A shy girl, outcasted by her peers and sheltered by her religious mother, unleashes telekinetic terror on her small town after being pushed too far at her senior prom.
Your review makes it sound like it's not so bad. I refuse to watch any Carrie remake because I love the 1976 film so much (I have it on DVD). I can guarantee you wouldn't like that one because it has plenty of (audible) swearing and full frontal female nudity. This version has things from the book that the 1976 version changed or omitted.
From looking at the preview, though, there's one thing about it that I don't like about it at all - Carrie is pretty. She's not supposed to be pretty. She's supposed to be awkward (and in book she was overweight). Sissy Spacek managed to look the part. Yeah, I think I'll skip this version.
I understand that one hundred percent. I know a lot of people who have a favorite movie, but won't look at any other version (sometimes even refusing to read the book if it's based on one) because they really like the version they watch. In fact, come to think of it, that's kind of similar to how I don't want to watch the other versions of Carrie because I liked the remake so much.
The language probably wouldn't be too big of a problem. I heard tons of vulgur talk way worse than any movie just from my days in school and college. The nudity does make me even less interested in the movie though. Nudity makes me very uncomfortable, and 99% of the time is completely unnecessary and very distracting.
That kind of surprises me to hear, because I would have thought the 1976 version was a closer adaptation, since the remake includes elements like social media and cuberbullying that obviously did not exist back when the book was written. Or maybe it's more like the way the Charlie and the Chocolate Factory adaptations were, where neither movie was more accurate to the book, but they both did different things more accurately than the other did. I don't know.
From looking at the preview, though, there's one thing about it that I don't like about it at all - Carrie is pretty. She's not supposed to be pretty. She's supposed to be awkward (and in book she was overweight). Sissy Spacek managed to look the part.
I was actually going to talk about that in the review, because I see that come up in comments on YouTube videos of the movie quite frequently. But I ended up not talking about it, because I was trying to review the film as its own thing without trying to compare it to other versions. But since I don't have any such limitation on this message board, I'll explain my thoughts about it here. I don't really have a problem with it. From my days in school and college, I knew lots of really really awkward people, and the majority of them were quite good-looking but still not very popular simply because they were shy and didn't communicate with people well, and sometimes had their own interests that differed greatly from the common interests of the students in school. As a side note, I also get quite puzzled when people say that Sissy Spacek's Carrie was more awkward, because, from pictures I've seen from the movie, she actually looks quite pretty. But since I haven't actually seen the movie itself, I can't really make any assumptions about the performance itself. I guess it's all going to depend on personal preference.
That kind of surprises me to hear, because I would have thought the 1976 version was a closer adaptation, since the remake includes elements like social media and cuberbullying that obviously did not exist back when the book was written. Or maybe it's more like the way the Charlie and the Chocolate Factory adaptations were, where neither movie was more accurate to the book, but they both did different things more accurately than the other did. I don't know.
Yeah there definitely was no internet or cell phones in the book or original movie. But in some other respects it was a little truer to the book:
The gym teacher's name in Brian de Palma's movie was Miss Collins, but in the book and 2013 movie it's Miss Desjardan.
Sue wasn't pregnant in the 1976 movie.
Chris was evil in both movies, but in the 1976 one her relationship with Billy was a little more comedic. It sounds like the 2013 movie made her as nasty as the book did and even though she didn't have a confrontation with Sue in the book or 1976 movie, the old movie didn't show the enmity that developed between the two of them.
The 1976 movie never mentioned that Chris' father is a lawyer who tried to intimidate the principal.
The 1976 movie didn't have Sue's final confrontation with Carrie (but the confrontation in the book was different - Carrie was on the road dying and they were nowhere near the house).
The 1976 movie didn't mention the trial at all.
Carrie destroyed the house with stones falling from the sky. They actually wanted to do that in the 1976 movie, but technical problems led to the house simply collapsing in on itself.
Miss Desjardin lives in the movie - Miss Collins dies.
In some respects the 1976 movie is more faithful to the book, and to be honest, the changes the 2013 movie made were unnecessary and stupid imo. Anyway:
I was actually going to talk about that in the review, because I see that come up in comments on YouTube videos of the movie quite frequently. But I ended up not talking about it, because I was trying to review the film as its own thing without trying to compare it to other versions. But since I don't have any such limitation on this message board, I'll explain my thoughts about it here. I don't really have a problem with it. From my days in school and college, I knew lots of really really awkward people, and the majority of them were quite good-looking but still not very popular simply because they were shy and didn't communicate with people well, and sometimes had their own interests that differed greatly from the common interests of the students in school.
When I was in school, looks went pretty far. People in general seem more forgiving of your flaws if you're good-looking. I doubt anybody would have been quite that hostile to someone who looks like Chloe Grace Moretz.
