January 25, 2015
They managed to make look a classic of terror, as a corny and boring cheap movie. These new actresses are just plastic. It wouldn't scare a 10 year old kid.
January 25, 2015
Julianne Moore's performance in this remake of 'Carrie' was spectacular, but sadly it was wasted on a remake of a film that should've never been remade.
January 24, 2015
you know what? I waited forever to see this movie thinking I would hhhhhhaaaattteee it. I am a big fan of Stephen King and loved the original adaptation. However, my heart is broken watching the updated version seeing how poignant it has turned out to be. This Carrie is not as ethereal and innocent seeming as the original, but she is just as sad and hopeful. I want everything to be okay for her, but I know it won't be, ever. I wish this on freshman high school students and college freshman as a cautionary tale year after year in any format.
August 21, 2014
Carrie was very poorly cast. An unnecessary remake.
January 15, 2015
It's difficult trying to talk about this remake without talking how great the original movie is. Like how the prom scene where blood is dropped on Carrie was one of the most high tension scenes in cinematic history. In this remake, not so much.
Remember how much you hated Nancy Allen's character? Remember how manipulative and cruel she was? In this remake she's downplayed in favor for being in a cliched abusive relationship with her too-old-for-high-school boyfriend.
Remember Sissy Spacek's wide-eyed, creepy alien stare? Remember the slight turns of her head as the split screen showed her on one side and students dying on the other? In this remake, expect more flying around, CGI, and Chloe Grace Moretz's awkward slack jawed, doe-eyed expression.
At least Julian Moore gave a good performance. It was far better than the average in this movie, but did little to help this mess. This movie was about as necessary (and entertaining) as the 1998 remake of Psycho. So whatever your feelings were for that remake, expect the same kind of experience with this one. It's not even as good as The Rage: Carrie II. I can't recommend this movie to anyone. Go watch the original. It's superior on every level.
January 11, 2015
If you're going to make a remake you should at least try to make it better than the original. this was so bad, so so bad.
January 11, 2015
It has been 37 years since De Palma adapted King´s debut novel to the big screen and in that span of time, "Carrie" has become one of the most acclaimed horror films to date and one of the best King adaptations (it even has King´s seal of approval) so when it was announced that "Boys Don't Cry" director Kimberly Pierce would tell King´s story again, many consider that it was unnecessary, even King agrees with this. If this retelling of Carrie White´s story worth watching?
Carrie White is a 17 year old shy and antisocial high school student who suffers from bullying at school and abuse by his extremely religious mother. After having her first period, Carrie discovers that she has a power that may give her the satisfaction of revenge of those that made her life miserable.
When it comes to "retellings" of older films there are two directions it could go, either you completely pretend that all the past installments never happen and start from zero with a different story (reboot) or you completely rehash the old film just changing the cast of course (remake), and 2013´s "Carrie" falls into the second option. I mean sure it was obvious because its base on a static story that's 40 years old but they could still try to do something new with the material but instead they just stole ideas from De Palma´s version. This version of Carrie counts with identical scenes than the classic 1976 version but without that powerful cinematography thus all the power that those scenes should have had is gone, this modern take of the story with the Internet has no point other than to appeal the young generation but I feel like they fail on that by having an R rating and the lack of gore that said generation expect from a horror film; the mixture of genres that I mention on my review of the classic version is done in a pathetic and uninteresting way, the ending tires to go bigger and scarier than De Palma´s but it comes off as a generic action film, and the biggest problem this film has is the casting: The supporting cast falls flat and Chloe Grace Moretz is a good young actress with a promising career but she doesn't work as an antisocial and bullied girl, she is to pretty to be that and no matter how great her acting skills are (which are very promising to be honest) I never bought her as Carrie; the only person that was perfect in the role given was Julianne Moore as Margaret White.
Kimberly Pierce´s version of "Carrie" is a forgettable and generic modern high school film with attempts at horror in it, it tries too hard to reach the greatness of De Palma´s version but it miserably fails. If you are young and like modern "horror" films then you should watch this over the 1976 version but if you demand a lot from films you should skip it.
January 7, 2015
2013 version , liked Julianne Moore in it , but Sissy was better then Chloe ...but the final seen after the Pig-blood was more spectacular then in the origenal !
January 4, 2015
There are a lot of good horror movie remakes, (Such as "The Thing " and "Friday the 13th") and this is another remake better than the original.
