Re-makes are an interesting cinematic phenomenon. A film gets made, that ultimately becomes enough of an icon in cinema history that other directors want to take a crack at and thus the remake is conceived. Occasionally, these attempts to update or modernize older films do quite well for themselves. I can think of a few examples – most notably the 1990s version of “The Thomas Crown Affair” that well surpass the original in their vision and scope. This is not always the case and many times (as is the case with “Carrie”) the remake falls completely flat.
What then, is the appeal of re-doing something that has already been seen as a classic work of cinema? Is it hubris to think that you can do better than the likes of Hitchcock and others? Is it because the name alone will draw in crowds no matter how bad it is? Is it the money? I assume it is many of the above, and most of the time, these poor remakes are done by unknown directors looking to cash in on the film’s already existing fan base. After all, many of these people will see it anyway – if only to find out how bad it is.
I held out hope that “Carrie” would be different, if only for the fact that the director was Kimberly Pierce who expertly crafted the film “Boys Don’t Cry”. Given her perspective as a female director and the underlying issues of emerging womanhood in the film, I thought it only logical that “Carrie” should have a director with a uniquely female gaze.
Brian DePalma’s original film was incredibly well made, no doubt about it, but the male gaze that permeates the film is hard to ignore – especially in that beginning shower sequence. I have difficulty watching that opening sequence because it puts you in the position of a voyeur and given that these girls are meant to be teenagers in high school, it feels incredibly perverse. That is likely the reaction he meant to instill in the audience (either that or he was just one pervy dude himself), yet still it disturbs me. Pierce cuts the time of the scene down and does not show as much (likely because of that first reason as much as the fact that the lead actress is a minor) but very little else is done to alter the film from its original format.
And that is the key problem here. A remake (in order to be good) has to bring something new to the table – a fresh gaze, a new way of telling the story. The only real difference to Pierce’s remake is that it has been updated from its original 1970s setting to 2013. Unfortunately, that is a change that only hinders, rather than helps.
The plot is the exact same as the DePalma version (though she incudes some things not originally addressed in his version). I haven’t read Steven King’s original novel so I can’t speak to how much of that is part of the source material (though I am told much of it is – including Sue Snell’s pregnancy).
The basic plot remains the same and focuses around Carrie White (Chloe Grace Moretz), a senior in high school who has been isolated and secluded her entire life by her religiously fanatic mother (Julianne Moore).
At the very beginning of the film, we see just how different Carrie is when she gets her period in the shower and, because she has never been taught what it is, freaks out. The other kids taunt and make fun of her, throwing tampons at her in the shower and further adding to her trauma. It is only when their gym teacher Miss Desjardin (Judy Greer) arrives and breaks it up, that she is able to explain to Carrie that what is happening is completely normal.
What isn’t normal, however, is the telekinetic abilities that Carrie begins to develop as a result of her emerging womanhood coupled triggered by heightened emotion and fear. The bullies are punished, but their ringleader – a spoiled rich girl named Chris (Portia Doubleday) – refuses to admit any wrongdoing and further blames Carrie when she is banned from attending the Prom. Some sympathy is shown towards Carrie in the form of popular girl Sue Snell (Gabriella Wilde) and her boyfriend Tommy Ross (Ansel Elgort). Sue attempts to make up for what she did to Carrie by forgoing her prom and getting her boyfriend Tommy to take Carrie.
Just as Carrie begins to believe that there is hope for her to fit in and have a normal teenage life, a cruel trick is played on her at the Prom resulting in a disastrous, bloody and deadly climax.
Although the performances are decent for the most part, this film never fully reaches its potential for a few key reasons.
