I like Chloe Moretz as an actress, but her Carrie role was terrible! Everything felt forced, unnatural, overacted. Even just walking down the halls, she was a caricature of a shy, introverted, self-conscious outsider. Anyone agree?
Both were poor. De Palma's film is artistic and beautifully directed, scored and shot. The direction here is just flat like a TV movie and so is the score and photography. De Palma also got way better performances from the actors, which is a big part of being a good director. I was bummed this turned out so bad since I thought Pierce did a great job on Boys Don't Cry. This remake was just awful.
Miscasting (the hot blonde girl as the ugly bullied girl) combined with bad direction. Chloe's acting wasn't too good either, but I'm way more inclined to pint it on the director/casting people than her
Really everything in this movie seemed rather forced, unnatural, and overacted, except maybe for Julianne Moore. So I'm not sure where the line is with Chloe. I agree that I wasn't buying her as the bullied weirdo victim of a psycho and domineering mom. Everything felt awkward and just obvious acting with her, in my opinion.
However...the other people were pretty cringeworthy too. The gym teacher for instance...way over the top! Nothing believable about her. Dancing like that with a low cut dress at the prom, too? And while I know the teacher in the 70s movie was tough, I bought it more then. Nowadays if you say *beep* or smack a kid, you'd be fired on the spot (well, fired for the smacking). So that didn't translate well to this modernized version.
And then Chris, the mean girl. Again, way way over the top. I didn't buy it. I get that she was spoiled by her dad but...if she was also supposed to be a really popular girl...um they don't act like that. she was borderline psycho herself. Popular people are usually cool and over it and, well, likable...the one other people want to be. This one was just yelling and all over the place like a baby.
This movie was very disappointing. It really felt like a waste of time. No offense to those who liked it. I just wanted it to be over. It didn't add anything to the already well known story (again, except maybe for portraying the mom as more mentally ill/unhinged as opposed to sociopathic like the original one...she didn't seem able to be loving at all). But it was just...blech. The whole film felt rushed and unconvincing. And we couldn't connect with any of the characters...etc.
It just made me want to watch the old one again.
Edit: OHH I will say the one thing I thought this movie did really well. Was showing the visible reaction/sinking/fear of Carrie whenever the mother would come up, or when Carrie would see her, etc. That's like real abused kids...you know it's a bad sign if they dread and resist seeing the parent. So this movie/Chloe did good demonstrating that with her demeanor.
As much as I think Chloe Grace Moretz is a decent actress, I found her to be somewhat miscast as the titular character. She is beautiful and attractive – sure. But when you watch the 1976 film version, you can see Sissy Spacek is also pretty yet has this capability to play somewhat plain, average looking characters at the same time. Spacek was even nominated for a Best Actress Oscar for her performance. I found it a little hard to believe Chloe as Carrie to be honest.
The 2013 film adaptation of the Stephen King novel is somewhat decent but it pales in comparison to the superior 1976 film version.
What I couldn’t stand about this film version was that all of the actors playing the teenage characters looked like something out of an MTV music video. The original version at least cast actors that could pass for being high school students, looked average and not as glossy. They looked like the kind of kids you could have went to school with, imo. High school doesn't always look like something out of Seventeen magazine. In fact, it's mostly the opposite.
Carrie is not as bad as some of the crap that gets made today and does have decent acting performances from Chloe Grace Moretz, Julianne Moore, and Judy Greer. If it wasn’t for the decent acting performances, this film version wouldn’t have been worth it.
I couldn’t stand most of the CGI in this movie and could tell the CGI was artificial. At least the original film version was more authentic in terms of the effects that this film version lacked.
I'd give: Carrie (1976) 9/10 Carrie (2013) 5/10
Cast Away...It's like Forrest Gump, but on an island.
I think it was bad direction because EVERYONE SUCKED in this movie, not just Carrie.
Everyone was cliche and over the top. specially the bad kids. and the angry father of the bad girl. This was probably the most cliche movie of 2013. Everyone is so over the top. I can't believe it.
I do agree. The original Carrie is 1000X better. That version is a classic and no one will be talking about this version in a good 5-10 years. Sissy Spacek will always be Carrie White. Having read the Stephen King novel, there are some things in the newer version I can appreciate, minor bits and things, yet other than that, there were a lot of parts in the newer film version that made me cringe.
For example, there is the opening. The camera creeps up the stairs as we hear the mother scream while unaware she is giving birth made me automatically think of that creepy Life Alert commercial from more than a year ago. I was literally waiting for an old lady to yell, "Help! I've fallen and I can't get up!"
That's how bad it was.
Cast Away...It's like Forrest Gump, but on an island.
The directing couldn't possibly have led to that bad of acting. Directing can ruin movies, but her acting was just flat not good in this, in my opinion. Although, it got better in some scenes.