January 3, 2015
STARRING: Chole Grace Moretz, Julianne Moore, and Gabriella Wilde
Directed By: Kimberly Peirce
Based on the novel by Stephen King of the same name. Carrie is the story of a shy, awkward, teenage girl who lives at home with her disturbed mother. She is growing up and if those changes weren't enough, she also starts to develop strong telekinetic powers. When some of her classmates humiliate her in the showers, one of the guilty party tries to fix what she's done and help Carrie out of her shell by having her go to senior prom. Unfortunately, some of the girls continue pushing Carrie until she reaches her breaking point.
First things first. I have never seen the original 1976 version, the made for TV movie from 2002, or even the musical (yes there is a Broadway musical, go figure). Carrie is one of the few Stephen King books that I haven't read either. So I don't have anything to compare it to, even though I do have the basic knowledge of the plot and the ending that most casual Horror fans would have. So going into this movie, I did know the ending, which takes some of the suspense out of the whole thing.
Again, having not seen the other versions, I don't really have any version of Chloe's Carrie to compare her too. I do think she did a fantastic job however. She captures the sadness, confusion, happiness, and rage that Carrie goes through during the movie beautifully and keeps the character likable, and you hoping that she gets what she longs for. Julianne Moore is also great as Carrie's mother. Being crazy one minute and possibly a kind, loving mom the next. Definitely one of the best performances I've seen her give. The rest of the cast do a fairly decent job, nothing that really stands out, but nobody did a terrible. Gabriella Wilde is good as Sue, Portia Doubleday does the pretty much psychotic Chris fairly well, and everyone also gives good, solid performances.
The movie keeps a good pace and doesn't drag often. The fact that it is under 2 hours, helps. My only complaint is towards the end when Sue finds out that something bad is about to happen, instead of texting or calling her boyfriend Tommy, she gets in her car and drives there instead. We know they both have their phones on and with them (the text each other just minutes earlier), so why didn't she try to warn them that way? Other then that very minor problem, I did enjoy the movie. Is it a remake we needed? Not really.
There some updates that keep the movie more modern, like the girls post a horrible video of Carrie online, that was taken on their smart phones. Making a movie more modern is not really a good enough reason to do a remake when there are other Stephen King movies that could be made or redone instead (I'm looking at you The Langoliers).
I do think this movie was categorized and marketed wrong. It's not really horror, nor is it scary, and it isn't very suspenseful. Which I don't think the movie was trying to be. If anything, Carrie is a tragedy. A story about a girl trying to fit in and escape from under her mentally ill mother and the classmates who are either trying to help or hurt her. I think you should see this movie with that frame of mind. Don't go expecting a horror movie, but a sad, tragic story instead. I recommend it to King's fans and anyone else in general.
7 Reels out of 10
"The other kids, they think I'm weird. But I don't wanna be, I wanna be normal. I have to try and be a whole person before its to late."
January 3, 2015
Not as good as the original, despite almost copying it shot-for-shot.
The original Carrie, released in 1976, is a horror classic. It was original for its time and one of the movies that made horror more main stream. Not only this, it launched the careers of Brian De Palma, Stephen King, Sissy Spacek, Amy Irving and John Travolta.
This remake is incredibly faithful to the original, to the point that it is almost scene-for-the scene the same. It has been modernized - set in 2013 rather than 1976 - and there are a few minor modifications with the action scenes - but it does not veer too far from the original.
What director Kimberley Pierce does not reproduce, however, is De Palma's slow-building intensity. Carrie 2013 feels incredibly flat. There is no mystery, no slow-burning tension. Furthermore, the nice character-building and scene-setting of the original is replaced by a token attempt at it. It all just seems rather dull.
Of course, this could be just because I've seen the original so know exactly what is going to happen. That's what you get for being so faithful to the original...
|andi dzul r||
May 24, 2013
I really like this movie and the sense of satisfaction I wait for this movie to have been paid, and I hope this film will be remade later. there is nothing wrong with this movie for me. its all perfect, especially the climax scene which made ??me tense, love carrie and the whole movie is very striking in my heart. anyway, I really like this movie
December 27, 2014
While I found it more believable than the original, I am still unmoved by the plot. I fast forwarded through a good portion of it because it was all too familiar to me. The film disturbs me not because it's a horror flick, but because King's creative juices generate deeply disturbed abusers rather than suspenseful action and breathtaking drama. I just want to schedule him an appointment to see a therapist, not celebrate his work with a remake. Better acting and direction than the original, but still not my cup of tea.