The Bad:
- The fact that it is set in 2013. This in and of itself is not a problem – many older films are given the modern update and work quite well for it. The problem with updating the time period, is that much of what happens in the original film (and novel I suspect) is very much a product of the 1970s atmosphere. The shower scene is a perfect example of that. I could believe that in the 1970s it was possible for a young girl not to have much information on her body or what changes it was going through. Lord knows, sex education was not exactly common place in public high schools and that sort of information was generally up to the parents to impart to their kids. Knowing what Carrie’s mother is like, we can understand why she had no clue what her period was or what was happening to her. Her fear makes logical sense – anybody who didn’t know better would think they were dying if they started bleeding from the genitals and didn’t know why. I assumed there would have been some changes to that scene or an explanation as to how Carrie could have gotten that far without knowing what her period was in 2013. The closest they got was the hint that she had been homeschooled for a time. That doesn’t work for me. Yeah she might have missed out on it being homeschooled, but it is quite obvious in the beginning of the film that she has been in the public system for quite some time and yet she has no knowledge of her period? In a modern day high school in 2013?? Even if her Mom demanded she be removed from sex ed for religious reasons, she would not have been able to avoid that information. Not in 2013. In 1976 maybe, but not now. I had hoped that Pierce would offer some logical reason as to how or why she didn’t know and/or changed the scene all together, but instead we get a half-hearted home school comment and that’s it. Also, in that same scene in the DePalma version, Miss Desjardin slaps Carrie in order to get her to come out of her hysteria. In the 70s, I can see this making sense but in 2013 there is no way a teacher could get away with slapping a student (for any reason) and not be severely reprimanded and/or fired. I can see why Pierce attempted to keep the shower scene as it is crucial for plot development, but the slap wasn’t necessary and did not make sense in a modern context. It might seem nitpicky, but the solution would have been to keep the film’s original time setting or change the beginning completely to something that might have made more sense. The only real “update” she makes to this scene is that she has the girls film themselves tormenting Carrie and puts the video on the internet (no doubt an attempt to comment on the trend of cyberbullying).
- Carrie’s discovery of her powers. In the original film, Carrie’s powers only manifest themselves in times of great stress or emotional difficulty. The same is true for Pierce’s remake, with the exception of the fact that Carrie starts to recognize that she is the one responsible for these outbursts and not only begins to research her powers, but to develop and learn to control them as well. By doing this, it completely changes the tone of the final scene as well as the way we view her character. It is clear towards the end that Sissy Spacek’s “Carrie” knew what she was doing to an extent, but did not really have control over it. This is because the powers came from a place of anger, fear, rage and humiliation. They were born out of these emotions and took on a life all their own. Chloe Grace Moretz’s Carrie on the other hand, practices with them until she has complete control over them. She uses her powers to physically subdue her mother and as the final scene unfolds, the death she rains down on her classmates is completely deliberate and emotionally detached. Spacek’s destruction during the infamous Prom scene came from a purely organic place – a place of rage and hate and swirling emotion too large for her to handle. This updated Carrie on the other hand knows exactly what she is doing which takes away some of the impact that scene has and definitely does not allow us to feel any sympathy for her later on when she showers and cries and expresses remorse for her actions. They were originally a crime of passion – a metaphor for the monstrous coming of age that all young girls go through. The horrors of puberty multiplied by a million. All that metaphor and subtlety is gone from this version and when Carrie breaks down afterwards we aren’t sure what to feel. Her actions were too deliberate and her intent too cold and calculated to warrant the sympathy that the film asks of us. So we are just left to sit there, waiting for the inevitable conclusion.
- The almost identical screenplay. There is very little that has been changed or altered from DePalma’s original screenplay. It is shot for shot almost completely identical with one or two minor alterations (such as Sue Snell’s pregnancy) and of course the cyberbullying element. Unfortunately, if you are going to remake a film like this, you need to be able to bring something unique otherwise it is just a carbon copy without the magic of the original to hold it in place. Pierce does not give us any new perspectives which is a shame because she is a good film maker. I read somewhere that she attempted to change how the story was told by giving it to us from Carrie’s perspective as opposed to the original which told the story from the perspective of how the other kids saw Carrie. This was intriguing, but never really followed through on. I never once got the sense that I knew any more about what Carrie was thinking or feeling, except for when she was practising the use of her telekinetic ability.
- The performances – some of the actors I felt were miscast here notably Judy Greer and Portia Doubleday. Doubleday’s Chris comes across not as a selfish spoiled bully, but as a borderline sociopath which I don’t think is what they were going for. And Greer’s portrayal of the gym teacher is too sympathetic. The original Miss Desjardin attempted to help Carrie, but you could tell (especially at the beginning) that she was somewhat annoyed and disgusted by her as well. There were scenes where she demonstrated visible annoyance at Carrie’s lack of awareness of the world, which made her death make some degree of sense. Greer’s portrayal came across as too genuine and caring causing us to wonder why Carrie would deliberately kill her, but let Sue Snell escape.
The Good:
- Some of the other performances such as Julianne Moore. She is probably the only performance in fact that was spot on and excellently done. The added scene at the beginning of Carrie’s birth gives further insight into a character that was mentally ill, and psychologically warped. We have far more of an understanding of where Margaret White comes from and some of the added touches from Moore (such as the cutting/self harm) added a new level of depth to the character. We actually see a genuine bond between mother and daughter (despite the evil things she does to her child).
All in all however, the film was rather underwhelming and the direction slightly disappointing. I don’t think I will watch this version again.
Blogs on the Silver Screen: Reviews and Discussion 