L'Appartement 7A

This was a film that intrigued me when I learned that it was coming out. One of my favorite films of all time is Rosemary's Baby. This is a prequel to that, following the young woman that Rosemary meets while doing laundry. I made this a Featured Review for Journey with a Cinephile since this is a 2024 release. It also helped me to complete the franchise on Letterboxd as well.

Synopsis: a struggling young dancer finds herself drawn in by dark forces when a peculiar, well-connected older couple promise her a shot at fame.

We start this off with seeing Terry Gionoffrio (Julia Garner) performing. She is a dancer and has bad luck. She lands wrong, hurting her ankle. It requires surgery and we see that even months later, it is still not healing. It doesn't help that she doesn't have an income if she cannot dance and that is causing it to be a nagging injury, which doesn't help since no one will hire her.

There is an interesting audition that she goes to for Leo Watts (Andrew Buchan). He pushes her, testing to see how strong the ankle is. Terry does everything that is asked, going as far as to beg by telling her story to them. In attendance is the writer of the play, Alan Marchand (Jim Sturgess). He comes on stage and tries to humiliate Terry. She stands up for herself.

Terry is running out of options. Her best friend is Annie (Marli Siu) who is doing everything she can to help. Terry gets the bold idea of sneaking into Alan's apartment building to see if she can discuss things further. She took too much pain medication to get through and ended up passing out near Bramford. This happens in front of the Castevets, Minnie (Dianne Wiest) and Roman (Kevin McNally).

They take her in, give her a place to stay and make breakfast in the morning. They take a liking to her, wanting to help her get on her feet. There is an apartment that they have that they let her stay in for free. Minnie also sets up a get together for her to talk to Alan more directly. This is a ploy where it ends up just being the two. Terry passes out and when she wakes up, she has a large bruise on her wrist. She had an odd dream and doesn't remember much of the night. Alan allowed her to stay in his apartment. Now she's nervous. She's shocked to learn that he gave her a spot on the Chorus line as the night is a blur.

This doesn't sit well with the lead, Vera (Rosy McEwen). There are rumors that she slept with Alan and she doesn't have the talent. A neighbor gives her an ointment that all but cures her injury, allowing her to return to form. Things are looking up for Terry, until that fateful night has another complication that will change her life forever.

That is where I'll leave my recap and introduction to the characters. Where I want to start is with giving a disclaimer. I'm not the biggest fan of prequels. The reason being is that I know how it has to end and it doesn't fit, then it feels like a failed attempt. If it does fit, then I already know the ending so it doesn't carry as much tension so it is a Catch-22 in my eyes. The thing that I hope most is that you make an entertaining film. What I'll end this out with saying is that, this one did have freedom to develop Terry as the tenant in the Bramford that the Castevets were fond of before Rosemary.

Now that I've set that up, let me delve deeper here. I know I've said what I did about prequels and why they don't work for me. Something that this does great is casting Wiest and McNally as Minnie and Roman. There is a darker side, especially to the former here that I want to give credit for. She gets significantly more annoyed here than in the original film. Part of that though is the fact that Terry is a young, single, independent woman who wants to be a star. She's working hard for it. When she doesn't fall in line with Minnie, they butt heads. This isn't a slight at Rosemary. She was a married woman who didn't work and they were considering having children. I believe they were waiting for Guy to work more consistently. I love looking at this concept here from a similar, yet different point of view, especially in consideration of the feminist angle.

I did then want to pivot with a differing perspective. This film borrows structure from Rosemary's Baby. There are elements that are similar with just variations on it. You can correlate something that happens at practice with Terry getting a better part in the play with what happens with Guy. Terry has a similar experience like Rosemary did early on in staying here. There are more that we have as well. I can appreciate it as a fan since I could point them out. My guess is that these are also here since newer viewers who aren't familiar with the original might not get it, much like in The First Omen. This also makes me want to watch the other film, which does it better in the grand scheme.

Then the last part of the story to explore would be religion. What is interesting here is that Terry isn't religious, but she's also not an atheist. It is less prevalent here until she learns more about where she is living. There is a nun who helps her who knows about the people living in Bramford that was interesting to me. I do like that Adrian Mercado is referenced and that this play Alan is putting on is a variation on his work. That was a good easter egg.

Let's then go over to discuss the acting performances. Garner is good as our lead. I like that she is a strong independent woman who is doing everything she can to succeed. She was dealt bad hands and fought to get back. She won't be bullied either. It is a good leading performance. I've already said how strong Wiest and McNally are. They fit well into the roles already set up from the original. Sturgess is good as this arrogant playwright. I like him along with Buchan. Siu works as Terry's friend and I like McEwen along with the other dancers who build the character through negative things. The acting was solid across the board, no issues there.

All that is left then is filmmaking. Now by the nature of the story this is a slow-burn. It runs around 95 minutes, which I do think could be trimmed slightly. I was still intrigued to see where they would go with it. It didn't do anything to violate continuity. There is one questionable scene where Terry runs into a woman in the laundry room who looks like Rosemary. I'm not sure why that was included since it is a different character. I'd say that the cinematography helps capture this building and the era. There's the vibes of 'old dark house' films that I appreciate. The framing was good. The effects were as well. There were a couple of scenes using CGI that I didn't love. The practical look of the devil was creepy. Soundtrack also fits the era and I love that the ending song is the opening one from Rosemary's Baby. That was a good touch.

In conclusion, this film is in a tough place for me. Prequels don't work as well since they have to end in a certain way to fit and it can struggle to build tension. I thought that this told an interesting back-story to a woman who lived in this building before Rosemary. The acting here is great from Garner, Wiest and McNally. Rest of the cast pushed Terry to where she ended up. This is well-made. I love the setting and capturing this building again. The cinematography, framing and practical effects leading the way. I appreciate what this is doing as a lead in with a slightly different look to the events to the original.

My Rating: 7 out of 10.

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.

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!

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.

"Apartment 7A" is a 2024 psychological thriller that serves as a prequel to the iconic horror film "Rosemary's Baby." It follows Terry Gionoffrio, an aspiring actress grappling with a career-ending injury, as she moves into the infamous Bramford building.

What Works: * Strong Performances: Julia Garner delivers a compelling performance as Terry, capturing her vulnerability and growing paranoia convincingly. Dianne Wiest and Kevin McNally, as the unsettling Castevets, are suitably eerie and unsettling.

* Atmospheric Setting: The film effectively recreates the eerie ambiance of the Bramford building, with its claustrophobic corridors and unsettling undertones.

What Could Be Better: * Pacing Issues: The first half of the film feels slow-paced, struggling to build suspense and tension effectively.

* Lack of Innovation: While it pays homage to the original, "Apartment 7A" doesn't offer much new to the table. It relies heavily on familiar tropes and fails to truly capitalize on its chilling premise.

* Uneven Horror Elements: The film struggles to blend its horror elements seamlessly. Some scenes are genuinely unsettling, while others feel forced or underwhelming.

Overall: "Apartment 7A" is a decent watch for fans of "Rosemary's Baby" who are curious about the backstory. However, it ultimately fails to reach the chilling heights of its predecessor. While the performances are strong and the atmosphere is suitably eerie, the film suffers from pacing issues and a lack of originality.

Recommendation: Rent or stream it if you're a fan of the original and enjoy psychological thrillers.

Disclaimer: This is just one perspective, and individual opinions may vary.