Carrie - Movie Reviews - Rotten Tomatoes

Carrie Reviews

Page 3 of 159
February 15, 2016
It boasts a handful of modern twists and some impressive technical effects, but this second remake of 1976's horror classic fails to bring many truly fresh ideas to the table and rings hollow due to a screenplay that unabashedly borrows from the original -- and plummets further into the genre barrel from inferior performances by its well-chosen cast.
February 8, 2016
Way better than the first carrie, the ending just as it supposed to be â 1/4ď¸?
January 29, 2016
I thought this would be a huge and really good horror film. It was huge but not as good as I thought it would be. First of all Chloe Grace Moretz is way too cute to be a social outcast but they did a pretty good job making her one. And the movie went by too quick in my opinion! I was hoping for like a half hour more of something! The bullying was plain cruel and whoever was like the bully in the movie in real life is really stupid and senseless and I doubt anyone would go that far in real life. It overall just wasn't my kind of horror flick. C-
January 21, 2016
Creeped the crap out of me in some parts. Chloe was great as she usually is. But Julianne just took the creepiness to a whole new level. Some deaths did shock me but this shows that you should never piss off a girl at Prom!
½ January 20, 2016
Pretty good remake, but since I saw the original film and know that plot line, I wish they added a new twist or interpret the source material differently. But the film is just an update of the original.
½ January 15, 2016
All the brutality of the original, with none of the art.
½ January 14, 2016
I don't believe much in "excellent" Hollywood remakes.
Some are good, and some are just terrible.
And this is the latter.
A 2013 remake of Brian De Palma's far superior 1976 Carrie, this film cannot compete with the original.
Why? Because there's so many things about the original that were so good, it was memorable. This remake doesn't even add up to it's plot, effects, or characters.
Sissy Spacek was Carrie White. She had just the character for her performance. It made me believe her troubled character, and that I praise.
Chloe Grace Moretz was nothing more but an annoying bitch. She looks more like a popular girl than a social outcast. Her bloody look didn't make me believe anything about her. I've even grown to hate her for her other stupid performances.
And everyone else looked like Hollywood extras than an independent unknown cast. One of the worst horror movie remakes I have watched. I suggest people stay away from this one and keep to the original.
December 29, 2015
Good till the en, not that gory, not that scary but it was kinda what I expected
December 22, 2015
It was very good and I like the effects
November 27, 2015
Moretz is a great actress, but neither her nor Bettis and not even Spacek are ugly enough to portray Carrie. She was written to be a fat, ugly outcast. None of them would have been outsiders; Moretz was beautiful at prom!
Another thing - this adaptation shouldn't have been modernized. The 70s film brings on a sort of rawness; posting Carrie on YouTube almost belittles the story.
November 27, 2015
Why was this made? It can't touch the original, and covers the same old ground without justifying its existence. It is there, that's about it. Watch the original for a very different experience.
November 27, 2015
Rather uneven and unnecessary although this remake is, the main fault appears to be the screenplay - it's all so much blunt force trauma, albeit delivered in blood. There are no nuances, no subtleties and no real point to it all. And the ending...risible.
November 8, 2015
The best version of the story I'd say
November 5, 2015
I love it, one of my favorite movies!
½ November 1, 2015
Remake lejos de estar a la altura del original de Brian de Palma, con problemas de tono (Mean Girls versión gore), aunque medianamente pasable gracias a las buenas actuaciones de Julianne Moore y Chloe Grace Moretz.
October 30, 2015
Nothing special about this remake. Almost a cut and paste copy without the charm that made the original a classic.
October 29, 2015
This Remake of Carrie is Further Better than the 1976 version ,the powerfull performance of the cast, the dark enviroment and the stange sound makes the film enjoyable tensed up and interting
½ October 23, 2015
Some good acting and it helped that I saw the original, but this movie cut corners too quickly and in the end, it felt unnecessary to remake this film.
October 18, 2015
I watched this movie last night and found it more enjoyable than the original.
Chloe's interpretation of Carrie was more human than Sissy Spaceks version. Chloe's had more empathy to the people who were trying to be friendly towards her, while Sissy's one was more cold-hearted and "zombie like". I especially liked how the modern one dispatched of the bully, it seemed more cathartic than simply having the car explode and tumble away from her as it was in the original.

The remorse of the character Sue Snell seemed more authentic as well, and even after all of the horrors of the Prom night, I'd think that she would still have a soft spot for Carrie. She seemed not as horrified as the original movie portrayed.
Also I liked the fact that there were some other survivors from the prom, it wasn't as bloodthirsty as the original.
I give the movie 4 out of 5, as it was more enjoyable than the original.
½ October 15, 2015
Kimberly piece should stick to character-oriented dramas, not to films that rely cine-subtleties.

The original Carrie worked because - among other things - Brian DePalma, knew how to create the proper atmosphere. 'Sides being wonderfully acted, this film is expertly crafted, as well. And this is what lacks from Kimberly Pierce's take on the same material: she just doesn't shine as far as craftsmanship is concerned. I'm not saying she is a bad director. "Boys don't cry" was a very good film, for example and it was good because it focused on it's characters, it made the audience care for them. From a tech. standpoint, "Boys don't cry" is unremarkable, but it doesn't matter.

But when Carrie's craftsmanship revolves around cheap cliches, it matters, because: 1. there is a predecessor, which is far superior 2. the actors are miscast and the overall approach is as cliched as the film's special effects.

There is a good thing to come to this, however: everything about this film is so stunningly bad that you only need 15 random minutes, at most, to realize that watching the entire flick would be a waste of time.
Page 3 of 159