1974 *** 1/2I like giving a half star. It makes it seem like I really thought about things.
I also like this image. Can we please get an "It's Alive Movable Baby Puppet" for a Halloween costume? Please?
The movie? Eh, I liked it okay. For one thing, Octo keeps picking dead baby movies. I mean, I hope it's not too much of a spoiler to let you know that although "It's Alive" in the beginning, it's dead by the end. The whole movie was schlock until this climactic scene, which actually almost made me cry. Monster baby turns out to just be a scared tyke who needs Daddy. John P. Ryan, who plays father Frank Davies, breaks down in tears as he realizes he's shot his very own little baby boy.
Oh, it was awful, just awful. I know evil babies was supposed to be our theme, but I really don't know if I can take much more of it.
As the mother is giving birth in the beginning, the doctor says, "This baby just has a very big head." Ah, that brought back memories. Later, Mom tries to protect the kid and feeds him all the milk and ground beef in her two giant, brown, 1970s refrigerators. What mom wouldn't want to nourish her overgrown, big headed, early teether of a son? I do it every day. Only I don't feed him cow's milk, because now we know that's an inappropriate food for newborns. And I don't feed him ground beef, because he's not a flesh eating mutant.
But speaking of brown refrigerators, this movie is worth watching just for the orgy of 70s decor.
The baby puppet doesn't appear for long enough to make this movie scary, but I thought the portrayals of the tortured parents were interesting. They start off sort of distant from the experience, I guess because they're in shock that their new baby just chewed his way through the delivery room staff and escaped onto the roof. They know he's a monster and has to be destroyed, and they're very matter of fact about the whole affair.
And actually, everyone else is kind of matter of fact about it also. At no point in this movie does anyone say, "How in the HELL did this happen? I mean, isn't this some freaky shit that there's a murderous baby loose in Los Angeles?" Frank Davies' boss fires him, because killer infants are just not good business at the public relations firm where he works. And the boss is quite business-like about the whole thing. His attitude toward the recent mutation: "These things happen." But...I have to fire you.
When the shock wears off, though, you get to see the emotional pain. Giving birth to a murderous freak who must be destroyed takes a toll on parents.
Oh, and there's no explanation of how this might have come about, except for a throwaway scene in which big bad pharma gets the possible blame. Even in the 70s, drug companies were the easy bad guy.
9 comments:
"because killer infants are just not good business at the public relations firm"
I find it hard to believe there wasn't some dirtbag at the firm who could spin this. They can make politicians look good, but they can't find the positive in a mutant infant?
Finally, how did you guys decide on movies with babies this year? You figure in a horror movie, whether they are victim or monster, it ain't gonna end well for them...
That was all me. As much as my predicted low numbers can accomodate a theme, I figured Evil Babies was the way to honor the non-evil baby in our lives.
Dreams in the Witch House was a total fluke. Didn't know there was a baby in that one, it was a leftover H.P. Lovecraft flick that I didn't get to last year.
so i noticed from the ad that there's a remake. came out in 2008. think you've got the stomach for that one too?
You're so right, Miko.
Upon further reflection, I realize this is one of those movies in which the real monster is supposed to be the guy who created the monster. The monster itself is redeemed in the end.
The father even comments pointedly that he always thought Frankenstein was a monster, until he read the book in high school and found out Frankenstein was the doctor who created the monster.
And maybe if I were writing a 20 page paper about this movie, I'd note that the creator is diffused, so there's no clear antagonist. Was it the drug company that manufactured the mother's birth control pills? Is it the media that can't stop hounding the parents about their sensational story? Is it the doctor who just wants to get his hands on the infant's body to study it? Who's the bad guy? The movie is prescient in the sense that unseen, corporate forces can do stuff that will suddenly explode in our faces with teeth and fangs, and we see the notion of that come alive in 1974. You could say that the current financial crisis is a mutant baby of sorts, and we just don't know who to blame for the birth.
I used to be pretty good at slinging bullshit like this around for grades.
But really, I am just commenting so you can see my new avatar.
Love the new avatar, and it sounds like you could have an interesting paper if you wanted to.
Evil babies, great theme!
"I hope it's not too much of a spoiler to let you know that although "It's Alive" in the beginning, it's dead by the end."
Best line of the week.
You know, Julie, there are some sequels and a prequel is shooting as we speak, do you want to spearhead that one?
Talk to my husband! I cancelled my own Netflix account and am just riding Octo's choices.
Octo will never admit it, but he's obsessed with It's Alive for some reason.
What's next Octo, Rosemary's Baby?
Wait - you purposely chose baby horror movies? Julie, I think you need to take control of the Netflix queue!
Post a Comment