Brian De Palma’s “Carrie” was well-received back in 1976 (even by the likes of Roger Ebert), and eventually became a staple of every online “Best of Horror” lists. So why remake something that apparently worked so well? After seeing “Carrie 2013”, I’m still not sure myself, other than simply to also remake the studio some money.
This iteration of Stephen King’s novel “Carrie” certainly ups the ante on the now-lackluster special effects of the original. But it was trying to serve two masters (the novel and the movie), and ended up doing neither very well. Added is an underdeveloped storyline from the novel, thrown in as a last-minute one-liner in the climax of the film. Gone is the surprise ending that itself turned into a staple of horror flicks to come, replaced with underwhelming CGI that does nothing to serve the story just told, and only opens the door a touch on an unwise sequel. At least DePalma’s dream-version ending made sense with the rest of the movie; this one takes place after Carrie is dead and gone …or is she? Ugh.
Most of the modern updates make sense, like the use of cell phones and YouTube in Carrie’s public shaming. And the build-up to the inevitable doom at the prom is palpable. But too much else just doesn’t work.
Firstly, as much as I love Chloë Grace Moretz, she is far too pretty (even in her dowdy, scared kitten persona) to make me believe she’s an outsider. Sissy Spacek’s take was much more believable, as were the reactions of her fellow classmates. Everyone seems to be afflicted with Eddie Murphy’s “That’s peculiar” disease when something fantastical happens (click here for Eddie – but it’s got some language! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zpPdgrr5diM). Way too early in the movie, Carrie is understandably upset in the girls locker room, so much so that she causes objects to move away from her in a 360 degree circle… and no one seems to respond the way normal people would to such an unusual occurrence. Later, she’s sitting in the principal’s office getting upset again, and the water in the cooler next to her bubbles, boils, and explodes as she runs out of the room… eliciting an unspoken “that’s peculiar” from the adults in the room. Seriously?
Yes, Julianne Moore is great; but Piper Laurie was better. I’ll never forget her crazed smile while using a butcher knife to form the sign of the cross just before stabs her frightened daughter.
But virtually nothing more than the effects are better in this re-imaging of Carrie; and even then they are way over the top. Possibly as a nod to the book, her rampage at the prom is made worse than in the 1976 movie. But rather than simply freaking out and causing all sorts of havoc in her grief, she directs it very well. Almost too well. She gains an awful lot of control very quickly even when seriously angry at the prom. Sadly, this buys into the old adage that all you have to do is get mad and suddenly your concentration is focused; the exact opposite of real life. And her final moment against her enemy Sue has been made almost laughable in this remake.
I’m bummed that this is Moretz’ s first movie to basically carry herself (Carrie! Hah! See what I did there?). I hope that she gets more chances in the future since she’s good. She just needs to pick her projects better, and Hollywood needs to resist the urge to remake everything that had cheesy special effects in it originally, unless you’re actually going to make it better.
“Carrie” is rated R for bloody violence, disturbing images, language, some sexual content, and being unnecessary.
100 Minutes
Directed by: Kimberly Peirce
Written by: Lawrence D. Cohen and Roberto Aguirre-Sacasa (screenplay); Stephen King (novel)
