I Move My Lips While Thinking Rosemary's Baby

News of NBC'southward miniseries remake of Rosemary's Baby, starring Zoe Saldana, and featuring—sigh—a black-clad coven, was this purist's nightmare. Why, the refrain goes, remake something that was already so good to begin with? (Run into also: Carrie.) Specially when in that location are plenty of bombs out there—like Dune or Gigli—practically begging to exist transformed? Merely in pondering why Hollywood so often attempts to fix unbroken things, I hit upon what might be a palatable explanation for this trend: an artist, understandably, wants to work from a pristine piece of marble, or sketch from a masterpiece, or restage a wonderful play. In brusque, the original piece of work itself must be of merit to inspire creative effort (this means Gigli'southward out). In this case, nosotros so often remember of the 1969 film version, directed by Roman Polanski, as the embryonic material, but in fact information technology is the luminescence of Ira Levin's novel Rosemary's Baby, published in 1967, that keeps people returning to the story.

Suspense novelist and playwright Ira Levin's groundwork could easily be summed up as "nice Jewish male child from New York": Manhattan-born, Horace Mann-educated, New York University graduate. Later finishing college in 1950, Levin took a job writing scripts for army training films, and he retains the tight, spare mode required for that form in his novels. His debut, A Buss for Dying, nigh a man who tries to murder his way up the social ladder, was published in 1953, but information technology was Rosemary's Baby that earned him instant éclat. The story, written with niggling narrative ataxia (and then you can ameliorate hear your heart as it begins to race), goes similar this: a nice young couple living in New York City named the Woodhouses move into a storied apartment building and befriend their quirky, elderly neighbors, the Castavets. Roman Castavet, who claims a long history in show business organisation, manages to most impress Guy Woodhouse, who is an player, and the fellow begins spending late nights with the people his wife Rosemary intuits might be interim as "surrogate parents." Information technology's Rosemary who dominates the narrative, though—sweet, simple, and utterly devoted to the domestic sphere, Rosemary spends her days redecorating their new place and fretting over Guy's frequently inscrutable behavior, which she chalks up to artistic egomania. Levin revisits Her marital problems are put on the back burner, though, when she discovers she'south pregnant. That the infant isn't what nosotros call "healthy" is probably something I don't need to preface with "spoiler alert!"  The story of Rosemary and Guy is often seen equally an allegory for the pitfalls of pursuing surface perfection. This is a common theme for Levin, virtually notably revisited in his volume The Stepford Wives, besides, fabricated into a movie. Inspired by the tony, homogenous suburb of Wilton, Connecticut, the book tells the story of a couple with two children who abandon the city for quieter, more bucolic environment, and find themselves in an eerie village where large-breasted wives seem to adore vacuuming and waxing the floors.  This, naturally, is more disturbing to Joanna, the female half of the Eberharts and a card-carrying women's libber, than it is to her husband, Walter.  Like Rosemary before her, Joanna begins to selection at the edges of her life, fearing that something perfidious lurks beneath the advisedly papered wall. And like Rosemary before her, she finds herself questioning everything she thought she knew well, including her sanity, the forcefulness of her marriage, and the virtue of the American Dream.

Considering the original flick version of Rosemary's Infant follows the volume so conscientiously—Levin himself called it "perchance the most faithful film accommodation e'er fabricated"—the feel of reading the novel for 1 familiar with the motion picture is a bit like getting to know a fond acquaintance on a deeper level. All the plot pivots, lines of dialogue, and historical signposts (the Pope'south famous 1967 visit to New York, for example) are the same in both. Polanski fifty-fifty transferred Levin's sly cocky-referential humor into the movie. For example, in the novel, Levin has Guy Woodhouse bitterly reading the theater reviews, including one for Drat! The Cat!, which happened to be a existent Broadway bear witness written by Levin himself. In the film, Polanski cheekily casts the actress Victoria Vetri to play an early victim of the Castavets, and has Mia Farrow mistake the young adult female for her real self during a scene in the building's basement. (At that place is besides a reference to the Dakota in the volume—"Go to the Dakota… if yous're dead attack nineteenth-century splendor!" a friend tells them—simply as to whether that's a meta-joke, I accept no thought.)

