After I finished the book, I was so excited to see the original version. I also saw there was a remake, so I rented them both. This one stayed true to the book, and so many of the scenes that I was looking forward to seeing in the original and that weren't there were here (e.g, confrontation between Mr. Hargensen and the principal, the scene with young Carrie and the neighbor, the rocks falling through the roof.) Also the ending was happy and I wanted to see Carrie happy, just like Ms. Desjarden said! Does anyone agree?
Well, that's what's nice about movies, books, music, etc....some will like things more than others. It's all a matter of personal taste.
That being said, the original version is much better IMHO. The acting was top notch, and Spacek and Laurie going head to head in a battle of wills is cinema gold. Of course, it would have been nice if Depalma had included more elements from the book, but because of budget costs, he couldn't.
The main problem I had with the remake was Angela Bettis. I don't want to sound mean, but she was badly OVER-acting. She played carrie as if she was
suffering from a nervous breakdown...constantly shaking and crossing her eyes when she got scared, etc...it was just too over the top. I wanted to pick on her myself! Also, on the other end of the spectrum, Patricia Clarkson's performance was too understated. She was playing 'margaret' as a perfectly calm rational human being who just happened to believe practically ANYTHING was sinful. I just didn't believe she was a crazy woman who would snap and kill her daughter...unlike Laurie's performance.
To end on a positive note, I DID like the fact that Billy Nolan was much more dark and sinister in the remake...he's that way in the book.
If you love Jesus Christ and are 100% proud of it copy this and make it your signature!
reply
share
robotrix
15 years ago
Also, on the other end of the spectrum, Patricia Clarkson's performance was too understated. She was playing 'margaret' as a perfectly calm rational human being who just happened to believe practically ANYTHING was sinful.
Think that was based on "It's the quiet ones you have to watch."
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Last night, I was lying back looking at the stars and I thought...where the *beep* is my ceiling???
reply
share
StrongRex
15 years ago
I think this one was deeper and much more developed. I like both versions, but I'm kinda leaning toward this one.
reply
share
knight-in-black-leather
15 years ago
I think this one was deeper and much more developed. I like both versions, but I'm kinda leaning toward this one.
Yes, this version had more time to develop the characters a bit more, but I still found it inferior.
If you love Jesus Christ and are 100% proud of it copy this and make it your signature!
reply
share
knight-in-black-leather
15 years ago
Think that was based on "It's the quiet ones you have to watch."
Interesting point.
If you love Jesus Christ and are 100% proud of it copy this and make it your signature!
reply
share
sylvia67
13 years ago
I actually liked Patricia's cold, understated performance in this.. i always thought Piper Laurie, though i like her as an actress, played Margaret White wayyy over theatrical and over the top... but it is all personal taste after all.
reply
share
mixedmed
13 years ago
The main problem I had with the remake was Angela Bettis. I don't want to sound mean, but she was badly OVER-acting. She played carrie as if she was
suffering from a nervous breakdown...constantly shaking and crossing her eyes when she got scared, etc...it was just too over the top. I wanted to pick on her myself! []
THIS! 1000%! It's like the only two expressions she had was bug-eyed and cross eyed and it drove me crazy. It didn't make you sympathetic to Carrie, it just made you say, "Well no wonder people wanted to beat her up!" Sissy Spacek from the original was a hell of a lot more believable and made you actually care about what happened to Carrie. I also liked Piper's Laurie's performance as Carrie's mother. Margaret White was portrayed as an utter loon and scary as hell in the book and the folks in town knew it. Patricia Clarkson was way too understated and not at all frightening.
To end on a positive note, I DID like the fact that Billy Nolan was much more dark and sinister in the remake...he's that way in the book.
I also agree with this. John Travolta in the original made Billy Nolan look like a clueless buffoon instead of sociopath he was supposed to be. I always hated the fact that they had Chris try to run over Carrie in the original movie instead of Billy doing it like it was in the book. That was one thing the remake got right. In reality it was Chris that ended up losing control of Billy, not Chris always leading Billy around. I also like the sassier Sue Snell in the remake.
Another win for the remake is structure of them interrogating the survivors with the story as testimony and flashbacks because that was actually closer to the structure of the book. And I loved that they included the scene with Chris' father threatening the principal with a lawsuit because Chris was kicked out of the prom. That was straight out of the book and the portrayal in the movie was gold.
The ending for both movies didn't following the book at all. Having Carrie live in the remake is crap and while the original ending was closer to the spirit of the book, Carrie didn't die the way they portrayed in the original either. In the book, Carrie died in Sue Snell's arms after she killed her mother. The story is supposed to be a tragedy, so I thought the remake trying to make a "happy" ending was a bit of a fail.
But in the end, while I liked some stuff from the remake, I'll have to say that I do enjoy the original a bit better.
reply
share