Qu'est-il arrivé au bébé de Rosemary ?

Rosemary (Patty Duke) finally escapes the coven of satanists when her son is eight years-old. The story then shifts to when Adrian (Stephen McHattie) is in his late 20s living with his "Aunt" (Tina Louise) at a casino in SoCal. Meanwhile the leaders of the goat-suckers (Ray Milland & Ruth Gordon) and Adrian's father (George Maharis) are hovering nearby. Donna Mills is also on hand as a psychologist in the last act.

"Look What's Happened to Rosemary's Baby" (1976) is a TV sequel to the iconic film from eight years prior. It's too different to really compare since the original movie is a psychological drama/thriller (with only bits o' horror) that took place almost entirely in an old apartment building in New York City. This one's a chaotic coming-of-age television horror mixed with Los Angeles chase flick and 70's music.

It's nowhere near as bad as its reputation, but it's hampered by a slapdash, graceless style that takes time to acclimate to. A better TV movie of this sort is "Bay Coven," aka "Bay Cove" (1987).

Yet it has its highlights despite the gauche tone. For one, McHattie is effective as the protagonist and the cast is generally notable. The psychological struggle between good and evil is interesting. Plus there are entertaining bits throughout, like the band at the casino, a scrap with bikers, the music and a couple noteworthy women.

The concept naturally provokes comparisons to Marvel's The Son of Satan, aka Daimon Hellstrom, a character that debuted two years before this flick went into production. Of course it lacks the 'superhero' angle.

The movie runs about 1 hour, 37 minutes, and was shot at Paramount Studios in Hollywood, Los Angeles.

GRADE B-/C+

I saw this long ago and wanna see it again!I need to find a video.Anyway,this movie was a hoot!Ruth Gordon worshipping the devil again and plotting domination or something.Another terrible Patty Duke TV movie that works for me.

This film is a bad film but to gain any nutritional value from it I recommend watching it back to back with Rosemary's Baby.

There is a lot to learn seeing how different directors can draw different performances from the same actors playing the same characters. Observe Minnie Castevet (Ruth Gordon) and the fine work she did in the first film vs the awful rendition in this film.

It is also interesting to see how the same characters were played by different actors. Which leads me to wonder if anyone involved with the sequel were aware of the first film and did any of them watch Rosemary's Baby before making this?

If your interest in films is purely superficial then you would best avoid this one. I have a lot more to say about this film but I really don't want to go there.

I usually seek to find good in movies, even the bad ones.Unfortunately this movie is one where I fail miserably-and the fact that there's barely one positive review on this board shows many IMDb reviewers share my pain.

I don't usually watch sequels but I just had to see this since I love "Rosemary's Baby" so much. What a mistake that was. It simply reaffirms my belief in the fact that most sequels are lousy-though thankfully, very few are as bad as this. In fact in my mind this isn't even really a sequel, it's a satire on how bad a sequel can be. Movie recommended very highly for not viewing-at any time-ever.

Sam O'Steen, the film editor on the superlative suspense flick "Rosemary's Baby" from 1968, here directs a quickie TV-made sequel, one in which Rosemary Woodhouse (Patty Duke Astin, in for Mia Farrow) is shunted off early--and inexplicably--presumably to help flesh out the more ghoulish aspects of this flaccid story about Satan's son on Earth. Most interesting is the return of Ruth Gordon to her Oscar-winning role as Minnie Castevet (with Ray Milland well-cast as her husband, Roman), but she isn't given much to do--and looks terribly uncomfortable at being involved anyway. This script is strictly low-rent goods, and must have shamed original author Ira Levin (who went on to write his own sequel). Fairly dim and pallid, with poor photography and no suspense or scares whatsoever.