Customer Reviews

Carrie

5 star:		(19)
4 star:		(21)
3 star:		(16)
2 star:		(4)
1 star:		(7)

 

 

This is in response to some of the previous reviews for this film. One should realize that this is an adaptation of Stephen King's original novel. It is not a remake of Brian de Palma's 1976 movie. If you read the novel and then compare with this telefilm you will find that it is one of the most faithful transfers from book to film. Just wanted to wake some people. Also, Angela Bettis's performance doesn't surpass Sissy Spacek's but it isn't any less in my humble opinion, kudos to her portrayal of Carrie and to the rest of the cast and crew. A truly accurate portrayal of high school life.

I can't remember what came first-I either read Carrie or saw the Sissy Spacek original. I was really disappointed in the movie. Apparently DePalma et al ran out of money and goodbye last third of the book. But the end was also kind of silly. Hands sprouting from the grave-so overdone.

Stephen King has sat through years of mediocre adaptations of his movies. This has been corrected the last few years with the TV remake. And this film was an especially good candidate.

First the good parts. Angela Bettis (you may recall her as Kim Basinger's junkie sister from Bless the Child) is fantastic as Carrie. I like Sissy Spacek but she never really grabbed me in that part. Bettis really conveys Carrie's intelligence and promise while also projecting how close she is to snapping after years of torment. She really makes the movie the sympathetic tragedy that King intended. Ditto for Rena Sofer as the gym teacher who befriends her and Patricia Clarkson as her religious hysteric mother. Clarkson wisely underplays the role rather than re-launching Piper Laurie-style hysterics. This adaptation is much closer to the plot and spirit of the book.

What's not so good is....daggone it, they changed the ending again. I won't spoil anything so enough said. See which one you prefer. Sue Snell is not as sympathetic as she was in the book. I can't tell if that is because Kandyse McClure is miscast or the way the part was written. A little of both I think. Ditto for Emilie de Ravin as Carrie' chief tormenter, Chris Jorgenson. She was bitchy and unlikable but I didn't get the sense she was capable of the stunt she pulls. Many of the special effects are obviously digital-certainly films with far higher budgets have had this problem (The Hulk, we're looking in your direction.) It's a USA TV movie though so good job all things considered.

The plot is updated well (with references to Freddie Prinze and the internet.) If you enjoyed the book and are curious, this is worth a rental. You won't be disappointed over all. If you just loved the book more than life, maybe you should buy this.

Angela Bettis is GREAT! I mistakenly purchased this, thinking it was the Sissy Spacek version and decided to watch it because of the marvelous Patricia Clarkson. What a great, updated version of the Stephen King novel...lovingly yet innovatively produced with great performances, special effects and direction.

A bit overlong (it was a TV miniseries), but wonderfully executed. The ending was not as satisfying as the original, but it remains a great story of terror and vengeance, well worth watching.

I like the King books to television better then the movie versions because you get more story and a clearer picture of what is happening and why. (perfect example...The Shining, I thought the movie inhaled much wind quickly) I also like it for the fact that Tommy Ross was actually good looking in this version! The only thing I liked about the original movie was Piper Laurie, she was just too creepy and way too believable with her part. The more involved story gave better insight to why everything was happening. That's the problem with movies, they have to move fast through the plot so the attention deprived movie watcher won't lose interest and wander out of the theatre. Which means for those of us who don't mind long movies, we lose the attention to detail that would actually make the theater releases more enjoyable.

(...)

While we Stephen King fans can take things a little too personally when we all know a book to film does not always bridge the way we expect, this almost "copycat" (New World's Pirannha favourite example), this movie holds it's own and then some.

While I agree that the original is a classic in it's own right, this version modernizes the setting of the story and I don't believe comparisons are really fair.

The effects are superior tho that is not to say this version is better than the original. However, the acting, atmosphere and mood are retained and perhaps it is best to say that this is simply an update to this classic, frightening story.

Though I cannot substantiate it, there are rumours that this film concludes the way Stephen King had originally wanted to end the novel. Only a rumour and to hard-core fans who know better, if I am wrong, I apologize.

More of an update than a remake, it is hard to fault this version. It is at least as touching and frightening as the original, though fans bicker about the ending.

The actress playing Carrie <sorry, her name escapes me now> is as hauntingly beautiful as Spasek in the original and the "mood" of the film is somewhat darker, though not overly so.

Don't let the words "made for TV" scare you. This is a thoughtful and faithful remake of an outstanding story and deserves better than what many critics have levelled it with.

Try to get the Canadian, uncut version. Highly recommended !!

