Le berceau du Mal

If they release this movie straight to Lifetime channel,viewers might think that this is a pretty good movie since the way it's directed and acted is so mediocre without any suspense or scares a horror/ thriller needs,just like the Lifetime movies usually are. It had some good actors in it but the lead actress Rebecca De Costa really needs to improve her acting. When u are a lead in a movie and we,the viewers,are going to follow the story through her perspective,the lead should try to make the character more believable. Rebecca De Costa just sort of read her lines as she memorized it and acted without showing much emotions. She just looks scared or confused most of the time. The others were alright in their role but i think Gabriel Macht was wasted in his role. He is such a talented actor and deserves a better role or more screen time in the movie. Just watch Suits and you'll know what a talented actor he is. The movie,although have a cliché story,could have been made into a very suspenseful movie but it lacks totally in scares and suspense that it turns into a complete bore fest. There was a scene at about the 45th minute of the movie which i thought was a good twist and would have made the movie really good if the story followed the twist but it turned out to be a very disappointing scene that contained the most used horror movie cliché. So,in conclusion,this movie is watchable but it most probably will never excite you in any way while you're watching it and definitely doesn't have a replay value.

To define it as a bad movie seems unfair. It is only an exercise, correct in its presence, for a reasonable thriller and the basic sin remains the lost in labyrinth of cliches for the idea. Lithium pills and a last will. Brothers, a not comfortable wife, Milo Ventimiglia and the effort of Rebecca De Costa to save her character. A promising beginning. A wasted end. So, in large lines, decent job. Deserving be better.

A really poor and uninspired attempt at a supernatural thriller. The entire movie boils down to "the main character is suffering from hallucinations and she sees a ghost, aha but in fact she isn't crazy! Or maybe she is! But wait, maybe she isn't! How suspenseful!"

The problem is not with the miserably predictable twists but that during the entire movie none of the character's motivations or allegiances are made clear so it plays out like a jumbled mess and it makes the "twists" lose impact because they didn't really subvert any expectations as none were established. It really is a movie that makes you keep looking at the clock or your phone.

I like to check IMDb ratings to gauge the potential of a movie before watching, however I'm glad I did not follow this rule for Breaking at the Edge as I would have missed a good movie (it was actually one of the reviews here that convinced me to give it a go).

"The Firstling" (as it's called on my streaming service) scores points for the suspense, good scary scenes, good dialogues and a storyline that holds well enough.

But to me the biggest selling point of the movie is the performance of Rebecca Da Costa as the beautiful and intelligent young wife. She brings a spark and depth to her character that is unexpected and really pulls the movie up.

A pregnant woman (Rebecca DaCosta) fears for her unborn child's life if she does not avenge a supernatural entity.

So, seriously, how did they get Andie McDowell? Does she owe a bookie some money or get behind on her mortgage? Because she is above this sort of thing... or at least she should be.

"When I was shooting it, it was very intense," Da Costa said in February 2014. "I was literally getting crazy." She said that preparing for the role she "talked to many psychiatrists. I didn't want to look like I was trying to play crazy." Um, well, your acting comes across as pretty poor. So if you were going crazy, it does not show and if you were playing crazy, it shows even less.

The music sounds like the theme to "The Snowman" (1982). Thank you for stealing it. The camera shakes for no reason, even when filming a scene of people sitting still and talking. Why? Was there an artistic reason for this? Of course not.

Clearly the script was pretty good, because the whole idea of seeing through other eyes is great if pulled off right. This film is not pulled off right. Which is obvious when commenters think it has some connection to "Rosemary's Baby". Huh?