Sharon's Baby

This modest popcorn thriller from Britain boasts a solid performance from that fine actress and world-class beauty Joan Collins as a former stripper who marries Italian money and ends up on easy street, London style – or so she thinks. Unfortunately her firstborn turns out to be possessed by the spirit of a demonic nightclub clown whose advances she spurned shortly before her marriage. Even before the child is brought home from the hospital he has already drawn blood from an attack on his mother. The baby's diabolical screams are technically enhanced with reverb and echo effects, as are those of his victims. Toward the end there is a strong dream sequence in which Collins, under the influence of a sedative, makes her way through her house with space, time and the relationship of sounds to their source imaginatively distorted. Eileen Atkins plays, of all things, an Italian nun who also happens to be the leading lady's sister-in-law. She doesn't quite get the accent and in general seems ill-suited to the role. The English actor Ralph Bates as the Italian husband is equally out of place. Donald Pleasence does better in his supporting role as the doctor who attends to the troublesome infant as does Hilary Mason, so memorable as the blind psychic in "Don't Look Now," as the no-nonsense nanny. The actual baby looks ordinary and does nothing but smile or cry as all babies do, but through editing tricks and cleverly applied sound effects we believe he is indeed evil. Shot in vivid color and with an undertone of urban sleaziness, it's scary, sometimes silly and somewhat naughty fun.

This movie is known as 'Sharon's Baby', aka 'The Monster: I Don't Want to Be Born', and aka 'Devil Within Her'. Starring Joan Collins, Ralph Bates, Donald Pleasence and Eileen Atkins. Lucy Carlesi is played by Joan Collins. Lucy's baby is somehow possessed by the dwarf Hercules (George Claydon) that she once worked with. (The lead character is LUCY not Sharon... so why is this film aka 'Sharon's Baby'? Maybe they changed her name from Sharon to Lucy??? At any rate, the film is fairly interesting even though a bit corny.)

I liked this film better than I anticipated - I knew it was going to be a bit on the corny side (and it is) but not so cornball that I couldn't enjoy it. The movie grabbed me from the start - I had to suspend my beliefs in order to watch this movie but that is true with quite a few movies.

This movie is NOT the quality of Rosemary's Baby but it is entertaining.... kept me interested from start to finish. :D 6.5/10

Well now, this really is a sad effort falling between the enviable status of an honest-to-god bad movie watchable for laughs and a passable horror flick. Joan Collins is an ex-stripper who is cursed by a horny dwalf (little people are in league with the devil presumably) and goes on to have a baby with her Italian husband. Now there are rare treats to be had in this film to give it its due. First of them is seeing Joan Collins performing an erotic dance at her strip club. I've never actually been to such a club and its fairly obvious to the viewer that Joan hasn't either. Her dance is so entirely unerotic and daft as to serve as a warning that what is to follow will be of the lowest possible quality. Of course no strip club is complete without a sweaty dwalf dressed as a jester or in a top hat. The dwalf in question rants about her having a baby by the devil and lo and behold she does have a freaky child. The only problem is that the baby shown is entirely normal looking. All devilish action happening off screen and then cutting back to the decidedly unmenacing kid. Rosemarys baby and The Omen both showed that kids can be quite scary. This film though decides not to give the child ungodly mental powers, or spiritual domination as its forte instead relying on it having immense physical strength. That's right, this little tyke will push you into lakes, scratch your face etc. All of this is incredibly silly to start with but cutting from Collins leaning into the crib to her with a scratch on her face doesn't exactly create fear. The means by which the baby inflicts its reign of chubby terror on the cast is daft, nonsensical and entirely unscary. Except perhaps for the workman who gets a mouse put in his cup of tea because that was about the only act of terror that the child could conceivably achieve on its own. Especially silly is the suggestion that it keeps clawing people, since its tiny fingers are shown several times and its quite clear it has normal little fingers with no claws just tiny baby fingernails. There are more treats though, especially for anyone who lives in London where it is set. The curiosity value of seeing police on the streets, working telephone boxes, parking spaces and other symbols of the past might just be enough to keep you watching. I was also fascinated by Joans non-acting friend who seems unable to utter a single line without gesturing wildly and adding "darling" to it. In the finale an exorcism is performed by the husbands sister who happens to be a penguin (nun) however she seems to have forgotten several ingredients. A book, bell, candle, feasible latin and a priest would surely have helped. Luckily this doesn't seem to be a problem, even Satan seems keen to be out of the film, and all ends well. Unfortunately you may be thinking that this is a watchable if naff horror film but I've neglected to mention the bits that will put any sane viewer off. A good portion of the film has the same loud sound effect of a baby screaming and crying through it, rendering it extremely irritating. I personally ended up with a thumping headache after forcing myself to watch it to the bitter end. Added to this every sound effect, especially telephones, make twice as much noise as they should causing you to constantly adjust the sound. To cap it all the title doesn't even make sense and has no relevance to the story presented. Unless seeing Joan Collins groped by a dwalf is high on your must-see list then this film offers nothing other than a headache and a laugh at some totally inept scripting and a nun with all the Italian authenticity of the Mario brothers.

