User reviews

Rosemary's Baby is one of my favourite films ever, still stands strong almost half a century later. I watch it time and time again and still notice new things.

When I seen there was a prequel made I gave it no notice, proper eye roll stuff. Why? Can't they just leave a classic as is?

Anyway! Was at a loss and put it in tonight, and I actually enjoyed it. The story line was good, I loved the Easter eggs of the original... its made me want to put on the OG again ha.

I think the low score for this is unjustified, I think you need to have seen the OG for the groundwork of this story to understand it. If watched as a stand alone it would seem abit meh.

So yeh pleasantly surprised... not a patch on OG but a welcomed reimagining using the original story and characters before beloved Rosmary moved in.

On that note. I urge anybody that hasn't.... please watch ROSEMARYS BABY like now!

Apartment 7A" is surprisingly a very strong film. The storyline stays closely aligned with the original, and the cinematography, both inside and outside the apartment, evokes strong memories of the original masterpiece.

The performances are outstanding, particularly from Dianne Wiest and Kevin McNally, who excel in their roles as the Castevets. The film features thoughtful nods to Rosemary's Baby throughout, and as a prequel, the plot is well-crafted and cohesive.

One of the highest compliments I can offer is that Apartment 7A left me eager to immediately revisit Rosemary's Baby. Together, they would make a fantastic double feature.

Director Natalie Erika James embarks on a mission to give us a prequel that can at least match Roman Polanski's 1968 classic, and the truth is that we're left with a film with a great leading lady, but one that falls a few steps short of achieving the milestone of matching the original.

It has good ideas at its core, especially the dreamlike moments of its protagonist that resemble that atmosphere of 1968, but as we get deeper into the story we lose the strength that would lead us to a more satisfying horror impact, and also taking into account that it plays quite a bit with references to Rosemary's Baby in several parts.

What it does excel at is in presenting us with a great protagonist who is allowed to shine in a consecrating way, a Julia Garner who makes that leap to demonstrate what a great actress she is and the star she becomes with each job. On this occasion, she takes on her character with all the elegance, talent and first-class charisma, she makes the film her own and in turn the film works on the strength that the actress delivers in her moments, to reach a final climax where she is totally consecrated as the star of the show. The actress manages to transmit this personal drama in a very forceful way, where one can highlight as a great strength the depth and personality of a character with whom you connect at all times.

When we get into the substance that the film offers us, it is here where we find the lowest points of the proposal, and that is that we are left with a script that although it clearly addresses personal drama, when it must reach the moment of terror it lacks the necessary intensity to give us symbolic moments or moments of more enjoyment that allow the film to stand out more strongly as an excellent horror film, its strength only allows it to be a correct, but passive way of confronting sects, the devil and a prequel to a classic of the genre.

In any case, Apartment 7A works as a decent movie that doesn't waste time, largely due to its protagonist and a rather interesting direction. It may fall short in intentions and in more challenging ideas, but it fulfills its role as a movie that goes straight to platforms and without greater ambitions than to provide a moment of entertainment and that honestly does achieve this in several passages where it intelligently provides an ending to the journey that is the most rewarding of the entire film.

"Apartment 7A" attempts to dive into the realm of psychological horror, but ultimately falls short when compared to Roman Polanski's masterful "Rosemary's Baby." While Polanski's film is a rich tapestry of metaphor and symbolism, exploring themes of paranoia, trust, and the loss of autonomy, "Apartment 7A" presents its narrative in a painfully literal manner. The characters come off as caricatures rather than fully realized individuals, stripping the work of the nuance that made "Rosemary's Baby" an enduring classic. Where Polanski artfully builds tension and unease through subtlety, the newer film relies on predictable tropes and shallow execution, failing to capture the essence of true horror. Overall, "Apartment 7A" serves as a stark reminder of how essential depth and artistry are in the genre, drawing a sharp contrast with Polanski's epic creation that continues to resonate on multiple levels.

