The early to mid-1970s were not a good period in the career of Ruth Roman. Although she'd been in some prestige films over the years (such as Hitchcock's "Strangers on a Train"),by the 70s she started appearing in schlock pictures--such as "The Baby" and the supremely awful "Impulse". Her TV work at the time on shows like "Police Woman" and "Kung Fu" was vastly superior to her roles in films--though this really isn't saying much. It's a shame, as she was a decent actress--but one whose career had fallen on hard times.

The film is rather embarrassing to watch---but it's also like a train wreck. You just can't stop watching and the film is clever despite its awfulness. It begins with an eager social worker stopping by a STRANGE household. It seems the mother (Roman) has three adult children--the youngest of which (age 20) acts exactly like a 6 month-old child! It's very creepy and only gets creepier when the caseworker begins to dig deeper. At first the family seems cooperative but as the film progresses it gets crazier and crazier--so crazy that you need to see this to believe it.

Overall, it's a bit uneven--ranging from very creative to a bit clichéd. The most serious is when the family threatens the social worker and behaves horribly (having made allegations of impropriety by the caseworker). The caseworker then goes to a party at their home and brings along no escort for protection nor does she tell her superiors where she is going! Can anyone be THAT stupid?! I hate horror films with such huge and obvious plot problems that SHOULD have been worked out before the film was shot. Also, the family's about-face from VERY threatening and inappropriate to sweet as sugar is just too fast and only an idiot would fall for this! Weak...very, very weak. But, one thing that DID impress me was something no one ever does in this sort of film--when she escapes their clutches, she stops to puncture the clan's tires--now THAT'S good writing! But what happens next....that I didn't expect!! Again, it's uneven and seldom makes sense....but it IS compelling to watch.

So is "The Baby" worth seeing? Well, it's NOT the sort of film to watch with your kids, your mother or anyone you want to impress. It's a guilty pleasure and is amazingly sick and twisted--and folks' opinions of you might drop a bit if they know you watch this sort of movie! Subtle? No way...but also entertaining providing you can stand to watch it! And definitely one of a kind!!

By the way, I was just thinking that if the caseworker lived in such a HUGE and luxurious house, why did she drive a crappy old Dodge Dart? I used to drive one and it's certainly NOT something I'd drive unless I had few other options!

I found myself holding my head from shaking too much in fear it might fall off after seeing what this disturbing film was all about. no matter how polished it is, it's nothing more than a higher budgeted version of a John Waters movie, and I could easily picture individual cast members from water stock company in the roles in this film.

With a smoky voice and an unforgettably commanding presence, Ruth Roman reminds me of an older Suzanne Pleshette here, and her character is quite the most demented Mommy Dearest outside of a John Waters movie. She's the mother of two daughters and a 21 year old son who cries like a baby, wears diapers and sleeps in a crib. Marianna Hill and Suzanne Zenor are her two equally demented daughters, and David Mooney is the infantile titled baby, creepy in every way and uncomfortable to watch.

The real star is Anjanette Comer, a social worker troubled in her personal life who takes an interest in the string circumstances and after being drugged by Roman and her daughters kidnapped baby and takes him home to her own mother. it becomes a battle of wills between her and the crazy family as they try to get baby back, and this leads to a last half hour is that takes 1970's hag horror films schlock into a new direction.

What is really disturbing about this film is that someone could actually sit down and write this story let alone turn it into a 90-minute movie script. The 1973 annual "Screen World" designated one small paragraph in it's "also released" section, a category left for films of such embarrassing low-quality that the publishers didn't even want to acknowledge that these films existed.

This is Roman's entry into the "hag horror" playing a character so vile and unlikable that it's an embarrassment to see the veteran film noir femme fatale stooping to such levels to get an acting job. I could easily see Divine playing this role and making a hoot out of it, but unfortunately, this film is just simple bad taste, leaving out the camp element that would have made it laughably fun. Her daughters in the film seemed like rejects from the Manson gang and have no redeeming qualities whatsoever. Comer tries her best to be the one sane presence in the film, but when you've got to strip like this, sanity is nowhere in the vocabulary.

This is a cult classic, that is a bit odd, slow at times, but stay with it. "Baby" is an adult male (David Mooney) being taken care of as a baby. He is "retarded" (they use the "R" word and have a powder blue dial up phone). Mrs. Gentry (Anjanette Comer) is the case worker who takes a special interest in baby to the dismay of his 2 sisters and mother (Ruth Roman).

While the film is odd, the entertainment value is quirky and soft by today's standards. It isn't until the end twist, I no way no how saw coming in spite of the sparse clues, that I came to appreciate the production. However, now that I know how it ends, the re-watch factor is low.

Guide: No f-word or nudity. Implied sex.