MovieChat Forums > First Born (2007) Discussion > What the hell was this movie about?spoil...

What the hell was this movie about?spoilers alert!!!! ,spoilers alert!!

posted 17 years ago by mrharper77
23 replies | jump to latest

Man, I'm confused,what was the significance(s) of: one, the talisman that the old babysitter put underneath the crib, two, the diary that the exterminator man found, three, who, or what, was the figure seen running through the house? was she just some figment of Laura's imagination or was she come kind of ghost?
Four, who, or what, was this Jenny woman? is she the ghost?
BTW, did Laura really bury the real baby in the back yard,or has she just gone wacky?
It's too bad there were so many confusing parts because this movie had real potential.
Damn!

[–] hitchhiker90 17 years ago

***** WARNING: SPOILERS ******
**** DO NOT READ ****

I just finished watching the movie so I will try to answer them the way I saw it.

1. no idea except to hide it from the mother
2. no idea
3. The figure was actually Laura. The percieved ghost was her running around. First they showed her inside the house and the ghost outside, then they showed her outside doing the same moves as this ghost and her running inside. But you can see the person wearing the same exact clothes (white night gown).
4. no idea except Jenny was the person who lived there previously. I'm willing to bet there was a scene that actually gave more details but it got cut and there are no bonus scenes on the dvd.
5. Yes,the real baby was buried. Laura was dillusional, so she thought the doll was the real baby and left it in the crib, and the real baby she carried into the back yard and buried thinking it was the doll. The ending scene implies this since the doll is in the crib and the father asks where Jessica is.

I didn't find the movie confusing, I just found it to be boring. It did not strike my interest at all except for that very last scene.

[–] xoshanathegreatox 17 years ago

Yeah, I didn't get this movie either. The diary, the thing under the crib, Jenny, the doll, and the mice all seemed pointless to me. They didn't explain whether their was an actual curse put on her, so what was the point of bringing that up? There was no Jenny at the college and no mention of her after she put the diary away, so what was the point of that? They didn't tell you what was even in the diary, again, point? The thing under the crib didn't do anything as far as I could tell...point? The doll was showing up everywhere and she DID just have a baby, but I don't get the point of that either. And so on and so forth. And at the end, I don't think she got them mixed up. She seemed to not know that she even had a baby. So yeah, very confusing. Maybe I'm just dumb. lol.

[–] allbymyonesies 17 years ago

This is not a supernatural movie. At all. If you watch this thinking that it is, you will be highly confused. She didn't see the mice in the crib until AFTER she read the book. After, kids. This movie is about post-partam depression and watching a woman slowly go insane because of it. Get that in your heads and it makes all the sense in the world. The charm under the bed was simple superstition and was probably placed there because the folklore called for it. No different than hanging a Dreamcatcher over a baby's crib, really. This poor woman got uprooted, shoved into a huge, empty house and was left there to rot her mind away by her neglectful, piece of crap husband. Jenny did not matter. She was simply something else for Laura's splintering mind to latch onto.

I really am quite disappointed by the reception it has gotten around here.

[–] Cooper75 17 years ago

All I can say is thank god for 'allbymyonesies'. I's about time this movie got some love. I can't believe there is so much confusion over it.

[–] barbarellacult 17 years ago

I think this movie just suffered from some unfortunate advertising. The box cover is terrible. From the cover, they tried to bill it as a super natural horror movie and it is not. I hate it when this happens to movies. All I knew about this movie was that it starred Elisabeth Shue and I really loved it.

[–] Cheena71 17 years ago

Regardless of whether or not this was a supernatural movie, it still has a lot of unanswered questions, there were scenes that didn't need to be there.

[–] allbymyonesies 17 years ago

No it does not and no there are not. Every scene is a piece of the puzzle that is her impending psychotic break. Watch it again. I only saw it once and every scene makes perfect sense to me.

[–] iamelloco 17 years ago

allbumyonesies is right on the money.

People who are watching this movie and complaining I think might be have got caught in the extra "details."

Shue wrote on the diary, there was only one mouse, it died on the trap. The rest were her imagination, and jenny was just some girl who used to live there.

The idea is to make the viewer feel and believe like this is a supernatural movie, that there are "ghosts" and that there is a curse. That is what all the other stuff is about. If you avoid paying attention to all of those things you will see what actually happened, which was a woman suppering from depression.

Read or watch "The Yellow Wallpaper" and you will see this movie is not the first and won't be the last on this issue. The fact that it confuses people is the reason why it is so miunderstood and not paid so much attention to.

Once again, I believe the last two posters pretty much nailed it. I thought it was a great movie, the sheer trauma that shue's character goes through is enough for me to be scared about what could possibly happen if I ever have children.

[–] g_i_z_m_o_87 17 years ago

Also, did you guys notice she had some sort of obsessive compulsive disorder? like when she took anxiety pills, she had 2, she cut one of them in half, placed them perfectly next to eachother, the big one in the middle, the two halves on the side. But then eventually she just put them all in her mouth at once.. also, when she buys the ratpoison and the mousetraps, and she gets home, she places them all perfectly next to eachother on the kitchen table. And allthrough the movie she seemed kinda neurotic to me.. Indeed, it reminded me of the Yellow Wallpaper as well. I enjoyed the movie, though at first i also thought it was a movie about, i dunno ghosts or something like that. Especially the Jenny part, i at first figured she was probably slaughtered in the big house:D haha

But i agree that some extra scenes, to explain some of the stuff (about Jenny for example) would help to make this a better movie..

