Sorry guys but this was better than the original. The original feels like it takes forever and the are only a few scenes worrh watching and the rest of the movie lags, but this was enjoyable right from the first 30 seconds. The only semi likable char in original was Tommy. In this one kids are being kids and bullies, but some DO feel guilt,and most of the adults are personable. Totally worth it.
shareI respect your opinion, but I must disagree. The remake is ok, but in no way, shape or form is it better than the original. The original is haunting, emotional and visually stunning (particularly the prom scene), and the acting and characters are portrayed much better (here it felt like they were mostly delivering lines already made great by the 76 film, but just saying them in a stale, throwaway kind of fashion). The music is also much better in the original, as it actually feels like a part of the film, while the score here is just generic and bland. I did like Moore's performance as Margaret, but I hate the fact they keep toning down the fanaticism of the character (something the 76 film shows in all its glory, and Piper Laurie offers a much more commanding and intimidating presence); I would be pretty damn terrified of Laurie's Margaret, but Moore's I wouldn't be scared as much as annoyed. As far as likeability, I thought Carrie and Miss Collins were pretty damn likeable, certainly just as much as Tommy (even Sue got likeable after a while, when you could see she really wanted to help Carrie out), and even the minor characters had their moments (Sue's mother, the principal, Tommy's friends in the tux shop, Frieda, etc.) and they feel so much more developed, while the characters in the remake I felt were lacking in development (and the guy who played Tommy was really wooden, imo).
As I said, I did like the remake, but the original is definitely the superior film (Even its sequel, "The Rage", is better than this one).
"Speak of the Devil, and He shall appear."
The remake is ok, but in no way, shape or form is it better than the original. The original is haunting, emotional and visually stunning, and the acting and characters are portrayed much better. The music is also much better in the original, as it actually feels like a part of the film, while the score here is just generic and bland. I thought Carrie and Miss Collins were pretty damn likeable, certainly just as much as Tommy (even Sue got likeable after a while, when you could see she really wanted to help Carrie out), and even the minor characters had their moments (Sue's mother, the principal, Tommy's friends in the tux shop, Frieda, etc.) and they feel so much more developed, while the characters in the remake I felt were lacking in development (and the guy who played Tommy was really wooden, imo).
Blasphemy!
shareI totally agree with you - it WAS better than the orginal, something I thought I'd never ever say after being such a big fan of the original movie starring Sissy Spacek.
The Webmaster
www.wirralwriter.co.uk
Reamke sucked because it lacked nude woman
share[deleted]
says the retard who likes to bash nostalgia but honestly has no idea that Star Wars episode 4 to 6 and the Excorcists were products of nostalgia too as well and has to go hating on them because of how dated they are what a crazy loser
shareretard
who likes to bash nostalgia
Star Wars episode 4 to 6
Carrie is some kind of iconic movie even though it's flawed.
Horrible editing.
Bad/bland performances by Amy Irving and John Travolta.
The film not being creepy at all until the pig slaughter scene but yet it's labeled as "one of the scariest creepiest films of all-time."
The prom being a letdown. I'm not saying the prom in 2013 is perfect with flying Carrie (so stupid) but I couldn't take the prom seriously when people were getting killed with a HOSE.
You must be joking. How lame a response. However, I like the fact that you had the "fortitude" to respond to McQween. Carrie 2013 sux major ass!
Editing is okay, not the greatest, but it doesn't take away from the story.
I thought Travolta was great. He played a good slob.
The water hose works, because all water hoses have lot of water pressure and it was used to get people to move away from the exits. It also electrocutes the principal and Mr. Fromm. What would you rather have, banners killing people or paper stars falling.
Thanks for standing up for the De Palma masterpiece, Poseiden gal. That one chick is a dude and has a little barky dog named "Fizzgig". Friggin horrible movie!! Worst so called remake ever!
DePalma's film is a messy film, relying too much on the horror side of things rather than something scarier like bullying.
Be Brave and Never Give Up ^.^
DePalma's film is a messy film, relying too much on the horror side of things rather than something scarier like bullying.
Its not supposed to be a straight horror film. Bullying is a way scarier thing. Hell, I've almost killed myself because of it.
Be Brave and Never Give Up ^.^
I prefer the original it had better acting by the entire cast but I did enjoyed this remake.
share[deleted]
You're saying this movie is so great even 30 seconds in, but the original is boring even though it's the same path except this version, the girls are in a swimming pool and not on the volleyball court. Sorry, but even the first 30 seconds of the remake was a total mess.
shareSo is the convoluted original.
Be Brave and Never Give Up ^.^
Actually, any rationale behind the remake was dubious, since in terms of storyline it was like a scene-by-scene reproduction of original. However, with the passage of time, the original material had become terribly outdated. That the titular character knew absolutely nothing about her own body might just have been marginally believable in the 1970s, but would be completely preposterous today. It was odd that the filmmakers tried to "modernize" the story by introducing, for example, internet bullying, but did not seem to realize that in the age of internet, Carrie's ignorance would just be unbelievable.
The choice of the lead actress was crucial to the film, but Chloë Grace Moretz was much less credible than Sissy Spacek. Carrie was supposed to be shy and uneasy with people, and Sissy played her well. Carrie as played by Chloë instead looked retarded and even abnormal at the beginning. She was like Hit-Girl trying unconvincingly to look weak after losing her mom and dad. She got better when the character became happier after receiving Tommy's invitation to the prom. Piper Laurie and Julianne Moore were both good as Carrie's mother. Again, here the story had become outdated with time. The mother repenting her "sins" for having Carrie? The present decade has more than its generous share of religious fanaticisms - perhaps even compared to the 1970s, but not in that form.
Other "modifications" to the original also made little sense. Carrie had telekinetic powers, but did I not see both of her feet rising above ground? What had she become - a demon or the Antichrist? And what was the point of Sue Snell getting pregnant at the end? It served absolutely no purpose. The filmmakers were not even certain how to end the film: the Blu-ray ending was vastly different from that of the theatrical release.