I DON'T WANT TO BE BORN

(USA: The Devil Within Her)

Aspect ratio: 1.85:1

Sound format: Mono

A nightclub stripper (Joan Collins) is cursed by a dwarf (George Claydon) whose attentions she spurned, and she later gives birth to a murderous baby possessed by a demonic spirit.

Clearly inspired by the contemporary vogue for satanic shockers, this slapdash concoction - memorably dismissed by UK journalist Nigel Burrell as a 'crapulous farrago'! - was thrown together by Hungarian director Peter Sasdy, previously responsible for such superior offerings as "Taste the Blood of Dracula" (1969), "Countess Dracula" (1970) and "Hands of the Ripper" (1971). Here, his contempt for the material is obvious in the weak storyline, feeble horror scenes and lackluster staging, and his concessions to the exploitation marketplace (strippers at work, a gory decapitation, etc.) are shoehorned into proceedings with reckless abandon.

Quite apart from its ridiculous premise (unlike the mutant creature in Larry Cohen's similarly-styled IT'S ALIVE, sweet little babies simply aren't frightening, no matter how much filmmakers try to make them seem otherwise!), the movie is further stymied by indifferent performances and half-baked characterizations: Collins runs the gamut from A to B and back again, Donald Pleasence provides little more than marquee value as Collins' doctor, and Ralph Bates (playing the heroine's husband) is a blank slate throughout. Hilary Mason - the blind lady in DON'T LOOK NOW (1973) - plays the wary housekeeper, and Eileen Atkins is Bates' sister, a nun who performs the commercially-dictated climactic exorcism. Support is offered by Caroline Munro as a fellow stripper (though she looks far too glamorous to be playing such a lowbrow Cockney strumpet!) and Euro-favorite John Steiner as one of Collins' former boyfriends. There's enough campery to entertain die-hard fans, but the sloppy production values and leaden pace will certainly limit the film's appeal to anyone else.

Oh, and watch out for abbreviated prints: If you don't see the head come off in the aforementioned decapitation sequence, you're viewing a censored version...

A woman (Joan Collins) gives birth to a baby, but this is no ordinary little tyke. The child is seemingly possessed by the spirit of a freaky, sexual dwarf (George Claydon) whom the mother once spurned. From director Peter Sasdy, who made "Countess Dracula" (1971) and "Hands of the Ripper" (also 1971).

First, let me absolutely say that I love this film being retitled "Sharon's Baby". The original title, "Devil Within Her", is so much better, and the new title just sounds like a cheesy knockoff of "Rosemary's Baby"... which, of course, is a film it could never live up to. Sounds like the sort of new title that would get it played at sleazy drive-ins or theaters on 42nd Street.

The soundtrack is awesome. Not unlike Goblin's work in Italian films, it seems that the musicians here were going for the same style. The only problem is that this style of music only works in Italian films... and sounds completely silly in British or American works. I loved it, but I can imagine the average person wondering what the heck is going on.

Horror fans will love seeing Donald Pleasence, who has far too small of a role as Dr. Finch. Maybe he did not read the script, or maybe it sounded better on paper than it turned out on film, but I am glad he signed on for this.

At the time of release, Andrew Nickolds wrote that he film was "derivative and disastrous in every respect: a poor idea... an abominable screenplay by Stanley Price... ludicrous acting... and worst of all, Sasdy's direction. Almost every foot of film not concerned with the baby is travelogue at its most banal – extraneous shots of Westminster and Oxford Street, plugs for Fortnum & Mason and Holiday Inns. Completing this sorry tale of rip-off is borrowing from The Exorcist... and any number of details from Amicus, Hammer and Swinging London horrors. Give it a wide berth." Wow, Andrew, harsh!

Luckily, the film has since enjoyed its place as a cult camp favorite, because really, who besides Nickolds was taking it that seriously?