[–] frequency-2 17 years ago

Jenny was the babie's name. Right at the end the husband asks "Where's Jenny?" I wish the movie had been shorter. I think the story would have worked better if the point had been got to sooner.

[–] Cameo87 17 years ago

Frequency-2 you're wrong. I just watched the movie and the baby's name was Jessica. And was I the only one that noticed they NEVER mentioned the baby's name until the very end of the film. Throughout the movie they referred to her as "the baby", which to me made her more of an object than a human. I understand there was probably a purpose to not revealing the name until the end, but...what WAS the purpose?

But I must hop on the bandwagon of people who hated this movie. I actually liked the idea of it being about depression and loneliness and all that, but the film is just...bad.

[–] Spica1 15 years ago

whenever she got into the market to buy a product, she bought many of the same product. XD she's surely OC.

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] fbsishe 17 years ago

Totally agree with hitchhiker90. The movie was kind of dull up until the last scene. I kept on checking my email and chatting throughout it, just to keep myself awake :)

[–] iwbawahm 17 years ago

I agree with the one who said something about the baby taking over the mom...the whole time laura did her stuff at the end she had a huge smile on her face...

I thought Jenny could have been the lady on the subway with the doll...and I watched it with close caption on and at some point laura read from the diary something about loud voices and it being cold.

I guessed the end though..I do that with a lot of movies (even deja vu, was guessing things the whole way thru and coming up right each time)...it did show laura grab the doll from the dresser not the crib...so that was unfair to the audience...they could have made it to where we knew she grabbed the baby but she thought she grabbed the doll...or showed us she inentionally grabbed the baby and put the doll in the bed.

I watched this with my 5 year old running in and out of the room...so I knew it was about PP and told him so the whole time, that she was nuts and only she saw all those things.

I also agree the old lady was trying to unite mom and baby with the charm under the bed. It's probably what she did back when she had her first child and felt "disconnected".

I agree that laura's mental state should have been more of a priority. Maybe the nanny saying what she did gave laura the idea that she could go back to feeling like herself if she could get her soul back and so if the baby was taking more of her soul, then the baby needed to be gone...

It is still awful that this type of thing happens to some new moms.

[–] edwardbradenton 17 years ago

I understood this movie for the most part. The only person who seemed like they knew she needed help, was the old lady. The old lady was from the "Old country" she placed the pacifier and mom's hair under the crib to break the supposed "curse." I think it was confusing because we were watching her psychotic episodes and her hallucinations, through her eyes. I felt sad at the end, that no one helped her..

[–] bensmybaby 16 years ago

I watched only a part of this movie and when it seemed supernatural I went to bed. Now that I am on IMDB I want to say I believe the reason the movie is so confusing is because we are supposed to be experiencing it from the woman's perspective.
She thinks she's being stalked then haunted when in actual fact she is going insane.
If you give the movie a second viewing with this in mind it might just make more sense.
As for the burying the baby and saving the doll shows the extent of her madness.She coulnot even tell the difference anymore.In line with the supernatural aspect if the baby was taking her soul she would have thought she needed to kill it to get it back . Also the doll was left by the little girl on the train so by putting it in the crib she was ensuring the doll would not be left again.Sounds mad..well she was .
As for the Jenny I beleive is a person from her past who was connected to the doll.But I would need to watch the rest of movie to understand it.
Will update when i do.

Only people allowed in...leave your egos at the door...respectfully

[–] bensmybaby 16 years ago

I keep getting this feeling that Andrea Yates was the inspiration for this movie.
if it were up to me I'd chose to speak like Humphrey Bogart, but....it isn't

[–] TexArcane 17 years ago

Eh, I've watched it twice now and it still doesn't get any better.
I find it incredibly hard to believe that a couple this rich wouldn't have significant post pregnancy care much less give birth at a hospital employed by insensitive staff. Postpartum depression is taken very seriously by maternity wards and doctors. The fact that it's not even mentioned and casually at that 3/4s of the way through drives me nuts.

You would also think that once the medical staff realizes she is suffering from the more dangerous version of PPD the husband might actually pay attention to what is really going.

As others of said the movie just tries too hard to be mysterious and ends up being too confusing.

In the end what I took away from First Born was if you're rich you should really find the best hospital and doctor for your money instead of the bare minimum in health care especially when your wife is slightly nuts to begin with.

[–] JENNLO469 17 years ago

Well I thought the movie was pretty good. The bag underneath the crib put there by the Nanny I thought was to bring mommy & baby back together. Remember the story the nanny said about a mother being cut into 2 pieces and the baby taking the mothers soul. I thought it was a good luck charm of sorts to bring them back together. Inside the the cloth was a pacifier and some hair of elizabeth shue's that she had cut off.

Also at the end the husband asks where's Jessica? i didnt think he said jenny

[–] mikecool4ever 17 years ago

Now see I figured it was more supernatural because the nanny says something about when a woman has a baby she becomes half the baby, half herself but in some cases the baby will take over the mother completely and by killing her baby she became herself again if that makes any sense. lol

Trusting another soul with my fate,showed me how easily love could turn to pure hate.