In 1965, the aspiring dancer Theresa "Terry" Gionoffrio (Julia Garner) moves from Nebraska to New York City expecting to win fame and fortune. However, during the rehearsal of a play, she breaks her ankle and falls in disgrace in the artistic environment. When she goes to the audition of the play "The Pale Crook", she is humiliated by the producer Alan Marchand (Jim Sturgess). Terry follows him to beg another chance and when he arrives at his apartment building, the Bramford, she feels sick and throws up. The old couple Minnie Castevet (Dianne Wiest) and Roman Castevet (Kevin McNally) help her on the street and bring her home. They do not have children and offer the apartment 7A that is empty to Terry. She moves from the house of her friend Annie Leung (Marli Siu) to the apartment at the Bramford. Soon her life progresses but she feels that there is something evil in the Bramsford.

"Apartment 7A" (2024) is a great prequel to Roman Polanski's masterpiece "Rosemary's Baby" (1968). The atmospheric plot is creepy, and Julia Garner has a great performance in the role of an ambitious young woman that intends to be successful in New York City dancing, but stumbles upon worshipers of the devil. The viewer will certainly feel sorry for the fate of Terry and there is a cliffhanger for the film by Roman Polanski. Unfortunately, it took more than fifty years to make and release this prequel. Now I will revisit "Rosemary's Baby" again to remember details from this unforgettable movie. My vote is seven.

Title (Brazil): "Apartamento 7A" ("Apartment 7A")

It is inspired by the novel Rosemary's Baby, but I have not read it, and it's been too many years since I last saw the movie, thus I neither noticed nor was I able to make any connections.

The directing was decent, there was some nice cinematography and I found Julia Garner to be rather good. Unfortunately the script is actually pretty bad at times, uneven is how I would describe it, and most of the supporting cast was, let's just say, not excellent. Dianne Wiest's character in particular, Minnie, was both poorly written and surprisingly poorly acted. One of the dancers, who was the movie's bully, was written in such an over-the-top and silly fashion, it was impossible to take seriously. I really liked the ending though, which significantly elevated my experience. I just wished the rest of the film was more interesting and consistent in tone.

Do you know how many horror movies introduce a character at some point, whose whole reason of existence is to deliver exposition? Well, the exposition lady in this movie was one of the worst and most unnecessary examples I can think of. It tries to be a serious horror film and build up a lot of tension, and then something like that happens, which makes you roll your eyes. There were elements of this film I appreciated quite a bit, so I do recommend it, even if rather lukewarmly. Unfortunately, parts of the movie are not on par with its best moments, to say the least.

This is not enough of a movie to the name, Rosemary baby is probably the best horror movie of all time, this movie is good but is not trying enough.

Its an interesting movie to watch and Garner is an incredible actress and everyone knows that, but the story and the distinct horror presented in here is not solid enough and that's a shame because this movie looks very good.

The other cast does an increible job too, it really feels like a proper prequel of RB but its lacking the suspense, its s shame really it should have been better than this

Its never going to be in the same level as the original but its ok, that's obvious and expected, this was a good try.

I get that there are quite a few fans of the original (if you can call it that since this is a prequel), I understand that stories could have been tied better... But, you know what? This is a good movie. The main character is likeable, smart, and relatable. The story is interesting and well-paced. There are some creepy characters but they never felt cartoonish. I enjoyed it a lot and it's one of the best horror movies of 2024.

By now you probably know the story and even how it ends, but try to enjoy this movie as a stand-alone. Try not to bother yourself "nobody asked for this, originality is dead", watch it and you just might like it.

Okay. So I liked the period part of this.

And did I remember before I started watching this that it was a prequel to Ira Levin's novel/Roman Polanski's film? No. Didn't dawn on me until I said to myself, "Self, there's Dianne Wiest! And she's doing a Ruth Gordon impression? Oh, duh. This is that Rosemary's Baby cash grab that was put into production because Satanic pregnancies are all the rage in this post-Dobbs landscape." I think this is the 8th devil fetus movie this year alone. But here we are.

I like Dianne Wiest. I don't think Julie Garner was horrible. But this seemed more like a rehash of the Mia Farrow classic - with some aspects a scene-for-scene matchup. Yeah, it's with a single unwed mom set in the pre-Roe era. I mean that is the film's entire premise and reason for existing.

But the film doesn't expand on the Leviniverse beyond saying that things at the Bramford go back before the Woodhouses moved in.

