MGM and Screen Gems have released a teaser for Kimberly Peirce's Carrie (2013), a remake of Brian De Palma's classic film, which earned Oscar nominations for stars Sissy Spacek and Piper Laurie. The remake stars ChloŽ Grace Moretz, Julianne Moore and Judy Greer, and will open in theaters across the U.S. on March 15th, 2013.
The quiet suburb of Chamberlain, Maine, is home to the deeply religious and conservative Margaret White (Moore) and her daughter, Carrie (Moretz). Carrie is a sweet but meek outcast whom Margaret has sheltered from society. Gym teacher Miss Desjardin (Judy Greer) tries in vain to protect Carrie from local mean girls led by the popular and haughty Chris Hargenson (Portia Doubleday), but only Chris' best friend, Sue Snell (Gabriella Wilde), regrets their actions. In an effort to make amends, Sue asks her boyfriend, high school heartthrob Tommy Ross (newcomer Ansel Elgort), to take Carrie to prom. Pushed to the limit by her peers at the dance, Carrie unleashes telekinetic havoc.
Note: Blu-ray.com has a review for Brian De Palma's classic film here.
Looks great to me. I loved the DePalma version, however I thought the scale of destruction was much smaller than what King described in his book. This teaser indicates that won't be the case in this version.
For Christ's sake! or Carrie's sake in this case. The first remake of Carrie was terrible and it really doesn't matter if this one sucks or not. The original Carrie is a classic, one of the all time horror greats. Leave the classic horror films alone and respect their legacy. Hollywood horror has long been in decline. Enough with this remake bullshit, instead let the classics be a source of inspiration for new talent with a fresh perspective leading the way into a new golden age of Horror cinema. Wishful thinking? Maybe, but it's possible. It's up to the suits.
I love the original movie, but I like the people involved in this one. I mean, Chloe Grace Moretz is a pretty good actress and Julianne Moore is great in any role she's given.... I'm willing to give it a chance.
How sad for Julianne.... From such lofty heights she came-a-crashing.... The dearth of originality and imagination from Hollywood these days is truly sad.... De Palma's "Carrie" was a genius of its time, and continues to horrify, amuse and amaze to this day! One could probably count on one hand the number of times an out-n-out horror film had its actress(es) nominated for an Oscar: Ellen Burstyn ("The Exorcist"), and Piper Laurie and Sissy Space for "Carrie." Blech to remakes...!
Exactly, lokipei, it's a new adaptation of the novel. I also think DePalma's version is a classic, but it strayed enough from the book to make another adaptation possible on its own terms. I'm definitely giving it a shot, especially with the talent involved.
The original WAS a classic and had great performances, but it also deviated strongly from the novel. The TV remake was much closer to the original story, but was also a lot less fun. Hard to tell from the preview what this one will be like, but I hope that "conspiracy" line doesn't mean they're going to reinterpret Carrie as a terrorist.
So IMO, they need to bring something to this that the original movie and the TV remake didn't have. That's a tall order. Otherwise, there's no reason for the remake other than teens on dates won't go to see old movies in theatres (not that they play any).
Surprised so many people are whining about "remakes" in this thread.
How many of them have read the Stephen King novel? I'm guessing very few.
The original film is a classic. It's untouchable. Having said that, Kimberly Pierce isn't remaking it. She's re-adapting the novel. The book is a masterpiece and while DePalma's film is amazing -- it's not exactly a direct interpretation of the story. There's plenty of room to make a more faithful adaptation of this novel and I think that's what they're trying to do. Nobody discounts how great the original film is.
I'm normally against most remakes as well but this isn't the standard remake. As far as I'm concerned when there's original source material like a novel that's being re-adapted as opposed to a straight remake it's fair game. I'm reminded of the whining about Fincher's take on Stieg Larsson's The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo -- which I found better than the Swedish film -- and after the American film was released seemed to result in "Oh, okay... that's not what I expected..." -- the film was a very worthy adaptation of a foreign film released just a few years prior.
Anyone recall the other "remake" Moretz took part in... LET ME IN -- the fantastic American film based on the amazing "Let the Right One In" ? That was a fantastic 2nd adaptation of the source material. It's different enough from the original film to be worthwhile. Is Let the Right One In better? I thought so. Let Me In still blew me away.
The Carrie remake with Angela Bettis was dreadful and I'm still pumped for this film. Pierce is a very talented film-maker and I doubt she'd have taken this job if she didn't think she could bring something new to the table. In 20 years which film will be remembered? Probably DePalma's -- but does that mean this version should be discounted before anyone has even seen it? I think 'No.'
>> The Carrie remake with Angela Bettis was dreadful
Many would think "May" is an exceptional horror film. Horror is such a crowded genre. A horror film needs something extra to stand out, and "May" certainly has it.
True film lovers DO NOT care whether a remake is truer or less true adaptation of the source; they only care *filmmaking skills*. And the horror genre, with its emphasis on the visuals, the sound, the atmosphere, etc. is an arena for directors, not writers. What are the odds that Kimberly Peirce has more directing skills that Brian de Palma?
I don't think Pierce has MORE skills than DePalma, necessarily, but I'm doubtful you've seen Boys Don't Cry or you wouldn't question her talent.
"I know Kimberly Pierce, I've known her for twelve years. I met her in Paris when she was on a press junket for Boys Don't Cry. We spent some time in New York together, we used to go to the theatre together," De Palma told Fangoria.
He added, "She's a bright, talented person. I tried to encourage her to make a movie very quickly after the success of Boys and it took her years to find right materialÖbut anyway, she contacted me when she decided to do Carrie. We discussed the right way to approach it, who she was going to cast and we had a few discussions about it and basically I gave her my blessing. She's a very talented girl and I'm really excited to see what she does. It will be more like the book, I think, which is Sue Snell's testimony which puts Carrie in kind of bracketsÖ" (ShockTillYouDrop.com)
For the record, May is one of my favorite films and Angela Bettis delivered probably one of the greatest performances I've seen in film (horror or otherwise). Where the heck is THAT on BD? Lionsgate... get to work. Despite this, the 2002 Carrie remake suffers from being an attempt to shoehorn the film into a pilot for a TV series that never materialized. It's dull and lifeless. Also the "tunnel vision" keeps Carrie from performing her actions out of anger and makes her something of a victim to her powers. "She's not a monster! She can't control it! She doesn't even know what's happening!"
Bettis does what she can with the material but it's a soulless film. She deserved much better talent behind the camera.
My comment was less about the new film being "faithful" to the source and more about suggesting that there's plenty of material for them to work with without necessarily remaking what DePalma already did. Filmmaking isn't just about pretty visuals. It's about telling a story. Genre is irrelevant in that. Pierce knows how to do that, both in writing and in capturing excellent performances and displaying them with fantastic visual detail. She's incredibly talented.