Linbeymusol Wonderful character development!

WillSushyMedia This movie was so-so. It had it's moments, but wasn't the greatest.

filippaberry84 I think this is a new genre that they're all sort of working their way through it and haven't got all the kinks worked out yet but it's a genre that works for me.

Skyler Great movie. Not sure what people expected but I found it highly entertaining.

Red-Barracuda It probably goes without saying but Rosemary's Baby was a film that did not need a sequel. It ends on a tense yet perfect note, to elaborate further just seems misguided. But this is the movies and this is the way things go. I am sure that the primer for this particular sequel was the massive success of The Omen which was released the same year as this one. It seems likely that some executives somewhere thought that a cash-in follow-up to Rosemary's baby would be just the ticket and while I think it was a bad idea overall to make such a film, there is nevertheless some potential for it being enjoyable if it's made with a bit of care and thought. That's the problem though because Look What's Happened to Rosemary's Baby is a movie that has not been made with any care or consideration whatsoever.It is a TV movie. But this isn't any kind of excuse because I have seen several television films from the period and have found the standard to have been pretty good overall. The main problem is that it simply has a badly written screenplay. At the start Rosemary and son Adrian run away from the satanic cult. She re-locates somewhere in the Midwest but is soon removed from the scene by supernatural powers when she is taken away on a strange driver-less bus. Her son is then taken under the wing of a mysterious woman. We fast-forward in time and encounter the now adult Adrian who is now visited by the Satanists who want to see if they can unleash the evil within him.To be honest, it's an awkwardly told story that has little focus. It's broken up into three named chapters and despite this sounding like a good idea; it's only interesting on paper and doesn't really add anything. Rosemary herself is taken out the film early on and we then focus on her son but he isn't really a very interesting character, especially when you consider he is meant to be the son of Satan. He mopes around a lot and doesn't in truth do much; while I failed to understand why the plot-line was designed to not take full advantage of him being the Devil's son instead of making him a reluctant victim who the cultists are quite prepared to kill. This film should have had him out there causing perturbation and despair! He occasionally lets his powers loose, although he doesn't seem aware of them and they don't amount to much more than glowing eyes and super-strength. He even kills a couple of kids when he is a boy, although this incident is dealt with like it's a minor incident of little importance! Also of note is a bizarre scene later on where the Satanists involve Adrian in some ceremony where he is whitened up like a mime artist. I couldn't work out the point of this scene but it was a little bit memorable at the very least.The only cast member to return is Ruth Gordon as Minnie Castevet and she definitely adds a bit of class to proceedings. But every other character is replaced with a new actor. It's not really too surprising when you consider the TV budget though. It's overall a film that looks really bad when compared to the original movie. But, unfortunately, even as a standalone production this one is pretty bad as well.

Michael_Elliott Look What's Happened to Rosemary's Baby (1976) BOMB (out of 4) It's funny to think that one of the most popular films ever made has a sequel yet very few know about it and even lesser actually remember it. I'm really not sure what type of drugs were being passed around at Paramount when this film got the green light but let's hope those taking eventually recovered. The now adult Adrian (Stephen McHattie) is having growing pains as he keeps getting the urges to do evil things. Little does he know the truth behind his birth but soon his real dad, Satan of course, is getting ready to give him full control of his powers. This made-for-TV flick is bad, really bad but I guess that happens when you have Patty Duke taking over for Mia Farrow. This film has very little real connections to Polanski's classic so it's really unfair to compare the two as both films were obviously created for different reasons. Even when you don't compare this thing to the Polanski movie you're still left with something truly horrid and I still can't believe they even attempted something like this, although I'm going to guess THE OMEN being a big hit helped push this movie along. We have Ruth Gordon back in her role from the previous movie but Ray Milland takes over as her husband and we even have Broderick Crawford in a small role. It's a shame so many talented people put their name on this thing but I guess we can't blame them too much for trying to make a living. Director O'Steen, who edited the original movie, really doesn't have too much to work with as the screenplay offers up on bad scene after another and the level of dumbness just grows worse and worse as the movie goes along. The entire idea of this guy being split to do good or evil is nothing original and the way it plays out here is just extremely lame and boring. Within fifteen-minutes I started to grow tired and the bad pacing didn't help but next eighty-minutes. The screenplay follows one cliché after another and one really has to ask what any of it was suppose to mean. The film changes small items that were put in place by the first film but the entire third act is just mind-blowingly stupid. The performances really aren't anything better as both Gordon and Milland seem bored out of their minds and McHattie just has nothing in the lead. Even worse is Duke who really stinks up the scenes she's in as she overacts something terrible. This film has slipped into obscurity and I'm sure it will never be rescued from it, which is understandable. I would like to hear or read something as to what the producer's were thinking when they made this thing but I'm sure everyone connected to this thing would rather just pretend it never happened.

dbdumonteil It was a foolish idea to make a sequel to a film which even today (mainly today) remains the best horror movie ever done.Patty Duke who was a wunderkind when she was a child (remember "the miracle worker")was given a poor part and she was sadly unsupported by the rest of the cast (if my memory serves me well,only Ruth Gordon remained from the original cast).In order to give this dud a "biblical" feel ,the story is divided into "books" (the book of Rosemary;the book of Adrian ;the book of Andrew).The flick begins with the impressive last lines of Polanski's work (You want me to be HIs mother?/Aren't you His mother?) You do not need anything else when you've seen the 1968 film.Ira Levin ,who had nothing to do with this made-for-TV sequel,wrote in 1999 "son of Rosemary" which was not as successful as his first novel:the conclusion ,they say,has an "hidden " meaning based on a pun.I've been trying to solve it for months ,to no avail..Anyway Levin should not have written it in the first place.I finally found it out:nothing to get hung about.

triple8 I usually seek to find good in movies, even the bad ones.Unfortunately this movie is one where I fail miserably-and the fact that there's barely one positive review on this board shows many IMDb reviewers share my pain.I don't usually watch sequels but I just had to see this since I love "Rosemary's Baby" so much. What a mistake that was. It simply reaffirms my belief in the fact that most sequels are lousy-though thankfully, very few are as bad as this. In fact in my mind this isn't even really a sequel, it's a satire on how bad a sequel can be. Movie recommended very highly for not viewing-at any time-ever.