Let's not call this a remake of Brian DePalma's movie. It's a remake of Stephen King's novel. I'm not terribly fond of the DePalma film, and all in all I prefer this version. As another reviewer noted, it is a more faithful adaptation. This ceases to be the case at some point very near the end, though, which was a bit strange, but it doesn't bother me because I understand the point of the changes. Angela Bettis is an outstanding Carrie, and Patricia Clarkson as her mother gives a quiet, scary performance, which is a nice tonic for the entirely-too-over-the-top one Piper Laurie gave in DePalma's film. By no means is this a perfect film, and if you want the best version of the story you should still seek out Stephen King's novel, but it is enjoyable and well-made.

Stephen King's "Carrie" is among the top tier of horror novels ever written, but the 2002 remake version of the tale surpasses the original novel. Not to mention soaring past the original filmed version from 1976, which was loaded with talent on both sides of the camera but just couldn't capture the tension or emotion of the novel.

This is actually one that I only saw fairly recently. With it being a made-for-network-tv movie, I always kind of assumed it was going to be 'horror-lite', like the style of theatrical movies that were so popular in the late 90s. There were only a few of those I really got into, so the "Carrie" remake, while not something I was trying to avoid, was just never very high on my to-see list; I ended up renting it on a day when there were virtually no other horror movies in the video store I hadn't already seen.

From the first few moments onward, it becomes clear that this isn't an ordinary tv movie or mini-series. It's not on the light side either; either the DVD is extended or the backwards slide in what gets on tv hadn't really started in 2002. With Angela Bettis giving a stunning, award-worthy performance in the title role, "Carrie" is a riveting, frightening, and visually awesome tour-de-force that strikes at the heart and mind in a way that I've seen very few made-for-tv movies do. The story of "Carrie" is well-known but it's deeper and more affecting than can be conveyed in a few short words. The dysfunctionally shy, lonely, and anguished - and secretly telekinetic - Carrie Whyte is scorned and tormented by her peers at school, and berated and shamed at home by a mother who's own interpretation of religion is so twisted up she makes the world's most conservative televangelists look like Marx-quoting happy-go-lucky hippies. The question isn't If the repressed rage in Carrie is going to become too powerful for her to contain, but when and how. And it's after her life starts to improve only to be plunged into an even deeper pit that it's likely to come out.

The movie follows the book in operating in two timeframes - the bulk of the story going through in normal linear mode, with occasional flash-forwards into the future to show an ongoing investigation into catastrophic events that occured on Prom Night. The climatic last twenty-five minutes is jaw-dropping, much better than the same period in the novel (the only significant flaw in the novel, I thought, was that the events of that night took a sudden drop in its climatic end chapters right when things should have been at their most mind-blowing). The last twenty-five minutes have to be seen to be believed. Another change is that the number of sympathetic characters has been upped a bit - and they've been made more credible - than in the book or the previous remake. Despite those changes, it's very faithful to the spirit of King's novel - more than a lot of adaptations - but it's got the different hooks to make it feel so fresh. Everyone involved in this did smashing work, and they've created an all-time great, far better than I ever anticipated.

A horror essential, and every iota as great as the movie version of King's "The Green Mile".

The original Carrie was very loosely based on the Stephen King novel, while this TV version was dead on (exc. for the ending). If it is not compared to the orginal--which is absolutely a classic--it is an excellent, well done movie. I especially like the fact that is was more based on the Carrie character and her plight as opposed to "just" being a horror movie.

Almost like the re-make of "The Shining" with Rebecca DeMornay. No, there is nothing like Jack Nicholson's character and his "here's Johnny!"...but, definitely more resembling the events as portrayed in the book.

Ok this movie has no famous actors/actress's in it and it tells the same story of Carrie just in a made for TV movie. Kind of odd it's a remake by MGM(who also made the first one) This version tells the same story but has some more little features that are covered in the book, like the rocks falling from the sky. I thought it was pretty neat. In the original at the prom Carrie goes ballistic and she is kind of in a trance and I tell ya the look on her face scared even me. But in this version she just kind of stands there and don't even move that lock of hair that is in the way. And in this one ya can tell it's kayro syrup and food coloring, when in the original ya had a hard time telling that it really wasn't pig blood. I do like the way this version ends though, Carrie does not die in the house with her mom and that's pretty cool to leave it open like that. I'll have to read the book by Stephen King and see how this movie is really suppose to happen. One bad thing in this movie is ya can tell when the TV stations insert commercials because there is a black screen every 12 or so minutes in the movie that discouraged me somewhat.

Carrie White (portrayed by Angela Bettis) is your typical High school girl...except she is hated by all, and she has telekinesis. This movie is alot better than the original for many reasons. First of all, i am only 15, so i am going to think that the special effects are better right off the bat. I loved the original, but this one is so much better. I have read the book, and this one follows the book pretty much to the t. For instance, in the shower scene, they weren't supposed to yell "PLUG IT UP!", but rather "period" over and over. Also, the way the mother dies follows the book rather than the original. This is the way the movie was meant to be, and this version should've been made in 76, rather than the original. It would've worked just as good, had the original cast been in this version...These stars are just as good though.