When I first read a Stephen King novel, which was a couple of years ago, I realized that with an author like King it has to be very difficult to capture his imagination on film. The novel wasn't Carrie, it was the Tommyknockers, but the idea still applies. In 1976, when the original film came out, that was about as close to the original novel that anyone was going to get, and Brian De Palma did a magnificent job turning an amazing novel into an amazing film. But can that be repeated?
The answer is, unfortunately, no. Carrie (2013), while not quite living up to the original, is still a decent movie on its own, and would likely have seemed better had it not been faced with its predecessors. The 1976 film was opposed the same way, but with less pressure. When Stephen King released Carrie in 1974, he was still a new and up-and-coming author. The original film was held to a less strict standard than this recent remake. But let's talk about the movie by itself. It was good. Yep. However, that's pretty much all that comes to my mind. Not horrible, not so egregiously poorly made that I never want to even hear the name of the movie again, like some people seem to think. But also not amazing. Not so amazingly outstanding that it is my first choice any time my friends and I have a movie night. But it is, invariably, good.
First, I'll talk about the good parts of the movie. The acting was great, really quite good, but only with the two main characters. Chloe Grace Moretz is a and outstanding actress, and the same goes for Julianne Moore. Two outstanding actresses in two very difficult and complex roles. The supporting actors/actresses did an OK job as well, but nothing outstanding. Next comes the story and plot line. As to be expected, the story is quite decent. But you can't really go wrong when the mastermind behind it is Stephen King. However, even though the story is already existent, it can still be difficult to execute it well, and this is the case here. The movie starts out interesting, and compelling for sure, and the ending is very well done. But the fact is, the middle section was fairly boring, and you will probably find yourself rather tired of the movie and looking at the clock to see what time it is. There is only so long the characters of Carrie and her mother can carry the movie. I say this because Julianne Moore and Chloe Grace Moretz did such an amazing job with their roles, and that can't really be said for everyone. Right there is where the movie takes a fall. Acting is one of the most necessary things in a movie, and Carrie just can't quite deliver on that front. And honestly, that's one of the only bad things about the movie. However, without good acting, a movie can take a serious hit, and that is what happened here.
But despite this, the ending result was a rather average movie with varying levels of interest. You are brought to sympathize toward Carrie, and it really is a heart-wrenching story. The realness of Carrie's surroundings is something we can all feel, and most people know what it feels like to be left out and ostracized; it is a fear we all have. Because of this, I give Carrie a 6/10. If I were you, I would rent the movie to make sure you like it before you put forth any money for it. But hey, that's just me.
The answer is, unfortunately, no. Carrie (2013), while not quite living up to the original, is still a decent movie on its own, and would likely have seemed better had it not been faced with its predecessors. The 1976 film was opposed the same way, but with less pressure. When Stephen King released Carrie in 1974, he was still a new and up-and-coming author. The original film was held to a less strict standard than this recent remake. But let's talk about the movie by itself. It was good. Yep. However, that's pretty much all that comes to my mind. Not horrible, not so egregiously poorly made that I never want to even hear the name of the movie again, like some people seem to think. But also not amazing. Not so amazingly outstanding that it is my first choice any time my friends and I have a movie night. But it is, invariably, good.
First, I'll talk about the good parts of the movie. The acting was great, really quite good, but only with the two main characters. Chloe Grace Moretz is a and outstanding actress, and the same goes for Julianne Moore. Two outstanding actresses in two very difficult and complex roles. The supporting actors/actresses did an OK job as well, but nothing outstanding. Next comes the story and plot line. As to be expected, the story is quite decent. But you can't really go wrong when the mastermind behind it is Stephen King. However, even though the story is already existent, it can still be difficult to execute it well, and this is the case here. The movie starts out interesting, and compelling for sure, and the ending is very well done. But the fact is, the middle section was fairly boring, and you will probably find yourself rather tired of the movie and looking at the clock to see what time it is. There is only so long the characters of Carrie and her mother can carry the movie. I say this because Julianne Moore and Chloe Grace Moretz did such an amazing job with their roles, and that can't really be said for everyone. Right there is where the movie takes a fall. Acting is one of the most necessary things in a movie, and Carrie just can't quite deliver on that front. And honestly, that's one of the only bad things about the movie. However, without good acting, a movie can take a serious hit, and that is what happened here.
But despite this, the ending result was a rather average movie with varying levels of interest. You are brought to sympathize toward Carrie, and it really is a heart-wrenching story. The realness of Carrie's surroundings is something we can all feel, and most people know what it feels like to be left out and ostracized; it is a fear we all have. Because of this, I give Carrie a 6/10. If I were you, I would rent the movie to make sure you like it before you put forth any money for it. But hey, that's just me.