As a side note, I also get quite puzzled when people say that Sissy Spacek's Carrie was more awkward, because, from pictures I've seen from the movie, she actually looks quite pretty. But since I haven't actually seen the movie itself, I can't really make any assumptions about the performance itself. I guess it's all going to depend on personal preference.
Sissy Spacek isn't ugly, but she isn't a knockout like Moretz. And with her dorky clothes, her slumped posture, and her hair in her face, she does look pretty awkward. But both films opened with Carrie flubbing a volleyball game, which probably wouldn't endear any kids to her no matter how she looked.
There's also dialogue in the remake suggesting that, when she was younger, Carrie, being more naive in her early days in school, actually went around telling all the students that they were going to be doomed to eternal torment, which would likely alienate her from many of the students who didn't like feeling threatened all the time. Chris actually states this as one of the reasons she hates Carrie.
Interesting list of changes. Since I have no intention of watching the original, and it will probably be a long time if I ever do watch it and review it, I'll put my thoughts on those differences here.
I always scratch my head at those kinds of changes. In the long run, character names rarely matter, and it wouldn't have changed the movie for me at all. But that just makes it all the more confusing as to why the change was made if it serves no purpose whatsoever. Pointless change, but wouldn't ruin the movie for me.
This wouldn't matter to me much either, because it's a very minor element of the story, though it does give Sue a legitimate reason for why she doesn't just go to the prom without a date (because she thinks she's come down with something), and I also liked the twist when Carrie found out and revealed it to her.
Chris was evil in both movies, but in the 1976 one her relationship with Billy was a little more comedic. It sounds like the 2013 movie made her as nasty as the book did and even though she didn't have a confrontation with Sue in the book or 1976 movie, the old movie didn't show the enmity that developed between the two of them.
I definitely wouldn't have minded a little bit more humor in the film, as it was quite dark, and sometimes a little bit of comic relief is a good thing. But at the same time, I have mixed feelings about this, because the more sinister portrayal of Chris and Billy really made me hate them. A more comedic portrayal would probably not have changed the film much for me though.
I'm afraid that's a deal-breaker for me. That scene was one of my favorite parts in the film, and is probably the part I have re-watched on YouTube the most times. It gives Sue and Carrie closure, and without it, it really causes Sue to not get much character development at all, and her characterization ends up going nowhere. Without this scene, literally the last time was see her (not counting the epilogue(s)) is when she witnesses the prom massacre. I rank this kind of omission right up there with adaptational changes like Scrooge not going to his nephew's for dinner at the end of some versions of A Christmas Carol, and Tybalt killing Mercutio by accident in the 1968 version of Romeo and Juliet, both of which I consider unforgivable adaptational changes. This scene was a crucial character moment in my opinion, and I don't think I would have asked to re-watch the film the next day it hadn't been included, as it really stuck with me.
I seem to recall seeing production images or something similar from the remake that were actually of that version of the encounter, which means they must have shot two different versions of the scene, and then decided which one worked better in the context of the film. I probably wouldn't have minded the alternate version of the scene, but the one actually used in the movie does add a sense of urgency with the house collapsing around Sue and Carrie. It would be interesting to see the alternate version of the scene get released for the public to see someday, but would I want to see it edited into its proper place in the movie? Not really.
It doesn't appear in the ending I preferred anyway, so it doesn't matter much. There's actually a whole bunch of footage of the trial that was filmed and was supposed to appear throughout the movie, with the main story told in the form of flashbacks, but this was all cut out, and the footage hasn't been released. This is actually one of the reasons I don't really care that much about getting an extended edition of the film released. because the fast pacing of the film actually made it quite enjoyable for me, and editing those scenes back in would probably have thrown off the pace quite a few times. I bet it probably also would have spoiled the events from near the end of the film, considering that it involves people being interviewed about those events. It would be interesting to have the footage released just as deleted scenes, but once again I don't want to see them edited back into the film.
Carrie destroyed the house with stones falling from the sky. They actually wanted to do that in the 1976 movie, but technical problems led to the house simply collapsing in on itself.
This is probably one of the things I'd actually prefer in the 1976 version, as the stones just created more questions than answers. There's actually also a (released) deleted scene for the remake that shows a younger Carrie causing stones to fall from the sky when her mother beats her for watching a neighbor sunbathe. I just don't see how Carrie is able to control the weather just those two times, and then never again throughout the rest of the movie. It also raises the question about why it took Carrie so long to figure out she had powers if they were this obvious early on in her life. Also, the actress playing the neighbor looks a lot like Portia Doubleday, so it probably would have confused audiences who weren't paying close enough attention as to why Chris is still in high school with Carrie when she was a teenager when Carrie was a little girl.