But thank you to the expansive, malleable quality of literature, the issues only coyly referenced in the film—Rosemary'south lapsed Catholicism, Guy's increasing remoteness, and her later ambiguity toward her demonic offspring—are explored in greater item, and with aplomb on Levin'due south part. He is truly, equally Stephen Rex one time dubbed him, "the Swiss watchmaker of the suspense novel" in that a close reader can see the meticulous, almost algorithmic precision of his plotting, and the fashion reality—or is information technology Rosemary's sanity?—falls away piece by miniscule piece. The way he has Rosemary happily gush at her hubby's lying prowess on page four, for example, and then, after he rapes her while she's passed out, await back and wonder if peradventure this talent had been a warning sign she had overlooked. "He was an actor; could anyone know when an player was true and not interim?" The mode the ranting of an enraged Minnie Castavet become part of the fabric of Rosemary's dream, woven into the usual Freudian 24-hour interval residue. The inkling, which is the shrieking request for someone "young, good for you, and not a virgin," is successfully planted, but because information technology swirls within memories of Rosemary'due south Cosmic girlhood, nosotros are not disturbed that she doesn't seem to take note of the harbinger, as we oftentimes are in works of horror. "Why doesn't she but telephone call the police force?" we recall in exasperation. "Why is she running up the stairs equally opposed to out the front door?" Only here, we recognize that Rosemary is a frog in a pot of h2o that is being oh so slowly brought to a boil. Don't we all dream foreign, inexplicable, sometimes dark and shameful things? And don't we all shrug off our romantic problems, and our neighbors' idiosyncrasies, and anything that may look irregular for the sake of disarming ourselves that reality is knowable, and that existence itself is a safe enterprise?

It is Polanski's recognition of and adherence to Levin'due south genius of timing and subtlety that makes the 1969 version such a archetype. Polanski himself, though a very gifted filmmaker, does not have perfect suspense pitch, equally is evident in the occasionally laughable (though however lovable) The Tenant. Miniseries director Agnieszka Holland (Europa Europa, The Secret Garden) doesn't accept that sixth sense either—maybe information technology'south a Shine thing—and when she succumbs to the temptation to be florid and utilize stock horror ideas in this "reimagining" of Levin's story, she fails nearly spectacularly. To approach this as a "reimagining" (her word) rather a direct remake was a skillful idea—given that we all know the story and its conclusion by now, the surprises have to come in the manner and not in the denouement, which information technology would be sacrilege to modify. (Roughly the equivalent, I would say, of making a film version of Moby Dick that ends with the coiffure of the Pequod feasting on whale burgers.) Then Kingdom of the netherlands makes a serial of calculated changes to the story on the spectrum from faintly suggestive to obvious and heavy-handed. Unfortunately, just a scattering of these are well executed, namely Rosemary's having suffered a previous miscarriage, the couple's movement to Paris, the tragic fate of the previous tenants of their flat, the is-it-homosexual-or-is-information technology-merely-French way that Castavet mere is always touching Rosemary's, or commenting on her ovulation wheel, or kissing her on the oral fissure. There are a few tiny flashes of genius, as well, namely a shot of Rosemary and Guy having a moment in front of a painting of a swaddled baby, suspended on a black canvass. Ultimately, though, the vast majority of her changes are missteps, particularly those that involve blood, organs, and showing the face of the actual devil, blueish eyes flashing, in flagrante delicto. The success of Levin'due south initial idea—woman slowly realizes she is conveying Satan'due south offspring—is its noticeable absence of gore and monsters. It counter intuits our expectations by making the threat invisible, or at least benign in advent. In another of Levin's books, The Boys from Brazil, about Josef Mengele'south plot to clone Hitler, Nazi hunter Yakov Lieberman laments, "Just once, I'd like to encounter a monster who looks like a monster." Holland's biggest mistake is that she showed u.s.a. the monster, and he looked like a cartoon.

The final, and most inescapable, flaw of the miniseries is the casting. Zoe Saldana is vibrant on-screen, the Castavets are feh, merely Guy Woodhouse is inexcusable. John Casavettes, who played the character in the Polanski version, was dynamic, slightly awkward, and temperamental; he wore his professional person angst and his ambition on his confront. Patrick J. Adams is an utter milquetoast, and everything he does and says is unbelievable merely considering 1 can't envision a desirous thought passing through his encephalon. Want, specially Guy's, is immensely important to the graphic symbol, and to the story as a whole; without Guy's desire for power, for recognition, for financial and critical success, he would never be vulnerable to the Castavets' seduction, and the whole structure falls apart. In this story, equally in many of the tales in Levin's oeuvre, the male effigy comes to believe not only radical theologian Thomas J. J. Altizer'south claim that "God is Expressionless," an esoteric theory of Christianity which figures prominently into Rosemary's Baby, but that he himself deserve to take the place that He has vacated. His needs—for a book deal, a good role to jumpstart a floundering career—come before the needs of anyone else. Mayhap this prophylactic and horrible casting pick—of a conventionally bonny histrion (if skinny is your thing)—is really a part of that same cultural disability to tolerate subtlety. Now, our devils swallow beating hearts, and our love interests have well-defined cheekbones. The banality of evil, indeed.

✖

The American Reader stopped publishing in 2015.
This is a living archive of our piece of work.

I Move My Lips While Thinking Rosemary's Baby

Source: https://theamericanreader.com/the-banality-of-evil-rosemarys-baby-the-miniseries/

Share this post