leads him to the ultimate betrayal of Rosemary. The question of whether the devil is a literal, physical being in the movie is not vital in conveying that theme.
My real name is Jeff -
ghostdeen — 10 years ago(October 03, 2015 02:22 PM)
That's my impression, too the devil here is a separate figure from any other character he had his own body, he committed the rape. I have heard it argued, however, that he was possessing Guy, possessing Roman, or even possessing a still-alive Adrian Marcato! What are your thoughts on that? Hutch's line about Marcato "conjuring the living devil" would tend to support him being a separate entity, though, I would think.
-
fiatlux-1 — 10 years ago(October 03, 2015 05:31 PM)
I don't think the Devil possessed Guy. We see Guy standing in the crowd with the coven at one point, talking to Minnie.
I think the Devil just took his image/made Ro 'see' him as Guy, so as not to frighten her until the act began.
I'd say this cloud is Cumulo Nimbus.
Didn't he discover America?
Penfold, shush. -
fiatlux-1 — 10 years ago(October 04, 2015 06:40 PM)
Agreed. A good portion of what Ro sees is the fault of the drug they gave her. Its a drug induced hallucination (and, possibly, some Satanic mojo too).
It was Satan all along. Guy was just a part of the hallucination; either from Satan himself OR more likely just who Ro's mind was naturally expecting to see!
In the novel, Ro
always
thinks its Guy! Her addled mind thinks she is at a costume party, and that Satan's leathery skin is Guy in a costume!
Right up until she sees Satan's yellow eyesthen has that moment we see in the film too where she panicsand they dope her up again with a drug-dusted pillow.
I'd say this cloud is Cumulo Nimbus.
Didn't he discover America?
Penfold, shush. -
lguandolo-24408 — 10 years ago(October 27, 2015 02:39 PM)
It's a psychological thriller, and it can be interpreted in a number of ways. I attributed the sequence of events to Rosemary becoming increasingly paranoid until she completely lost it and had a psychotic break. Her doctor was giving her tranquilizers and she quit taking them, so naturally the psychosis returned. I believe that if she had continued to take the medications and gotten herself out of that situation and away from those people (especially her husband), she would have been all right eventually. She could have married a normal man and had another (normal) baby.
But, and this is the great thing about these types of movies, what if Guy wasn't evil? Or the neighbors, for that matter? What if she had imagined the entire thing? I personally think she did; she read entirely too much and literally freaked herself out to the point of psychosis. Who among us hasn't Googled something about Satanism or witches and read obsessively about it until they became terrified and depressed? Those sort of things can just take a hold of us until we start to lose touch with reality ourselves. I also have a lot of experience with psychological issues as I see a doctor and take heavy psychiatric medications. Therefore, I was able to relate to Rosemary and the horror going on in her mind, and how very real it felt to her. -
karsul1 — 10 years ago(October 31, 2015 08:26 PM)
Did you read "Son of Rosemary?" It's the sequel written by Ira Levin. Without giving it away, I'll say you'd find it interesting given your theory. A lot of people didn't like it and called it kind of a cop-out but I thought it was pretty entertaining (although I'm one of those who find it extremely easy to suspend belief for the sake of entertainment). Give it a try, I'd love to hear what you think.
-
InherentlyYours — 10 years ago(March 04, 2016 06:27 PM)
If it wasn't Rosemary Baby, the great film it is, would we be interpreting it a number of ways? Did Polanski say it's psychosis, all in her mind, hallucinations, etc? If it was a TV film instead of the classic it is, would it be taken at face value?
-
InherentlyYours — 10 years ago(March 04, 2016 07:09 PM)
'I'm sure no woman back in the day would divorce their husband because of it'
How are you sure of it, back in that "day"? Are you very young, so you think the 1960's-70's is some surreal era? We do know you like the word "disgusting"
What's even more disgusting is that I'm sure the male audience would just have said the same thing.
How are you sure what the male audience would have said? You seem to have a disgusting sexist attitude towards men, based on your comments in general (on all boards) Maybe it was the home life you experienced, which makes you feel sure.