October 20, 2013
Not as scary as the original.
December 23, 2014
Interesting enough for me to keep going but in all honesty it doesn't have that much depth to go for it. Chloe Grace Moretz is awkward in the role she plays but this role is no indictment of the kind of actress that she is. The symbols and storyline while predictable serves adequately but is not near special or spectacular. As its best summed up in the tomatometer, Carrie feels woefully unnecessary.
December 25, 2014
I know a lot of people will disagree, (and yes I have seen the original movie) but I absolutely loved this movie. It made it so that you can relate emotionally to the characters in this day and age and it's just a more emotionally gripping film
December 18, 2014
I don't know what i saw a horror film or a fell good movie. If it was the previous than it felt flat however Julianne Moore delivers a creepy performance as she was the only tiny scary thing in this film. Other than that there's nothing scary in this film only me rooting for Carrie.
October 12, 2013
The key thing to remember about this film is that it always billed as the new and most sincere adaptation to the novel yet. But what we actually have instead is something which has been compromised greatly, and perhaps a far more likely its reason for being such conforming film is to fit in with the current feminist wave that is sweeping and morphing the horror genre into a gutless meandering bore. In the 2013 trailers it was clearly evident that this film was ignoring many of the key things described in the novel - the most obvious being that the novel takes place in the 1970's! And we have I-phones and the like? Whatever has happened to at least a sense of authenticity film makers? This so called error works against the very essence of the plot in this version, as the inclusion of the world wide web, social media ect makes Carrie's ignorance to her cycle far, far less believable.
However one thing that one could argue helps with the authenticity in this verison is the age of the actresses involved. Yes Ms. Moretz is far closer to the age described in the book than Spacek, however with that she brings another problem which is inexperience. Her performance whilst not terrible, is certainly nothing to remember. The overwrought hand gestures displayed throughout the prom scene strike as being nothing believable, nor even camp theatricality for that matter, but rather just plain sillyness- although admittedly this particular hilarity may not necessarilly be her fault. And how convincing is she as the character of 'Carrie'? Certainly not even begining to match up with Spacek. She just comes off as someone trying a little too hard to fill a far better actresses shoes; unbelievably in a couple of interviews Moretz had the arrogance to be almost dismissive of Spacek's performance as well as the 1976 film in general. Julianne Moore is perhaps better cast as Margaret White but again is just simply nothing like as strong (or frightening) as Piper Laurie.
The alterations made to Carrie's humiliation are amongst some of the most ill conceived, as the changes actually made serve absolutely no function, other than to make it safer and more palatable for the modern day, easily offended purist. The new version; trying desperately to be subservient to the '76 scene, but whilst at all times keeping its hovering politically correct hat on. Whilst watching the 1976 versions equivilant scene was painfull to watch (as it should be), this version is entirely unconvincing in its execution as whole excluding these changes. Apparently according to Ms Moretz, the director (Kimberly Peirce) having 'the utmost respect', would never want to cause any distress or embarrasment for the actresses - which is absolutelty evident, as what we are left with is so comparitively tame, risk free, non-effective and unfaithful; she would have been far better off filming bbc breakfast. I have no problem with Ms Peirce wanting to film bland, politically correct dross, but she should also remember that this is NOT the Stephen King book of 'Carrie', nor should it have anything to do with the horror genre in general.
In the build up to the prom scene we have a few nice looking shots looking onto the stage before the actual rampage which yes (suprise suprise) contains some of the worst and most artifical looking computer generated visuals I have seen in any film, whatever has happened to the idea of actually SHOOTING some footage rather than GENERATING it?! Certainly almost made me reach out for the control pad
January 27, 2013
Chloe and Julianne were great. Julianne's role really freaked me out
December 16, 2014
A highly underrated remake because everyone compares it to the 76' original. This one is not only a little more faithful to the source material, but it improves on several things. Tommy feels more relatable this, And Carrie's mother is a deeper character than in the original. Not just a raving maniac.
Honestly, I think this one may be arguably better than the original. Chloe may be too attractive, but so was Spacek in my opinion, as the book had Carrie as a fat and unnattractive girl. I get her shyness here. And the characters of Sue and Chris are done much better this time. Overall, I think this is one remake worth checking out. It's up there with the remakes of Halloween and Fright Night.