Badmovies.org Forum

Movies => Bad Movies => Topic started by: lester1/2jr on September 07, 2007, 02:28:28 PM

Title: The Baby (1973)
Post by: lester1/2jr on September 07, 2007, 02:28:28 PM
       I actually sort of wish this had been MORE low budget, but it was still great.  rated PG, but there are allusions to very adult subject matter and that their is no nudity is besides the point.  If there is indeed a directors cut of this film, please keep it far away from me. 

       The premise is outrageous:  a 21 year old man is treated like a baby by his twisted family.  A social worker gets wind of the case and is convinced he is capable of more and that the family is perversly keeping him as a little baby for some reason. 

The closing shot is photographed brilliantly .   totally f**ked up

:thumbup:
Title: Re: The Baby (1973)
Post by: Scott on September 07, 2007, 03:58:38 PM
This is one wacky film, I bought it earlier in the year and it's both a rare film and over all outrageous film. B-Movie fans will love this one. Very strange film with a crazy ending. Come to think about it maybe it's too strange, so I advice you not watch it.

[youtube=425,350]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gS1qxSDrwHg
Title: Re: The Baby (1973)
Post by: Raffine on September 07, 2007, 04:05:14 PM
Hi ho! I've heard of this one but have never seen it. It sounds precious. I see THE BABY is out on DVD now. I'll have to look it up.

Ruth Roman is in it! She was a fairly big star in the 40's and 50's and wound up in films like this and the William Shatner classic IMPULSE. She and Shatner were also in the TV movie GO ASK ALICE, one of the raunchiest and explicit 'educational' exploitation TV movies ever. Andy Griffith plays a priest. My mother made us watch this (Reader's Digest told parents to!) and we got a good primer on drugs, sex, and rampant insanity. It was based on the 'true story' diary of a teenage dope fiend that later turned out to be fake. Parents were supposed to make their kiddies read the book, too.

You know, 70's made-for-TV 'message'  exploitation movies are almost as much fun as the ones they made back in the 30's.

They probably deserve a thread all their own.

Title: Re: The Baby (1973)
Post by: Scott on September 07, 2007, 04:09:48 PM
Here are my earlier comments on the film.

http://www.badmovies.org/forum/index.php/topic,111975.0.html (http://www.badmovies.org/forum/index.php/topic,111975.0.html)

70's films where the greatest in many ways.
Title: Re: The Baby (1973)
Post by: Mr_Vindictive on September 07, 2007, 04:11:29 PM
Quote from: Raffine on September 07, 2007, 04:05:14 PM
Hi ho! I've heard of this one but have never seen it. It sounds precious. I see THE BABY is out on DVD now. I'll have to look it up.

Ruth Roman is in it! She was a fairly big star in the 40's and 50's and wound up in films like this and the William Shatner classic IMPULSE. She and Shatner were also in the TV movie GO ASK ALICE, one of the raunchiest and explicit 'educational' exploitation TV movies ever. Andy Griffith plays a priest. My mother made us watch this (Reader's Digest told parents to!) and we got a good primer on drugs, sex, and rampant insanity. It was based on the 'true story' diary of a teenage dope fiend that later turned out to be fake. Parents were supposed to make their kiddies read the book, too.

You know, 70's made-for-TV 'message'  exploitation movies are almost as much fun as the ones they made back in the 30's.

They probably deserve a thread all their own.



The book was a fake?  I recall having to read it in high school and that was in the 90s.  I remember reading parts of it but never actually reading the whole book.  Now that I think back on it, it did seem to be a bit embellished.
Title: Re: The Baby (1973)
Post by: lester1/2jr on September 07, 2007, 04:18:02 PM
Spoiler alert*****


scott, the closing shot had the three of them in the pool together in a way that made them look naked.  it was jarring to say the least!!
Title: Re: The Baby (1973)
Post by: Scott on September 07, 2007, 04:36:46 PM
When I saw it I was thinking "Why haven't I heard of this film before?". It's just very weird.
Title: Re: The Baby (1973)
Post by: Raffine on September 07, 2007, 04:56:51 PM
QuoteThe book was a fake?  I recall having to read it in high school and that was in the 90s.  I remember reading parts of it but never actually reading the whole book.  Now that I think back on it, it did seem to be a bit embellished.

