carrie remake

[shape22]

I had high hopes for Chloe Moretz after seeing her breakout performance in Kick Ass. But now she seems helbent on becoming the queen of ill-advised and unnecessary remakes. First Let The Right One In and now Carrie? I'd put both of them high on the list of films that didn't need second stabs--EVER.

[vampyr789]

Originally Posted by Paff

Margaret White's speech is indeed in there, and Piper Laurie did it practically verbatim. So that part is not DePalma improvement, that's pure Steve-o

I hope they have a similar monologue in the remake, because that's one of my favorite parts of the movie.

[deepred]

Originally Posted by Copyboy

I love Chloe Moretz and Julianne Moore, but seriously, what Paff said.

I love them too -- plus it has the director of Boys Don't Cry so I am curious. That said, Julianne Moore has made a lot of bad movies but she's made a lot of good too.

[deepred]

Originally Posted by shape22

I had high hopes for Chloe Moretz after seeing her breakout performance in Kick Ass. But now she seems helbent on becoming the queen of ill-advised and unnecessary remakes. First Let The Right One In and now Carrie? I'd put both of them high on the list of films that didn't need second stabs--EVER.

Don't forget Dark Shadows.

[chancetx]

I actually like the book but completely agree that De Palma made the definitive movie version and filming things "just because they were in the book" is not a valid argument. Margaret White's death in the book worked well enough in a literary way but De Palma changed it brilliantly to work on film. Such a visual scene wouldn't have been so effective on the page.

I'll argue with Paff that the book and movie actually reveal Carrie's abilities exactly the same way. Carrie knows nothing of her powers until getting her period in the lockerroom shower. In the book she does recall an incident from her childhood that she had previously believed to be just an act of God but now wonders whether she caused it. But King's Carrie wasn't telekinetic as a child, or rather, wasn't aware of her power then. Just as in the movie she causes the lockerroom lights to explode, the principal's ashtray to fly off the desk and the teasing little boy to fall off his bike and then starts connecting the dots about her ability.

I guess I'm in a minority but I actually really like the cutaway/wraparound elements in the book. King presents Carrie White's story as a local tragedy that drew national attention and the interviews, commission report excerpts and other asides helped flesh out the events in an interesting way. Any time there's a tragedy we're always left to wonder why and how. The media interview the perpetrator's family, friends, co-workers and wonder if any of them had an idea something was wrong. We seek expert opinions to try and explain the behavior. We form commissions to investigate what happened and offer advice on how to prevent future tragedies. I'm sure King was inspired by the Warren Commission report on JFK's death and the national and media reactions to that tragedy as well as the deaths of MLK, RFK and the Kent State killings. But the book reads just as fresh today after tragedies like Columbine, 9/11 and James Holmes the "Batman" shooter. King could have told the story in a linear fashion but I believe these other elements actually give the reader a "you are there" aspect a straightforward novel would have missed. All that said, De Palma was wise to eliminate these elements for his film as they would not have translated well to the screen.

The one thing I wish De Palma had included from the book is Carrie working to strengthen her powers. In the book when she first suspects she might be causing these things to happen she tries to lift a hairbrush with her mind and exhausts herself after barely lifting it off the dresser. By prom night, she's moving multiple pieces of heavy furniture around the living room while she nervously waits for Tommy to pick her up. In the film, we see Carrie restore the broken mirror in her room and slam some doors and windows while arguing with her mother but you never really got a sense of her "owning" her powers. By the time the prom happens we've almost forgotten she has any powers at all. One more scene of her practicing her new-found powers would have developed that part of Carrie's story better.

As for this new remake, I'll see it but there's no way to NOT compare it with De Palma's version.

[dave13]

when i read the book, a long, long time ago, i thought it was dull as hell, and a chore to get through, despite the fact that its under 300 pages. but hey, what did i know then? i thought the movie Carrie was boring as well! I watched it again a few years ago, and it practically had me in tears it was so powerful. so, who knows what i might think of the book now? but i expect i'd agree with the general sentiment here.

[Katatonia]

Stephen King books translated verbatim to the screen almost never work well. Most literary works are heavily adapted (and rightfully so) for the completely different medium. Translate a book exactly as its written, and it's generally going to have a hard time being as enjoyable as the book.

King and others have tried it before with disappointing results. The Carrie TV film from 2002 was more faithful to the book, but often quite boring and uneven on screen.

Maybe we'll get a remastered Blu-ray of the original film from this one, that'd certainly be nice...

[Paff]

This thread inspired me to watch the incredible 1976 film tonight. Said it before, I'll say it again. Best horror film ever made. It's got everything. Once again, I rooted for Tommy and Carrie to make it, once again, I hoped Sue Snell would get Miss Collins' attention, and once again, my heart rate spiked as that bucket of blood is about to drop. And I had to turn on the lights as the final credits rolled, 'cause I was a bit uneasy...

You just can't improve on this film. It's horror perfection.

[Ash28M]

Originally Posted by Paff

This thread inspired me to watch the incredible 1976 film tonight. Said it before, I'll say it again. Best horror film ever made. It's got everything. Once again, I rooted for Tommy and Carrie to make it, once again, I hoped Sue Snell would get Miss Collins' attention, and once again, my heart rate spiked as that bucket of blood is about to drop. And I had to turn on the lights as the final credits rolled, 'cause I was a bit uneasy...