Also, I don't get why they didn't just get Josh Groban for the Josh Groban guy. The did-get guy was easy to look at but the entire time I couldn't stop thinking he was supposed to be Josh Groban.

The movie is watchable. Nothing groundbreaking, nothing must-see, nothing revelatory narrative-wise. It's fine. I did find the ending somewhat pleasant while odd but entirely foreseeable.

"I found this film to be a perfect prequel to Rosemary's Baby. It was artistically crafted and beautifully shot, with an outstanding cast. I've been a fan of Julia Garner since Ozark-she delivers a phenomenal performance here. I also adore Dianne Wiest (The Lost Boys, Parenthood), and Jim Sturgess (Across the Universe, 24) shines as well. The film is directed by Natalie Erika James, who masterfully sets the tone with her keen eye for detail.

The story follows Terry Gionoffrio, a young woman dreaming of fame and fortune in New York City. After suffering an injury, she's taken in by an older, wealthy couple at their home in Bramford. When an unexpected opportunity for stardom arises, it seems like all her dreams are coming true. But as unsettling events unfold, Terry begins to question the sacrifices she's making for her career-discovering that something sinister lurks not just in Apartment 7A, but in the Bramford itself."

I'm not mad about this. Probably because I'm not a fan of the original and to me, Julia Garner is a much better actress than Mia Farrow, so it was a delight to follow her journey. And of course Diane Wiest is always superb. You can see how much she relishes this role. The visuals were great, and I can't quite decide what hits harder - Terry's Liza Minelli cut or Satan's whole bedazzled look.

I don't understand why everyone keeps saying that it's the same movie as the original... Like, how is it the same? The basic premise of woman getting pregnant by a sinister force is the same, sure. But the lead character acts differently, and correct me if I'm wrong - and I might be because I've only seen the original once and I didn't like it - but Mia Farrow only found out what she gave birth to at the very end. And Terry got wise to things much faster and... well, spoilers aside, the story does not unravel in the same way in Apartment 7A.

Why make a "prequel" to the really scary and great movie classic "Rosemary's Baby" when you tell everyone right from the start it is the same as the original???

"Rosemary wasn't the first"

MEGA-DOUBLE-FACEPALM!!!

(because one mega-facepalm doesn't cut it in this case)

So it is the same story all over again but this time made by a director you have never heard of before (for good reason) instead of a very troubled genius like Polanski.

When the whole point of this totally unnecessary remake was to bore you until you can't take it anymore, they have succeeded.

But even if you didn't know exactly what will happen - this clunker is really bad.

Bad acting, an absolute non-sensical script and sooo tedious.

Nothing of interest happens there - they even botched the ending.

Hollywood clearly has run out of ideas and talented filmmakers long ago.

This is a remake (or prequel) nobody wanted or needed, made by "filmmakers" (and I use this term very lightly in their cases) nobody wants or needs.

Do not waste your time because - unless you need a good sleeping pill.

As that it works wonders and it will put you down in just a few minutes!

But if you dare to watch it all you will surely get an entry in the Guinness Book of Records for "Most facepalms ever made while watching a really bad movie"

Be warned of the curse of Rosemary's boring baby.

This movie borrows heavily from the plot of 'Rosemary's Baby' (1968), with Julia Garner's character, Terry, having both the look and feel of Mia Farrow. Diane Wiest does a carbon copy rendition of Ruth Gordon's Minnie Castevet. It's a shame that writers seem to be running out of ideas. Either that, or they are shamelessly trying to recreate the success of these early films in order to gain a quick buck. The problem with this formula is that Natalie Erika James is only half the director that Roman Polanski was. Still, the acting was captivating enough to keep me watching the entire 1 hour and 45 minutes.

Serving as a prequel to Rosemary's Baby, Apartment 7A is an unnecessary outing that does create intrigue due to its connection to the 1968 horror classic but is unable to sustain it for long despite featuring a similar premise. Slow, boring & forgettable for the most part, the only element that works in its favour is the neat production design and although the cast tries to capture the nuances of the reprising characters, the performances aren't compelling enough. It is devoid of the escalating paranoia that the original captured so well, is tediously paced from start to finish, and goes full cringe in its final moments to finish as yet another dull, derivative & disappointing attempt at reviving an existing classic.

