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.
shareIt is subjective to say which version is better. The original will always be the better version in the eyes of the critics. Two Oscar nominations for Sissy and Piper as well.
shareI think if Carrie didn't fly it would be great cause i found the flying to be weird even if she could make herself fly since she could move things with her mind (thus she would be able to move herself also)
She could be a little to hot but really i didn't care and sort of added to her to me that when you first see her she isn't pretty really but then she is at the prom this was good to me... you could even use it as a reason why the girls wanted to do what they did cause she got hot all of the sudden or something :P
I also think that the original prom sucked maybe its because of the use of objects they used to kill the people (a hose come on lol) and she was just stiff all the way thru this
I wish this had nudity like the original :D
The part where she kills Chris may be a bit overdone but to me it was better then the original
The ending is way better in this...
If the majority of the people posting here are for real...This planet is doomed.
shareMost young people today get bored before the opening credits are over. Sorry the original Carrie wasn't fast enough for you. It's called story and character development.
shareIt's called story and character development.
Not necessarily. De Palma's wildly over-rated as a director. He has a list as long as your arm of derison-inducing duds to his name ['Dressed to Kill' anyone? What about the truly shocking 'Sisters' from 1972? 'Mission to Mars' [2000]?]. He's popular, no doubt about it, and nobody is immune to the occasional flop. What's amazing is that so few think he's made any. I didn't see much character development in The Untouchables or Snake Eyes - two his more popular offerings. De Palma's taste is for schlock and histrionics. It defeats me why he's so highly rated.
Carrie [1976] had its moments but the new version won me over quickly. I've never read the book but it's obvious you need a heavyweight to play a part like that of Margaret White, and while De Palma found one in the wonderfully overwrought Piper Laurie ["He took me! And I loved it...!"] Julianne Moore - perhaps the greatest actress of her generation - outguns her every step of the way in my judgement, trimming elements of wildness and incoherence to build a tension that makes us aware long before the end of just how badly things must end.
I responded to Chloe Grace Moretz's Carrie in a way Cissy Spacek's portrayal made impossible furthermore. Spacek's made a career of timidity and self-effacemnent - think Prime Cut [1972], Badlands [1973] or even the colourless wifely adjunct to Kevin Costner's embattled DA in 'JFK' [1991] - but her trademark passivity fails to communicate the love Carrie actually feels for her Mother. This is an aspect of the story Moretz's ability to 'click' with Moore on screen realises more effectively in my view.
Hey ho. All subjective in the end isn't it? :)
De Palma may have duds but CARRIE is not one of them. Plus Chloe Moretz? When Carrie is the hottest girl in school the story goes out the window.....
shareI know this was ages ago but I'm rewatching the remake and I totally agree. I usually don't like remakes, especially of classic horror but I love this one!
share