You just can't improve on this film. It's horror perfection.

It's my favorite horror films as well, saying that I'm hesitant to say that it's the best. The second half definitely but Do you not find the first half to be a bit inconsistent compared to the second?

[bigdaddyhorse]

Also watched Carrie the other night, finally on Blu. While it wasn't a great blu, it was no where near as bad as reviews had me thinking it would be. For a 20 year old plus film that was low budget to begin with, I thought it looked good in many spots. Maybe I'm becoming a glass-half-full kinda guy. I always forget how dope the movie is too, besides the heinous fashions and hair, it stands the test of time.

The bad news? I looked up the cast list on imdb for the re-remake, and there is a "Young Carrie" role, so the flashback(s) are probably gonna be part of it.

[mclay18]

Screen Gems is co-producing the remake with MGM, so there is some reason to be concerned -- especially since they made the horrific Prom Night, When a Stranger Calls and Stepfather remakes.

However, I don't think it'll be terrible like those. You have a terrific director and two amazing actresses (then again the original had that too), and so that works in the remake's favor. Moretz said Pierce is aiming for a Black Swan feel, so that alone will set it off from Brian de Palma's adaptation.

[Copyboy]

Originally Posted by mclay18

Moretz said Pierce is aiming for a Black Swan feel, so that alone will set it off from Brian de Palma's adaptation.

So, are we to be left wondering whether Margaret White is real or a figment of Carrie's imagination?

[CPT HOOK]

I can tell you all how it ends and save you $10.

[vampyr789]

Originally Posted by Ash28M

Do you not find the first half to be a bit inconsistent compared to the second?

that's probably up to one's own opinion.
I personally think the first half the movie is great, it explores the characters well and has a good build up to the last half.

Concerning the remake, if they're going for a Black Swan feel, I'm all for it, I absolutely love Black Swan. It's one of my favorite movies.

[Paff]

Originally Posted by chancetx

I'll argue with Paff that the book and movie actually reveal Carrie's abilities exactly the same way. Carrie knows nothing of her powers until getting her period in the lockerroom shower. In the book she does recall an incident from her childhood that she had previously believed to be just an act of God but now wonders whether she caused it. But King's Carrie wasn't telekinetic as a child, or rather, wasn't aware of her power then. Just as in the movie she causes the lockerroom lights to explode, the principal's ashtray to fly off the desk and the teasing little boy to fall off his bike and then starts connecting the dots about her ability.

Well, yeah, both King and DePalma (or technically Cohen, since he wrote the script) give rise to Carrie's power upon her first period, obviously a metaphor for the power a woman has over a man upon reaching puberty. But I do think there were more mentions of childhood incidents in the original novel. Wasn't there a rain of stones over the Whites' house at some point, or am I thinking of the wisely deleted scene from the movie?

Either way, I think focusing on Carrie and her ability only from the shower incident keeps the focus where it should be. Flashback scenes only muddy the message (become a woman = power), especially when you have such a short time to tell a story. I think if you include these flashback scenes, the viewer might be inclined to think "why wasn't she doing this before, if she always had the ability?" In a book, you can have an internal narrative of Carrie's thoughts of her discovery of the power, it's a lot harder to convey that on screen.

Originally Posted by Ash28M

It's my favorite horror films as well, saying that I'm hesitant to say that it's the best. The second half definitely but Do you not find the first half to be a bit inconsistent compared to the second?

Yes, I do find the first half inconsistent, and that's why I love the movie so much. Although I'm not sure if you're referring to the general tone of the story, or the visual/music style. Admittedly, some scenes (the girls doing calisthenics) seem like they come from a made-for-TV 70s movie, but I've always liked that style so it doesn't bother me.

If you're referring to the general tone of things (there's not a lot of horror, or even potential horror from the time when Carrie gets locked into the closet up until Chris and Billy killing the pig), no, I think that's perfect even if it is inconsistent. Because it allows us to develop feelings for all the characters, and puts horror on the back burner. Much the way it is in real life. C'mon, how many times does a character come on screen in a horror film and you know, I mean, KNOW they're just there to eventually be slaughtered? Sort of like the red-shirted ensigns in Star Trek, but I digress. Carrie would be a great movie even if the prom went well for Tommy and Carrie, and that's the brilliance of it. Instead of taking place in a universe where we know bad things are going to happen, it's like we're watching a normal movie that suddenly becomes a horror movie at the end.

For a bizarre comparison (and this is off the top of my head), imagine if at the end of American Pie, at the party at Stifler's house, suddenly a hooded maniac starts taking out the kids one by one. Most horror movies don't do that. If that were the plot of American Pie, the movie would almost start out at the party and spend most of the time on killing and stalking. That's fine, I like those kinds of movies. But if you take a seemingly normal movie and throw in a horror element late, it really makes those horror scenes that much more striking and heartbreaking. It's a change of pace from the typical horror movie, and it's why I consider it to be the best one ever made. It's DIFFERENT than almost any other movie out there, and all the elements work together. And it only improves on repeated viewings, as you know the tragic end to the story and you're powerless to stop it.

I'm pretty thick-skinned in this genre, but Carrie still generates a little white knuckle effect when most horror movies rarely raise my pulse even a little bit. I can't for the life of me see why any person who knows anything about film would want to remake it. If you're reading this, Kimberly Peirce, I'm talking to you.