There's also dialogue in the remake suggesting that, when she was younger, Carrie, being more naive in her early days in school, actually went around telling all the students that they were going to be doomed to eternal torment, which would likely alienate her from many of the students who didn't like feeling threatened all the time. Chris actually states this as one of the reasons she hates Carrie.
Interesting! In the book the kids teased her because she'd kneel on the floor in the lunchroom and pray before eating. I don't think she told them they were going to hell, but that's something a kid might do, being raised with such a fire-and-brimstone mother. In the book Chris does say she and her mother are holier-than-thou.
One thing in the book that, due to time constraints probably couldn't be shown in either movie, was how hard she tried to fit in with the other kids as soon as they started making fun of her for being overly religious. She sneaked lipstick into school and blotted it in the bathroom with tampons. After getting her period she was enraged that nobody told her what they really were for. In the book (but not in the movie) she was filled with rage all the time. It's not a stretch that that prom stint pushed her over the edge.
I definitely wouldn't have minded a little bit more humor in the film, as it was quite dark, and sometimes a little bit of comic relief is a good thing. But at the same time, I have mixed feelings about this, because the more sinister portrayal of Chris and Billy really made me hate them. A more comedic portrayal would probably not have changed the film much for me though.
It was pretty funny. Nancy Allen said she was surprised at how evil she looked when she saw the final cut of the movie, because she thought she and John Travolta were more like comedy relief. She was pretty bitchy in the 1976 movie but Billy was not nearly as menacing as he was in the book. He was like a big doofus, but one with the ability to smash a pig to death ...
The 1976 movie didn't have Sue's final confrontation with Carrie
I'm afraid that's a deal-breaker for me. That scene was one of my favorite parts in the film, and is probably the part I have re-watched on YouTube the most times. It gives Sue and Carrie closure, and without it, it really causes Sue to not get much character development at all, and her characterization ends up going nowhere. Without this scene, literally the last time was see her (not counting the epilogue(s)) is when she witnesses the prom massacre.
Yeah, I can understand that. There was a shocker of an ending for her though - her mother is on the phone, while Sue is asleep in the next room. (De Palma also had Amy Irving's real mother play her mother in the film - and yet, to me, they don't look alike.) She's telling her friend about all the reporters hassling them, and how Sue's doctor discouraged her from going to any funerals, and we see Sue's dream. She's walking barefoot towards the steaming square of earth where Carrie's house used to be, and there's a cross-shaped grave marker that says "Carrie White Burns in Hell". She lays flowers at the foot of the cross, and Carrie's arm shoots up and grabs hers. She wakes up screaming. That's the end of the movie.
This is probably one of the things I'd actually prefer in the 1976 version, as the stones just created more questions than answers. There's actually also a (released) deleted scene for the remake that shows a younger Carrie causing stones to fall from the sky when her mother beats her for watching a neighbor sunbathe. I just don't see how Carrie is able to control the weather just those two times, and then never again throughout the rest of the movie. It also raises the question about why it took Carrie so long to figure out she had powers if they were this obvious early on in her life.
There's no real explanation of that. It's in the book too - her three-year-old self rains stones down on the house. In the book, where they intersperse bits of a book written by a reporter, they talk about telekinesis and latent ability and postulates that the long-hidden talent was squelched by guilt but resurfaced when puberty hit and all that stuff.
Yeah, I can understand that. There was a shocker of an ending for her though - her mother is on the phone, while Sue is asleep in the next room. (De Palma also had Amy Irving's real mother play her mother in the film - and yet, to me, they don't look alike.) She's telling her friend about all the reporters hassling them, and how Sue's doctor discouraged her from going to any funerals, and we see Sue's dream. She's walking barefoot towards the steaming square of earth where Carrie's house used to be, and there's a cross-shaped grave marker that says "Carrie White Burns in Hell". She lays flowers at the foot of the cross, and Carrie's arm shoots up and grabs hers. She wakes up screaming. That's the end of the movie.
That was another scene that was actually filmed for the remake but didn't make it in and hasn't been released. Test audiences said that they saw the ending with the arm coming up out of the ground, and then Sue waking up in bed, only in that version it happens in the graveyard instead of at the place where Carrie's house use to be. Other test audiences talked about different alternate endings of the film, one of them being the same as the ending I just mentioned here, only with it not being a dream and Sue actually being killed by the arm... And the less said about that version of the ending the better.
I suppose the people filming the remake wanted to homage the shocking ending of the original, but decided that the original ending was too well-known, and thus went with the gross-out ending that ended up on the Blu Ray version. I'd love to see the other ones they filmed someday though, if they ever decide to release them.
Other test audiences talked about different alternate endings of the film, one of them being the same as the ending I just mentioned here, only with it not being a dream and Sue actually being killed by the arm... And the less said about that version of the ending the better.