This film is a perfect example of why writers should stick to writing and directors should focus on directing. The script is a mess-poorly structured, with weak character development and dialogue that falls flat. It's clear the writer lacked the discipline to refine their ideas into a coherent narrative, leaving us with a jumble of disconnected scenes and confusing plot points. The result is a story that feels both bloated and underdeveloped, failing to engage or deliver any emotional depth.

Unfortunately, the direction is just as flawed. The film's pacing is all over the place, with scenes dragging on far too long, while crucial moments are rushed and poorly executed. The visuals are uninspired, with awkward camera angles and a lack of attention to detail that betrays the director's inexperience. Worse still, the actors seem lost, offering uneven performances that suggest they received little guidance on how to inhabit their roles or bring the weak script to life.

The fact that the same person wrote and directed this film is painfully obvious, as it suffers from the kind of tunnel vision that occurs when no one is there to challenge poor creative decisions. The lack of collaboration between writer and director, which could have brought balance and perspective, instead results in a project that is both poorly written and incompetently directed. It stands as a cautionary tale for anyone who thinks they can handle both roles without sacrificing quality.

This movie was a stunning visual display with a deeper look into the background surrounding how young women were drawn into the apartment's dynamics and what sets them up for the priming with consideration to the owners' end goals. It's shocking, stunning and heart breaking but gives a great cinematic experience that is thoroughly enjoyable if you are someone who finds mystery and suspense appealing along with delvings of the occult. I liked that it had great cinematic display for the time period portrayed and that it kept with the 60s theme rather than becoming a remake that takes place in modernity and taking away from the aspects that made the movie's sequences so thrilling.

A dancer has an accident and her wounded leg impaires her. Broke, she is taking under their wing by an old couple. She is slowly offered a lot and the price is being mother to Satan s child.

As a standalone has an obvious ridiculous fault: no meaningful and expressive soundtrack though it has long musical scenes. Is it not silly? And lazy?

As a prequal to Rosemary s Baby, it falls short in art of revealing the sinister. The evil.

Apartment 7A can be seen, it is not a complete failure, but it is mediocre at best. For those who have seen Polanski s Rosemary, this movie is as insipid as it can be.

Apartment 7A is a prequel to the 1968 horror classic Rosemary's Baby with Mia Farrow. Not a bad prequel but you would expect from a movie that is 56 years younger that the quality would be better, certainly considering the advanced technology we have now. But it wasn't the case, which I find a bit disappointing. But like said before it's not a bad movie, I was just expecting more horror. Julia Garner proves again she's a good actress, not the most attractive woman but certainly a good performer. The rest of the cast was good as well. I guess the lower ratings this movie gets is of people that were expecting too much of it. A faster pace and lesser long duration, combined with more horror could have changed the ratings.

Prior to this review, I hadn't seen Rosemary's Baby (1968) and this provided the perfect opportunity for me to watch that movie and now Rosemary's Baby (1968) is among my top 10 favorite horror movies of all time. Unfortunately, I had to also watch the made-for-television sequel that no one talks about and it was horrible. So I just finished watching Apartment 7A (2024) a hour ago and it was a decent enough prequel to the original movie.

Positives for Apartment 7A (2024): The movie is competently shot well and it looks way better than that thing from 1976. I also liked the performances from the cast particularly Julia Garner as Terry Gionoffrio, Dianne Wiest as Minnie Castevet and Kevin McNally as Roman Castevet. The costume design are very good and look pretty accurate to the 1960s. The dancing sequence are shot very well with some great choreography. And finally, there is a decent attempt to build up some horror throughout the runtime.

Negatives for Apartment 7A (2024): There is any reason for this prequel to exist aside from Paramount wanted to use the IPs in their catalog. Honestly, Rosemary's Baby (1968) should've never been turned into a franchise and this movie confers that. This movie also acts like a soft remake of Rosemarys Baby (1968) just without Rosemary Woodhouse as the main character. And finally, the movie is very predictable with its plot and I saw the ending coming from a mile away.

Overall, Apartment 7A (2024) is a decent enough prequel to a horror classic, but it also doesn't justify its reason for existing in the first place. So if you are curious to see what happens before the original 1968 movie, then give it a watch.