Carrie (2013 Remake)

TerrorFirmer

Anyone seen it, and if, what opinions have you?

I thought it was good - it did diverge slightly from the source material, so that original fans of either the book or the original film starring Sissy Speacek would be left a little guessing in terms of direction until the end, but, ultimately, as much as I did like it, I felt it was severely lacking in credible development, and it did just mirror the original exactly in the major plot points so...

6/10 from me, for being an enjoyable film from a movie goers point of view, but, if you've already seen Carrie (1976)....it's little more than a rehash with updated environments.

Kess73

It is to the original Carrie what the 1998 version of Psycho was to the original Psycho.


A by the numbers remake with a lead character devoid of any qualities that might inspire pangs of sympathy from the viewer.

Imo of course.

Bebo Rocks

It was very dumb that it had communal showers, Girls don't take showers in front of each other naked in 2013 America. in 1976 maybe but not in 2013.

Mr E

I thought it was a decent rework of the source material - not spectacular, but I enjoyed it.

The original has dated badly, so it was a worthwhile remake.

Warper

Mr E wrote: »

I thought it was a decent rework of the source material - not spectacular, but I enjoyed it.

The original has dated badly, so it was a worthwhile remake.

As was said on Film 2013 Chloe Moretz is just too strong and too good looking to play a character as fragile as Carrie. Sissy Spacek will never be equaled for vulnerability and frightfulness. That said Julianne Moore is brilliant as the mother. It is an average enough film but the casting of Carrie really lets it down.

Bipolar Joe

Thought it was a useless remake, especially for this day and age. It was marketed towards teens, and the slow build up doesn't work for that. Yr one from Kick Ass didn't work in the role, she would have been making fun of Carrie. What were they thinking casting her there?! Sure, gwan, back comb her hair a bit there, be grand.

Also, the pay off was annoying. Doing floaty tai-chi and stuff looked stupid. Carrie 1976 was scared and acting on impulse, Kick Ass Girl wanted to hurt people, which destroys the sympathy you have for the character.

ScumLord

TerrorFirmer wrote: »

Anyone seen it,

I don't bother watching remakes of good films. Whats the point?

Rabies

ScumLord wrote: »

I don't bother watching remakes of good films. Whats the point?

I don't bother watching movie versions of good books. Whats the point?



:pac:

LuckyLloyd

Lots of snobbery on show here!

I enjoyed the original but I do think it's dated badly. This is a decent update. Very similar to the original and mostly as enjoyable. Will be a hit amongst those who were never exposed to the De Palma flick. Moretz and Moore play their parts well, I don't get the 'Moretz isn't suited for the role' stuff personally. She does a very good job with the three stages of the character.

ScumLord

ScumLord wrote: »

I don't bother watching remakes of good films. Whats the point?

So you won't watch John Carpenter's The Thing or the Magnificent Secen or the first of the Dollars trilogy?

Sure there's done pretty god awful remakes and adaptations out there but there's also more than a few gems. The Dawn of the Dead remake is one of the more energetic and fun films of the past decade.

The original Carrie is incrediably dated and last time I watched it I found all the tricks of the day to be cheesy and distracting. While I'm in no great hurry to see the new one I can see it bring just as good as the much loved classic.

JumpShivers

I didn't see the original but by hearing about it, it seems it was more terrifying than this remake.

The recent one is pretty decent, I enjoyed it.

Mickeroo

Deleted User wrote: »

The Dawn of the Dead remake is one of the more energetic and fun films of the past decade.

Still Zack Snyder's best film.

Mickeroo

Mickeroo wrote: »

Still Zack Snyder's best film.

It lends itself perfectly to his style. I really enjoyed 300 but Dawn is just so immensely re-watchable that it'll always be his best work. Well, unless of course he does something truly exceptional in the years to come.

ScumLord

Rabies wrote: »

I don't bother watching movie versions of good books. Whats the point?

Well they're different mediums. But I get your point, I'll stop reading books.

Deleted User wrote: »

Sure there's done pretty god awful remakes and adaptations out there but there's also more than a few gems. The Dawn of the Dead remake is one of the more energetic and fun films of the past decade.

The dawn of the dead remakes were awful films. I don't like remakes. I find them lazy and all they're doing is putting a modern gloss on something hoping they'll make loads of money reselling it. I think films tend to capture a moment in time, the film works in that time period because it was making a statement about that time and place and the stories that happened. Remaking them just takes them out of context for profiteering.

Mickeroo

ScumLord wrote: »

The dawn of the dead remakes were awful films. I don't like remakes. I find them lazy and all they're doing is putting a modern gloss on something hoping they'll make loads of money reselling it. I think films tend to capture a moment in time, the film works in that time period because it was making a statement about that time and place and the stories that happened. Remaking them just takes them out of context for profiteering.

There was only one Dawn of the Dead remake? Was a very different film to the original too to be fair.