Sorry to burst your bubble.  :bluesad:

But according to Wikipedia:

Go Ask Alice was originally promoted as nonfiction and was published under the byline "Anonymous." However, not long after its publication, Beatrice Sparks, a psychologist and Mormon youth counselor, began making media appearances promoting herself as the book's editor.

Searches at the U.S. Copyright Office show that Sparks is the sole copyright holder for Go Ask Alice. Furthermore, she is listed on the copyright record as the book's author — not as the editor, compiler, or executor, which would be more usual for someone publishing the diary of a deceased person.


But, of course, that is from Wikipedia!  :teddyr:

Snopes has a better expose' of Alice and similar books by Sparks:
http://www.snopes.com/language/literary/askalice.asp (http://www.snopes.com/language/literary/askalice.asp)

More bad news: apparently Sybil and The Amityville Horror were fake 'non-fiction' books, too.

Was nothing real in the 70's?


P.S. Sorry for temporaily hijcking this thread...
Title: Re: The Baby (1973)
Post by: Andrew on September 07, 2007, 05:03:47 PM
Another interesting sounding-film that I have not seen, but heard about on the forum.  My Amazon wish list grows.

* SIGH *
Title: Re: The Baby (1973)
Post by: lester1/2jr on September 07, 2007, 05:45:09 PM
andrew-  why don't you have netflix? not that it's mandatory, but it certainly would be a boon for someone who runs a website such as this



scott-  have you seen Blue Sunshine?  It's different but of similar quality.  like someone had a sick idea for a movie and made it and the world forgot.
Title: Re: The Baby (1973)
Post by: Andrew on September 07, 2007, 06:01:02 PM
Quote from: lester1/2jr on September 07, 2007, 05:45:09 PM
andrew-  why don't you have netflix? not that it's mandatory, but it certainly would be a boon for someone who runs a website such as this

I try to do a lot of actual collecting and own the movies.  Quite often, this pays off when a "What was that film?" comes up or if I need to check on something when writing an article/posting/etc.  I have considered it, but mostly for Katie's benefit.  With the USMC, family, and website, I cannot quite keep up with viewing all the films I purchase on DVD.  I don't have a want for movies to watch, it is the amount of time I have available to watch them.
Title: Re: The Baby (1973)
Post by: lester1/2jr on September 09, 2007, 01:53:36 PM
scott-  you gave it 6 out of 10.  that has to be the most enthusiastic D-  I've seen in quite some time
Title: Re: The Baby (1973)
Post by: Scott on September 09, 2007, 07:57:49 PM
Quote from: lester1/2jr on September 09, 2007, 01:53:36 PM
scott-  you gave it 6 out of 10.  that has to be the most enthusiastic D-  I've seen in quite some time

I didn't want to encourage anyone to much. People might misunderstand what I mean.  :question: :lookingup:

This is strange filmmaking. 

Quote from: lester1/2jr on September 07, 2007, 05:45:09 PM

scott-  have you seen Blue Sunshine?  It's different but of similar quality.  like someone had a sick idea for a movie and made it and the world forgot.

Lester1/2jr, no I haven't seen BLUE SUNSHINE.
Title: Re: The Baby (1973)
Post by: Joe the Destroyer on September 10, 2007, 04:01:21 AM
Well, it's $0.70 on Amazon, with a charge of about $3 S&H.  I think I'll be ordering this soon.  I know it's still a small amount, but I've been addicting to order lately.  After picking up Satan's Playground, I also snagged some old RPG's I missed...
Title: Re: The Baby (1973)
Post by: lester1/2jr on September 10, 2007, 03:41:52 PM
I think if you liked "happiness"  you'd enjoy "the baby"  :buggedout: