A very simple plot of this story, or rather the book Stephen King "Carrie" was adapted in 1976 and was shot by Brian De Palma, a cult director ("Scarface" and "Mission Impossible"). Is it worth watching for people who want to tickle their nerves by getting used to King’s creations? I would not say, because modern society is already fed up with horror and surprise someone with blood that looks like paint, no matter how twisted or flying hoses with water pressure, alas, you will not surprise, and maybe even on the contrary amuse.
The action is divided into exactly two parts: the humiliation of Carrie White, and the ball. Anyone who reads a book will have read it. The picture, of course, up to verbatim dialogues was pleasantly pleased. But this is not how I imagined the oppressed, downtrodden girl.
Sissy Spacek is just a wonderful young lady, it is a pity that modesty and decency are not appreciated. She played her part pretty well, but she lacks the revelation of her inner world, the dialogues she had with herself when she realized she had an unusual gift for telekinesis. The movement of objects has always frightened and fascinated people, it would be worth focusing on this, and an indicator to the viewer of what a unique force that can be used not only as destruction. But here it is a terrible, uncontrollable murder weapon that has punished everyone, whether he is guilty or not.
Maybe it was not so much the developing psychosis and the gift of telekinesis that struck me personally as the cruelty of the people and the actors who performed the roles, completely getting used to them. First of all, this is, of course, the religious fanatic Margaret White (Piper Laurie), but the actress was a red beast, and according to the book she was an obese rude lady. As for the school staff, this is Sue (Amy Irving), Chris (Nancy Allen), who distinguished herself by bitchiness, vacillation and was, in fact, the catalyst for all troubles. Billy (John Travolta) is a very notorious scoundrel, but he is suitable for such roles. In contrast, he is given a handsome blonde guy Tommy Ross (William Catt), whose actions were not clear to me until the end. Teacher Miss Collise (Betty Buckley) may have been the most appropriate and fair character, but her efforts and kindness were never rewarded.
In general, the thriller, if it can be called so at that time, is a relaxed, rather interesting plot, which is really interesting how it ends, and will also be interesting to fans of the classics of the genre.
The very first of the adaptations of the works of the master of horror, the legendary Stephen King. It's been a lot. Yes, some moments from the book did not enter the picture - but this does not reduce its charms. So what do we have? The downtrodden, silent, always frightened student Carrie White is constantly bullied by her classmates – mostly, it is females who joke on her, and these jokes are far from good. Carrie discovers an unusual gift: she can move and change objects with her mind. And it's called telekinesis. After a terrible antics of schoolchildren at the prom, the girl releases her crushing energy and takes full revenge on everyone who hurt her.
The tape and the book are both good. Cece Spacek, who at the time of filming in this film was already 26 years old, perfectly played a tortured and driven teenage girl who prepared her classmates despots a cruel surprise. Same freckled, awkward, clumsy seventeen-year-old schoolgirl as in the book. Well done director Brian De Palma, who very effectively showed the final scenes: a burning school, chaos inside the building, and Cece Spacek with wide eyes, all doused with pig blood (according to the book), and in his eyes - horror, revenge and insurmountable, imminent disaster.
If you think about it, each of us has some supernatural abilities that are dormant and waiting for their time. And in a stressful situation, a person is able to do things that in ordinary cases simply could not. Carrie's gift just slept - sometimes waking up and stretching, but then falling asleep again. He finally woke up at the prom. Stephen King has created a "wonderful" alternative version of the most memorable evening in the life of every teenager. Brian De Palma managed to catch him up and make a truly terrifying, suspense-filled film journey into the world of Carrie White - a world filled with the religious lamentations of her mother Margaret White (a role Piper Laurie did well, although Margaret is a real monster, even more cruel and cold), a world in which there is no place for mercy and pity. This is what causes the blood to freeze in the veins. The musical accompaniment also does not leave indifferent - the music then rolls in a wave, then becomes quiet and soft.
This is the story of a world-renowned teenager, an ordinary girl who becomes the object of ridicule against her will. It should be noted that there are many such cases in real life. But you can not bring a person to the extreme - it will backfire. As in the situation with Carrie White, who arranged a real nightmare at his own prom.
This story teaches us to be kind. So the movie is worth watching.
Often, Stephen King’s famous novels are not filmed as they should be, but this adaptation turned out to be absolutely delightful, and I love it. It is difficult to convey all the tension, atmosphere and power of the novel by Stephen King, but the director of this film managed to do it. This horror movie is for all time. He looks after many decades with great pleasure, and also when watching creepy, interesting and disturbing.
We see the story of the heroine Carrie, who possessed telepathic abilities. She was introverted, and many mocked her at school, but even at home the girl could not feel calm, because her God-fearing, abnormal mother was constantly mocking the girl as best she could. The only thing that pleased Carrie was the upcoming ball, to which she was invited by the most famous boy in the school. Going there, Carrie could not imagine how it would end.
The film from the first to the last frame is psychological. This horror film is already a classic of its genre and recognized as a horror film for all time. The lead actress Sissy Spacek is a wonderful, American actress. Sissy Spacek has an Academy Award for Best Actress. She's a strong and interesting actress. Carrie is my favorite role in her career. Spacek played it great. This film needs to be reviewed and revised. It is difficult to describe all the excitement and nerves when you watch this movie for the first time. Piper Lori as a crazy mother was also great. Mad scenes of mother and daughter looked wide open eyes. Strong, scary, psychological film.
"Carrie" is a cult, American horror film of 1976 and my favorite adaptation of the famous, eponymous novel by Stephen King. Everything brilliant is simple, and I love this movie and recommend it to new generations. The evil joke in the end turned out to be a terrible tragedy, and everything was shown in an original and interesting way.
I’ll go, Mom, and everything will change here.
- Witch... This is the power of Satan!
10 out of 10
One of the eternal puzzles of human civilization: why people hate everyone who is at least in some way different from the usual crowd. It is an extremely shameful sight to watch someone being bullied, persecuted, scorned. The key to the eradication of this human vice, it seems, will not be found for a long time. Stephen King, however, has nothing to do with psychoanalysis, he was born to intimidate his readers. It is not enough to draw frightening pictures in the imagination, much more fascinating to understand the nature of the evil that lives in each of us. The story of a seemingly unremarkable schoolgirl with a beautiful name opened two great careers. King as an outstanding writer and Brian De Palma as an equally outstanding director. Infrequently, the release of a book and its adaptation are almost synchronized. The author and director pursued slightly different goals with their creations, but gained equally loud fame. The legend of Carrie and her telekinesis excites the minds of the good 40 years, which means that it is never too late to turn to its origins.
If you analyze the biographies of even the most terrible maniacs and murderers, it is easy to notice that the beginnings of their crimes have roots from childhood. It is the growing body that is most vulnerable to bad influence, resentment, misunderstanding. Why is Carrie White being bullied for her classmate? She is not the ideal of beauty, dresses tastelessly and does not know how to present herself. But the problem is solvable. Most people are not naturally evil, but herd feeling is a real problem. Carrie did not particularly like Chris Hargensen, a local windshield. It is known that a black sheep spoils the whole herd. A downtrodden kitten is naturally unable to resist a native predator. Characteristically, the girls do not selflessly follow the cheeky Chris. They are afraid, but to put down Carrie, this is please.
Lack of friends and ridicule, hard, but possible to survive. Much worse for poor Carrie at home. From her mother, Margaret never ceases to be horrified. There are few fanatical zealots of faith in the world, but children... What's with the baby? Eve was happy with her Cain and Abel. Margaret treats her daughter as a sin of youth. You look and wonder, is that what happens? The girl experienced another monstrous stress, and instead of supporting her, her eyes are flaming with madness and a dark closet. Forget about the witch from Oz and the other "good" ladies. Carrie's mother is a refined evil that belongs only to the ward for the violently insane.
I would not treat “Carrie” as albeit high-quality, but only horror. De Palma It is not by chance that he devotes only the last 20 minutes to terrible events. In part, this is a psychological thriller, where the heroine needs to go through the desired path. Carrie's evolution is far more important than the punishment of all her abusers. As if by the precepts of Darwin, development occurs in 3 stages:
I. Carrie can't stand up for herself, she has no outlet anywhere. A creepy mother, a mocking class, an idiot director stubbornly confusing her name, even a yard boy on a bicycle. People with skin feel weak and beat, hit in vulnerable places. And the girl herself is one vulnerability. Even to a compassionate Miss Collins, a broken child is suspicious. Man ceases to believe in goodness as a phenomenon. The psyche can be destroyed almost indefinitely, but it is incredibly difficult to restore it.
II. Telekinesis is an ancient and secret force that Carrie doesn’t know how to relate to. A bruised kitten rises to her feet, the girl feels she can at least occasionally confront her mother. I am convinced: it is Margaret who is the main source of trouble, and only then Chris Hargensen and her stupid friend Billy (John Travolta, by the way, the main smile generator when watching).
IIiI. Carrie was able to believe in the sincerity of the handsome guy Tommy Ross, in his desire to invite her to the ball. The young man did not immediately remove all the locks from her heart. The result never ceases to amaze. Where'd that sleazy kitten go? We have a beautiful cat! The prom fully demonstrates the unusual, but such amazing beauty of Sissy Spacek. Tall, sanated, with marvelous hair and a smile that keeps all the secrets of the world - this is really the queen of the ball. Tommy is rewarded for his perseverance. Even the expression of the girl’s face changes rapidly during the ball. She used to see nothing in her eyes but ridicule. The hardest thing was to overcome yourself, people are not as bad as they seem. Many layers of dust have been dropped and the star "Carrie" shines brighter than all the floodlights in the hall.
A decent melodrama could come out of Carrie, but King has a different profile. The enchanted Tommy calls the companion “the devil with false modesty”, but the real devils are like gophers sitting in an ambush. What kind of devils are they? Chris and Billy pull rather on the devils, throwing wood under the cauldron for sinners. The cruel law of life is that evil must be resisted, it will not go away. Carrie is infinitely sorry, but apparently it's just an unhappy fate. You should not dwell on the terrible component of the film, it is better to just see the brilliant handwriting De Palma, which will become its “trick”. But splitting the screen with the maximum detail of the picture of the atrocities is true genius. So is the oppressive silence. Cries for help, pleas for mercy - everything is so battered and stamped. Brian managed to impress, from a relatively short scene to make a fantastic promo of the whole picture.
Still, the most memorable is not the blood, not the fire, and not even the crazy eyes (although they do not cease to admire). Before the eyes and are rotating in the dance Carrie and Tommy. How beautiful this moment is! Just think about it: long years of suffering and this is the full compensation of fate. The most prominent guy in love looks at yesterday's outcast. He was just fulfilling his girlfriend's request, but now he's blinded, he wants to kiss Carrie. There are moments I want to live for. In the unfortunate broken fate of a telekinetic girl, this moment was. And in the pursuit of colorful images of murder and chaos, one should not forget about the true soul, which still managed to escape from the corrupt captivity implanted by a mad mother.
We often repeat that life is not fair. Sissy Spacek for her amazing role simply should have won an Oscar, as well as Piper Laurie. “Carrie” of course, a masterpiece is not for everyone, and first of all for zealous fans of Stephen King. But the director is not at all obligated to blindly follow the source, that is the director’s perception of the topic. The way I understood, interpreted and adapted the novel Brian De Palma — I really like. His cinema is frightening, disturbing and makes you think about a lot. Fans of horror have nothing to worry about - the last shots, like the cherry on a beautiful cake. Evil cannot atone for sins, only good can. The story of a rogue girl should serve as a formidable reminder: sometimes it is better to step aside from the object of misunderstanding. No one can predict the consequences.
In 1976, there was a real event in the world of cinema - the first film adaptation of the work of the great writer-mystic Stephen King was released on the screens of the world. Hollywood filmmakers led by a young but already experienced director Brian De Palma drew attention to a novel called Carrie, creating a masterpiece of the horror genre of the same name, which repeatedly paid off its modest production budget and became a cult spectacle for all time. However, no matter how spectacular some paintings in the past may look, their revision after many years can cause somewhat different emotions. And, frankly, "Carrie", began to lose a little to modern representatives of the mystical genre, although competent directing, memorable acting of actors and simply cult status do not let the work of Brian De Palma get bogged down in the quagmire of oblivion.
The plot of the film tells us the story of an unhappy high school girl Carrie White (Sissy Spacek), who all her adult life lives under the oppression of a completely religious mother, Margaret (Piper Laurie), who turned out to be a mentally unstable person with tendencies to sadism. Naturally, the mother raises her daughter in harsh puritanical conditions, in which there is no place even talk about sex, drugs and rock 'n' roll. And just this attitude of Margaret to Carrie leads the girl to the greatest shame in her life: during the shower after a physical education lesson, Carrie’s menstruation begins for the first time. Well, violent teenagers instead of helping made this situation a comedy. And only one student, Sue (Amy Irving), is fully aware of the mistake and tries to atone for it, forcing her friend Tommy (William Catt) to invite Carrie to the high school graduation. And all these events occur against the background of the main character gaining incredible abilities for telekinesis and the brewing disaster, initiated by the malicious Chris (Nancy Allen), who has long hated Carrie.
Of course, the main decoration of the picture is a very young Sissy Spacek, for which the role in the film by Brian De Palma became the most memorable in his career and even the well-deserved Oscar for a completely different film could not change the attitude of the public. Spacek managed to perfectly convey the inner world of his heroine, who, despite all the anger and hatred emanating from her mother, still managed to keep in his heart the good love for everyone around, including the ill-fated Margaret. Unlike a good remake of “Carrie” called “Telekinesis”, where the main role was played by the beautiful and favorite of the public Chloe Grace Moretz, Sissy Spacek from the original really looks like a forgotten, clumsy young lady, whom no one would look at if not for the incident in the shower. Sissy Spacek believes literally from her first appearance in the frame and realize that she fell on her soul many days, weeks, years of humiliation and religious drill. So the choice of the actress for the lead role and the subsequent rebellion of her heroine against the duplicitous public causes only righteous understanding and support from the audience. However, it is worth noting that unlike the recent "Telekinesis", the original "Carrie" tries to reveal the heroes of the second plan, while Carrie herself almost fades into the background. And I personally think this approach is somewhat wrong, because the director cuts many dramatic episodes from the life of the White family from the plot and cuts off the peculiar training of Carrie with his unexpectedly found gift. But the latter was more of a necessity, because of the modest budget, it was impossible to bring the whole fantasy of Stephen King to the big screen. As for Margaret White in the performance of Piper Laurie, her character does not look like a living demon, as was the case with Julianne Moore. Laurie’s game is not frightening or shocking, but at the same time it seems much more believable than the character from the remake. Old Margaret is still crazy about the Bible, but it is hard to call her the focus of evil, even if her actions somehow lead to tragedy.
In addition, Sue and Chris play an important role in the plot by Amy Irving and Nancy Allen, respectively. Similar heroines were also in the remake, but there their roles made deeper and more dramatic. In the original, Sue did not appear to be an angel in the flesh, but at the same time behaved quite naturally and her motivations are clear and without deliberate revealing. As for Chris, in the modern film, she was a notorious bitch without brakes, which she wanted to hate. In the original film, this heroine was simply a wilful person who must always go against the public and all her actions against Carrie are playful. Paired with Nancy Allen plays a very young John Travolta, for whom the role in the film De Palma is half comedic and one of his appearance in the frame causes a smile, which completely contradicts the image of the hero from the remake, in which he acts as an experienced criminal. And I want to say that it is Travolta that is most remembered. Thus, the old film in some aspects completely breaks "Telekinesis".
Despite the fact that “Carrie” is a mystic with elements of horror, the director added to the film irony, humor and extraordinary lightness. A similar mood was caught by the composer of the picture Pino Donagio, diluting disturbing melodies with many funny sketches, some of which seemed to come from everyone's favorite animated series "Tom and Jerry". Therefore, I want to say: if you want to see a real hard drama, then for you there is already “Telekinesis”, but if you want to turn to the classics of dark stories that are in fact easy and quite digestible for the widest audience, then “Carrie” is just for you!
In conclusion, I want to say that "Carrie" in 1976 is a rather entertaining and light film from the genre of mystical horror. The first acquaintance of Stephen King with cinema can be safely recorded in the assets of the writer, and Brian De Palma is rightfully considered the author of the classics, which will always rely on directors of new generations who want to shoot their version of King’s novel. And even though after many years, Carrie does not look as fresh and radical as it was before, I would still advise you to familiarize yourself with this work, in order not only to return to the origins of King’s film work, but also to appreciate really high-quality cinema.
7 out of 10
Of course, I'll compare it to Stephen King's book. (Nothing)
I was just rereading it. Moreover, I just watched the 2013 version of Telekinesis (special effects - wow, but no more).
This film I already watched 20 years ago and then the main intrigue was in telekinesis, and not in the emotional experiences of the downtrodden Carrie.
Nice to see young Travolta. But he is not a terrible Billy, but a skoda kid.
Piper Lori in the role of a devout mother in society looks funny and inappropriate, which helps her easily raise money for God’s causes. As long as she leaves. But at home, she's a monster. This is the main monster, not the downtrodden Carrie.
I would recommend a review.
"Carrie" film Brian De Palma based on the book Stephen King released in 1976. "Carrie" is a great book by a great writer and master of words. All the film adaptations of King are interesting and, of course, not unambiguous, but to my taste - they are original and integral, based on novels written by a talented author. The language of books and the style of King is difficult to transfer to the screens and almost always it does not work to the fullest. Brian De Palma created a real cult horror, I can not imagine how it was watched in the seventies. Perhaps not very scary, but impressive and large-scale.
Growing up in a cruel and evil world, destroying the world of naivety and openness. Blurred evil is absolute and straightforward. School is like a jar of spiders, who is stronger – bullying, who is weaker – tolerates. All this is projected into the future life, because such people have no other model of behavior, they are not rectified. But when the weak is actually not so harmless and the edge of the trait is very fragile, then there must come a knowledge of history or literature that recounts such situations constantly. Do not hurt your neighbor – this is a sacramental and true commandment, whether you are a religious person or not. The easiest thing in life is to mock the weak and then scoff at it, there is no purpose, absolutely useless pastime for a person with a mind. To consciously settle the complex in a person for life is one of the most disgusting acts of an unworthy person who walks straight. Yes, perhaps pathetic words, but they will not change anything, but to imagine your child in this position is not enough strength. A person who commits an atrocity intentionally receives a double reverse effect and so does not fully understand why and why he is grieving.
Growing up a girl in the family of an orthodox puritan, who categorically does not welcome any sexual intentions in her family. This part of life is closed by a huge castle complex. To remove from life the concept of sex and sexual relations is the same as to remove from pasta flour, where salt and water remain. Tight control, which is nothing like a strict regime in prison. Everything in the aggregate turns into a flammable mixture that will not delay the demonstration of its main quality.
A world in which nothing changes, in any cluster of society there is a person who is beaten, bullied and humiliated. Of course, because of this attitude to a person, he does not grow out of a criminal who comes to the office and shoots a dozen of his colleagues or a teenager who brings a machine gun to school to introduce his peers to the Coriolis Force up close. No, he is diagnosed with a mental illness and few people are interested in the causes of this injury.
People are ruthless at all times, only the external filling of a person changes. All people are different and everyone likes their own, but to mock the other is a deviation that is punished by life itself.
The transformation from a girl to an absolute evil happens instantly and nothing will change it. Evil that produces greater evil is one of the dogmas.
Innovative scenes and their style of colors of the tape, give it a slight unobtrusiveness and fantasy. A stunning soundtrack completes the picture.
Great role of the young Sissy Spacek. Ordinary, calm, patient, cozy at the same time incredibly charming and fantastic, kept in the frame. It seems that on the screen there are beautiful girls and a physical culture teacher, who is still a burning woman who does not wear a bra, but at the same time Spacek steals all screen time from other actresses. A stunning reincarnation worthy of loud applause and admiration of the audience (for sure). Piper Laurie as a mad mad mother is a stunningly spectacular role. And the young John Travolta, who is still very young and does not think about the church.
An excellent film, which became a cult and the first filmed novel by a talented writer Stephen King. A picture that easily combines entertainment and intellectual overtones, giving food for thought. Cinema on the most difficult and topical topics.
If I’m asked to name a few of Stephen King’s books, I’ll definitely mention Carrie, which is one of my favorite books. So I just couldn’t get past his adaptation. I will say right away that after watching, I had only positive impressions.
First of all, I want to point out that the plot has changed slightly compared to the book. Mostly there are differences in the ending, which, apparently, is the result of a lack of budget. However, the ending offered to us by De Palma seems to me quite suitable, and does not cause me any complaints. Therefore, even if you have not read the novel, then what happens on the screen will be clear.
Also, it is impossible not to note just the amazing game of Sissy Spacek, as the main character. Looking at her Carrie, I want to believe and worry about the heroine. I have not seen such high-quality acting work in a long time. The other actors I also liked, many of the characters I imagined, reading the book.
Separately, I want to praise the operators, who used quite unusual techniques at that time. The score scene looked particularly cool. The musical accompaniment was also very suitable for the action.
In conclusion, I want to say that many people will not like the differences between the book and the film, but I personally did not pay any attention to these differences, because it was confined to the main character and the actress who played her well. It is thanks to Sissy Spacek that I evaluate the film at the maximum rating.
10 out of 10
Recently released 'Telekinesis' - a film based on the novel by Stephen King. When I first started watching it, I noticed that it was originally called Carrie. There is no limit ' perfection' and the stupidity of the Russian adaptation of film titles. Well, come on, this is not about it, especially since there is a plus in this whole situation: I learned that Stephen King has a novel of the same name, moreover, that Telekinesis is the third film based on it. So after watching the first (in my calculus system and the third, if we talk about the order of release) film, I immediately went to Carrie in 1976.
It's a good movie. That's for sure. The hero of Sissy Spacek believes... What a sin to hide, she really came out not very attractive by generally accepted standards of beauty, a little hunched, pinched, twitched from any attempts to contact her. But what I liked, in the bright moments of the film, her eyes briefly and meekly sincerely burned with joy, and her smile was really cautious.
Teenage drama was hurried. It shows almost everything from the anger of the youth crowd to the conscience of its individual components. It is shown how the child's psyche is influenced. Here, please, the main character: absolutely normal girl. But ' thank you' a fanatical religious mother who, unknowingly, made the girl something... But you have her classmate, who at first was like everyone else and also pummeled the girl, and then her conscience woke up in herself. Although I think it's not a conscience, but one's own opinion and growing up. Imho, the girl became an adult and her psyche ceased to be simply influenced by the crowd around her. Here you and sometimes strange feelings of young people, when they love for rudeness and rudeness. In Carrie, there were different sides of teachers in schools. In general, you can draw as many descriptions of this film as you like. But you usually want to describe something very bright, about which you can talk a lot and a long time. This is either very bad or very good. And Carrie is not one and the other, this is just a film about the fate of a girl who, in spite of the accepted opinion, did not choose her fate. For the first hour, you and I are witnessing a typical development of the events of a dramatic film, and the ending looks somewhat foreign. In fact, it was just moral.
What surprised me is that the film is stubbornly marketed as horror, thriller and God knows what else. But where are the horrors? 5 minutes of curves in a bloody dress? What's in Carrie from the thriller? Does he hold in the chair #39, tension and expectation of something terrible and sharp? Although it’s a bit of a thriller... the good news is that the movement is heading for disaster, as Ross McDonald classifies thrillers. But that’s what this movie is all about, is drama. It's the horror of drama.
Carrie White is a shy and nondescript high school girl with a kind heart who endures humiliation from classmates at school and is morally suppressed by her own devout mother at home. Resentment gradually accumulates, and the girl gradually begins to open demonic abilities. The prom is approaching and suddenly Carrie invites a handsome classmate Tommy Ross to it. Of course, this is not for nothing, and another hard joke is being prepared over Carrie. But the class does not even suspect what this antic will cost them, and everyone will remember this prom once and for all.
Stephen King’s novel Carrie was written in 1974 and was the first published work of his career, and the first to be adapted for the screen. Similarly, for director Brian De Palma, this was the first experience of transferring the novel to the screen, and, as it turned out, the first high-profile success in his career (the film almost 19 times exceeded its budget of $ 1.8 million at the American box office), and Stephen King himself later proclaimed this adaptation as one of the units of successful. When watching the film, even without reading the original, immediately striking is the care in relation to the source, the refinement of each scene, the elaboration of each character (including secondary), and, most importantly, the skill of directing the director, which is manifested here in full. It is not for nothing that Brian De Palma’s Carrie, albeit with a more dramatic accent than King’s mystical and frightening novel, is even considered a model of directorial art worthy of inclusion in all directing textbooks. After all, here De Palma embodied many innovative and style-forming techniques, including a brilliant move in the form of dividing the screen in two (polyscreen) in the unforgettable scene of the prom, non-standard camera movements that give an impressive effect, slow shooting in anticipation of something terrible, etc. By the way, the prom scene is without exaggeration an unforgettable and powerful spectacle! The boiling point, to which the fragile main character was eventually brought, was embodied in the form of a real hell on Earth. Acting deserves a special admiration, especially the queen of the ball (as ambiguous!) Sissy Spacek, who played the hunted Carrie White and brilliantly conveyed the palette of her emotional states, and that tear was, like sharp knives, felt from the screen. Perhaps, the demonic face of the once angelic Carrie, after the incident at the prom, it is unlikely to be forgotten. Piper Lori in the role of a religiously fanatic mother is not inferior to the level of play of her on-screen daughter, and she wants to strangle her from the first appearance on the screen. Moreover, even more than peers and peers of Carrie, worthy of playing future famous actors - John Travolta, Nancy Allen, Amy Irving, etc.
In my opinion, the main trick of this film is that it, as it were, pretends to be a youth mystical horror story, while hiding behind this screen much more than it seems at first glance. The main message is “good intentions pave the way to hell,” and as a result, the blurred boundaries between God and the devil, good and evil, are not the only one. After all, looking at the peculiarities of the presented conflict, you can see a lot of other problems revealed in accessible language, from what ends a long silent accumulation of grievances, to how strong and dangerous can be the third victims, both for their abusers and for themselves. Although I do not quite understand the strange director’s decision in the form of a quick rewind in the scene of the selection of costumes at the prom, “Carrie” of 1976 release is, of course, a dramatically powerful, tearful, and unforgettable adaptation of Stephen King’s novel, which will remain an example of his successful film adaptation, and to this day, paradoxically, given the current technical progress, unsurpassed.
10 out of 10
A few months ago, I came across Stephen King’s novel Carrie in a bookstore. I bought it, and in a couple of days I ate it. So charismatic were the individual characters, so fascinating was the plot.
Of course, after reading, typing in the search engine cherished word, I found out that all the time there were already three screen adaptations. Almost immediately it was decided to watch the very first, 1976, especially since the rating of the film is high on many sites.
After watching, there was a double impression. On the one hand, we have excellent directing, on the other hand, a complete inconsistency of the book in many important aspects. For simplicity, let’s divide the features of the film into pros and cons.
Actually, the pluses:
+ As mentioned earlier, competent director and cameraman work. There are many scenes you can watch, like Carrie dancing with Tommy or the final chord with her mother (who am I kidding?). Scenes in the shower and at training - that's what really hard to take your eyes off.
+ A couple of moments that, if not frightening, will at least cause internal anxiety and will be remembered for a long time. One of the brightest in the film and we can say, his business card.
+ Actors play. For the most part.
+ Musical accompaniment.
+\- Whitewashing the main character, presenting Carrie not as an introvert with manic thoughts, but as a living person with certain social problems, as well as a partial justification for her actions.
And, of course, the disadvantages:
- There are huge inconsistencies between the book and the story. That's the biggest drawback of the movie. No, I understand that 98 minutes of screen time is difficult to transfer all the moves that King describes, but some details could be explained in more detail.
Say, why is Tommy so quick to go to the ball with Carrie at Sue's request? In the book, a few pages have been spent explaining this, and here something like this dialogue takes place:
- Tommy, can you help me?
- How?
- Will you go to the school ball with Carrie?
- OK.
You will see a couple of similar situations here.
- Gray characters. Again, the characters of Sue, Chris, Billy and Margaret White are undisclosed. Sue here is more of a character than a story chain linking Tommy and Carrie. Chris, to be honest, did not elicit the extreme negative feelings I felt when I read. Billy is more of a good-looking fool than the really stupid bastard he was in the book (though I doubt Travolta could have stoop to that level). Carrie’s mother, in the original, is much more cruel and at the same time indifferent to her daughter.
- There's a lot left behind. The continuation of the “incendiary party” at school, as well as the real hell that was happening in Chamberlain, you will not see. On the agenda is only revenge on your personal enemies and relatives.
What's the result? For those who have never read and are not going to read the novel of the same name, the film is worthy of attention, as a good thriller with a couple of spoonfuls of horrors.
For those who are familiar with the original source, I also advise you to watch it, as today the film has a certain artistic and cultural significance. However, the pleasure of viewing you risk less if you draw parallels with the book.
You can call me the devil of hell.
You can lynch me, mooing like a herd,
But I have no seal of evil, no need to thicken the paint.
I am happy that I am not a slave to philistine views. (Oxxxymiron)
It is worth thinking about whether a remake of this picture was necessary. The story of the girl Carrie, was written by Stephen King, and was successfully embodied on the screen by the maestro of the film industry Brian De Palma. Released this year, the remake of the picture does not try to put the story from a different angle, and it would seem that here to change, Carrie is good because it has an extraordinary story, the morality of which should not even be questioned. The remake is trying to jump out due to the technical base and the abundance of colorful special effects, because there are scenes that framing would only help, but to repeat at least part of the spark and the impression that the 1976 film does not work.
Brian De Palma, in collaboration with the magnificent cast, of course, made this terrible story very sensitive and heartfelt, they gave it in addition to a shade of blood a real echo of the soul, which bribed the audience with emotions. The famous story, about a girl, the object of ridicule and bullying at school, as well as the subject of domestic claims, about a teenager whose world was rapidly destroying her, but ironically, or higher powers, Carrie developed a gift. Very tense, rich in emotion project, largely contributed actors, very simple on the one hand, the role of Sissy Spacek, on the other hand, it is so much fascinating that watching it is impossible to come off. She shoots inimitably in the second part, when all the atmosphere and all the attention is focused on her, and the epic destruction that she creates, and there is much worth paying only for her crazy look. Nancy Allen, Piper Laurie, and William Catt did a great job, and it is also worth mentioning the “green” Travolta, for whom the project was the beginning of his career, in fact.
By definition, original films, and successful ones like Carrie, can’t give up copies, and that’s the rule. History contains a damningly plausible morality, with an evil grin distorted situations that often arise in life. The atmosphere is brought to a complete immersion, and it is impossible not to feel sympathy for the meek naivety of the heroine, and for her fate. A strong drama with a “terrible” denouement only reinforces the effect of what they saw, and all the charisma and charm of the project is contained in the actress alone, who unfortunately was not given the deserved “Oscar”.
8 out of 10
It was immediately apparent that MGM studio in '76 was not ready to film Carrie. I remember everything that happened in the book, from Carrie’s training in telekinesis to the destruction of the whole city, and I am sad to see how stingy the film adaptation has become. I’ve never been a fan of special effects, and I’ve never said that a movie without a cgi is not a movie at all, but when you film a book like this, you realize how necessary it is. A little lyrical retreat. Now in order.
Sissy Spacek has clearly outgrown her school age and is clearly not fit for the role of a schoolgirl. It would seem that, in fact, what should be surprised? After all, the actress at the time of filming was 26 years old! And that's the problem with all the students in this movie: they're more like students. It is difficult to say anything about the ages of the other actors (playing teachers, parents, etc.). Miss Desjardine also, of course, does not resemble the “young school teacher” she was in the book, but here you can somehow make an older actress, since you can be a teacher at a more mature age, but 22-year-old schoolchildren are a clear miscasting.
I really liked the way Carrie's abilities were described in the book, which made them feel like they were. King penetrated into the very essence, painting all the thoughts of the characters within the usual third-person narrative, thereby instantly showing the causes and results. So we read the thoughts and then we saw them come to life. What do we see in Brian De Palma's production? Eyes. Literally. Instead of reflecting the very essence of telekinesis, the operator makes a quick zoom to Carrie's bulging eyes, as if she had seen Jesus himself in the flesh. That is, suddenly, the “control of the power of thought” began to mean the control of the power of the eye, since in a number of moments it interacts with objects, literally looking at them with its huge eyes. And I could have blamed all this on the technical limitations of cinema in 1976, if, firstly, it was not true, and secondly, there was no other explanation for it, which I will discuss in detail later.
The film was clearly not ready for release. After reading the book, I was stunned by the release date of the first film adaptation: 1976? Did Jurassic Park not even come out? How are they going to show all this massive destruction of the city, this hail of ice blocks, and then the rockfall of Carrie's memories? The most chic, and generally important scenes from the book simply did not shoot just because of the limitations in terms of creating special effects. And in the fact that they shot everywhere you can see where the legs grow – a “flying” knife is removed against the screen, the “flying” hose is clearly suspended. Because of the cheapness of all this, not even a tiny illusion is created that at least something of all that is happening is actually happening and all these screaming people running away from a suspended hose create a comic effect.
And now the thing that really pissed me off, the thing that De Palma didn't even try to hide, was the psychological thriller was turned into a horror. What does that mean? And this means that the director will try to scare us at any opportunity, squeeze fear out of us, make the terrible out of the absolutely fearless. For example, that notorious zoom to Carrie’s eyes was accompanied by violin sounds, as in the track Murder from Alfred Hitchcock’s Psychosis. Moments of showing Carrie’s abilities in this way turn into a parade of failed attempts to scare the viewer. And that’s because most of those moments weren’t created to scare you, they were just part of the story. I mean, once De Palma decided to scare us, and he has to use this chip over and over again, because it's already becoming a design option. In short, the movie is trying to be what it is not. De Palma makes the thriller a typical horror movie. Even the ending to fit in, which really pissed me off.
I was trying to find something good about him, and I realized that the only thing I liked was the choice of an actress to play Margaret White. Although she fits only visually, the actress played terribly. According to the book, Carrie’s mother was very cruel in the sense that she could smack her daughter on the head with a Bible, but in the film Margaret beats Carrie very tenderly.
The film first follows the plot of the book, and then abruptly descends from this road, as the creators realized that they simply will not be able to shoot all this. As a result, at the end, it seems that you are not watching a production of Carrie at all, but some other film about a girl with the ability to influence objects with the power of thought. I was shocked at the end for two reasons:
1) She was far from the idea of the book.
2 She made me exclaim, "Oh my God, typical horror!"
4 out of 10
Carrie was the first filmed novel by the famous mystic writer Stephen King. I must say that this first work was very, very successful. The novel itself with its interesting plot turned out to be good, and the film adaptation of it does not lag behind in this.
In the film, we learn the story of Carrie White. At school, the girl endures the ridicule of classmates who made her a real scapegoat. At home, Carrie also has a hard time because of the severity and even cruelty of a pious mother. At the same time, Carrie herself has a supernatural power - telekinesis, which can be very dangerous to others if Carrie wants to. And how long will this downtrodden girl be able to tolerate the reality in which she lives?
King made a very strong piece. And the filmmaker managed to convey everything that was in the book. The viewer sees the loneliness of a girl who turned out to be just not like everyone else. The viewer sees cruelty not only among adults, but also among schoolchildren, still in fact children who could not accept Carrie.
A significant success of the film, in my opinion, brought Sissy Spacek, who played the role of Carrie White. A very important role in this was played by her extremely unusual appearance. She was really not like everyone else. And, of course, she was able to show the right emotions. It seems to me that Sissy Spacek has become a personification of solitude and fear, fear of the outside world. The rest of the actors very successfully complement and harmoniously fit into the film. And the mother of Carrie Margaret, played by Piper Laurie, and Miss Collins, a teacher and to some extent a defender of Carrie (Betty Buckley), and all the students do not spoil the overall picture, but, on the contrary, complete it.
In the film you can see excellent camera work. To some extent, it is the well-chosen angle that helps to understand the whole point. And complements all this beautiful music, which even more vividly emphasizes the whole action.
I've decided to review it again. Carrie, refresh the emotions, as on the big screens comes “Telekinesis”, also based on the book King – “Carrie”.
I liked the film, which was to be expected, because De Palma, a master of atmospheric cinema, sat in the director's chair, and when you film King, it is the most important thing. King does not write horror films, he is too talented for this and De Palma understood it well, he was imbued with this story of the life of an unhappy girl, she not only could move objects, she also felt, tried to be like everyone else, was the same person, but not for most, everyone in his life met such a Carrie and not always we treated them with understanding and human warmth and they often, hunted could not give back, tolerated human brutality, a sense of shame, personally I came later, although my conscience tried to reach out in time, but the herd seemed more important. De Palma coped, he conveyed what I saw in the book between the lines, what the writer tried to convey, hiding everything behind the screen of a short-lived horror movie.
Now the movie. As a horror film, it is naturally a failure, and I have a bad idea of this director, making a horror film, this is a bright, tightly shot, atmospheric to the chills, thriller. I really liked the acting of the actress, who played Carrie herself, she was able to detail, gradually convey resentment, embarrassment, joy, revenge and final persecution. But her religious mother, I didn't think she was bigoted enough, but she's kind of crazy in the book. Very annoyed by the hero of Travolta, some spongy, always grinning and constantly with a wet mouth from beer, slurry, even outwardly looked somehow repulsive. The film is a socially - relevant, in our time, especially, the message - topical, shameful and it at the same time carries a completely educational message, no, not the one you think about - the more you stare at the eyes, the faster objects move, it's not that, exactly, although interesting, try it, but everything is much simpler - remember, we are all different, be more tolerant, and better at once kinder.
Before watching this movie, I read Stephen King’s amazing novel. The novel made a very strong impression on me, and, based on the laudatory reviews of the film, I was hoping for a decent adaptation. . .
After watching the movie, the first question I had was: Why does the picture have so many positive reviews? This film is only a pale shadow of a really beautiful book.
First of all, almost all the characters of the film are some, roughly speaking, unfinished. All of Carrietta White’s classmates are shown too superficially. How colorfully portrayed were Tommy Ross, Sue Snell and Chris Hargensen in the novel! In the film, they are not interesting extra characters. I was particularly disappointed by Billy Nolan. The image created by the writer is the exact opposite of the book. In the film, I had the impression that Billy is a spineless, anxious hen-heeled man who agreed to this disgusting prank purely for Chris, although in the book he simply enjoyed this kind of “pranks” and, if Christine was in Carrie’s place, he would without shame pour a bucket of pig blood on her. That says a lot about the character.
Carrie herself is also not fully developed character. Many key scenes from her life were somehow cut out. I really missed the scene of Carrietta White’s inner struggle when, after a mean joke, she ran out of school and, lying on the grass all in tears and blood, made the fateful decision to take revenge. Carrie did not immediately decide to kill, she was not vindictive and never wanted to harm anyone, and therefore did not immediately decide to take revenge. Why is this scene so important? Because it was at that moment that she felt worthless, it was this scene that demonstrated the struggle of reason against madness and the victory of the latter. And most importantly, Carrie realized she had nowhere to go, that she didn't want to go back to her religious mother. Among other things, Carrie did not stop at the defeat of the hated school, her mind was disturbed, and she decided to destroy everything and everyone because they are all guilty, which demonstrates the complete clouding of the poor girl’s mind and uncontrollable hatred of others. The film shows us a completely different reality, where the vengeful Carrie did not endure the ridicule of her classmates, killed them all and returned home to her beloved mother.
But I was most disappointed by the ending. Stephen King captivated me not only with the plot, but also with the way Carrietta White told the story. The book is written so believably and realistically that it seems as if the events described actually happened. The realism of the film fell through the ground with the house of the Whites, and this finally spoiled the impression of the film.
A minor flaw that haunted me throughout the film:
Carrietta's dress was red, not pink, as in the movie. For this reason, Margaret White was so fed up with Carrie. The red color for her symbolized blood, debauchery, vice. Red is the color of sin.
Bottom line: the film was crumpled and boring at the same time. The characters are not fully disclosed, and the ending destroys the realism of everything that happens.
5 out of 10
People, you can throw me rotten tomatoes, but I am in complete indignation and bewilderment from this film!!
In my opinion, the whole idea and the whole highlight of Stwain King's book is completely distorted. Most of the key and main events of the work have been completely changed, from the relationship between mother and daughter White to the end of the story! The book has so many heartbreaking moments, experiences of the heroine. Also, the film does not reveal the power of Carrie White, the greatness of her abilities, as it played a huge role in the original source. The difficult fate of the heroine is not reflected, and how in the end this fragile gagged girl dominated everyone, because she destroyed everything she could, she took revenge on all “evil people”, made them suffer! Carrie just created the ultimate hell!!! And the tragedy was global!
It is not for me to judge a brilliant director, but I am completely disappointed. My impression of the book was so strong that I was disappointed with the film. Therefore, I see only 2 options: either watch the movie or read the book, as the inconsistency is too large. Nevertheless, I dare advise you, dear guests, read a beautiful and interesting book by Stephen King and do not spoil your impression by watching film adaptations, especially remakes!
In the last month of autumn of this year, a remake of the cult novel by Stephen King “Carrie” is released, which received an ambiguous localization. Time will tell whether the new film adaptation can approach the success of the original, because the picture looks fresh and natural to this day.
It is worth remembering that “Carrie” was the first adaptation of King, an insanely talented American writer of various genres. For the prestigious mission of the implementation of the novel, a compatriot, the owner of the Berlin Silver Bear, Brian De Palma (Mission Impossible, Carlito’s Way, Scarface), who before that shot mainly short films, took up the prestigious mission. Later, his work was nominated for prestigious nominations for the excellent and well-coordinated work of actresses.
The gem of the film, of course, is Sissy Spacek, who reincarnated in the unfortunate heroine. Her long-suffering look plunges and remains in memory, as well as the difficult life position in which she is due to the circumstances. The actress as a chameleon changes face under the pressure of inexhaustible bullying and ridicule from peers. It is incomprehensible to the mind that the main germ of the child’s complex is the mother, the closest person, where self-personality was crushed in an atmosphere of oppression. Despite this, the girl in every way supports a small light to the various interests of modern society. She, like Cinderella in a luxurious dress, rushed to the school ball accompanied by a gentleman, whom she had never dreamed of before. Her dance with Tommy is filmed in such an effect that it goes around her head. But as in a fairy tale, sooner or later it all ends. The problem is what the future will be like. And this option is all sad and terrible. It’s a shame to see the small moments of happiness and simple human desires erased from her face. Perhaps that is why all the accumulated hidden negativity resulted in the crumbling ability of Carrie.
It’s nice to see people who are involved in improving a girl’s life. For example, a teacher, Miss Collins, did not turn her back and helped Carrie find a little self-confidence and joy in life. At the same time, she put in place the restless girls who so unrestrainedly joked and mocked a classmate. Whether it was accepted at that time, but I was insanely shocked by some methods of educational nature of a physical education teacher: the cheeks of graduates issued ringing claps from “iron” hands. It seems that some individuals like this turn, they are happy to accept these "presentations" and their boyfriends. Here you can remember a furious guy named Billy (John Travolta), who exploded from simple and simple insults, for which he gifted his restless girl. The not fully revealed character for me was Sue, Tommy's girlfriend, or rather, on which side were personal beliefs. Remarkable is the fact that the screen mother Sue is in life as such (Priscippa Pointer).
Also surprised by the presence of natural scenes in the shower, where the girls seemed not to be under the gunshot of the cameras: jumping, joking and washing with a wild laugh, which by the way was not voiced, but felt through the screen.
The musical accompaniment is also memorable: immerses in the spirit of that time (70-80-ies), and also enhances the drama of Carrie's fate. At the same time there are light light notes, coming at the moment of general rejoicing of the king and queen of the ball.
Carrie's story had a shocking ending that might not have happened. It is not for nothing that the epilogue of the film presented the fact that every n-th family of any nation experiences certain interpersonal problems.
In the end, I want to emphasize the main, I think, the message of the picture. It is that if people around them do not meet personal standards and rules, they are not outcasts and crazy. Everyone has feelings, dreams and desires. Treat others as you want to be treated.
Stephen King is one of the most popular writers today, and in terms of horror, he is the King. I love some of his works, but I’ve never read Carrie. I was not interested in this book. But a new film adaptation with the participation of Chloe Moretz is not far off, and I decided to at least watch the rest of the film adaptations, in order to then compare all three films for myself.
The film is about a girl with incredible telekinetic abilities. But, alas, the girl is brutally poisoned by classmates, and at home Carrie is pressed by a religious mother to the madness. In short, this is a full paragraph from which you can not get out. And it seems that Carrie’s life is getting better with the onset of the school ball, but this is just an illusion, because teenage cruelty knows almost no boundaries.
In fact, Carrie is an adult version of Despicable Duckling. The bullied girl became a real beauty over time, but the denouement of the plot, nevertheless, is bleak.
The acting in the film does not cause any complaints - Sissy Spacek plays the downtrodden girl as if she herself survived all this. Piper Laurie is also persuasive in the role of Carrie’s mother, and you quickly begin to hate her.
But, although the film turned out to be very good, it did not make a special impression on me. Yes, everything that happens on the screen is quite convincing, and the theme of teenage cruelty will always be relevant, but, nevertheless, it’s not enough. I don’t know the quality of the novel itself, but the film is quite ordinary. King is usually hard to film because of the complexity of his characters. They all think a lot, think a lot, remember something - in the film that is not. We can say that the film is just the tip of the iceberg of the novel.
Brian De Palma's film "Carrie", released in 1976, became an unconditional classic of the genre. This is Stephen King's first film adaptation of his first published (two years earlier) novel. The durability of this picture can be explained by many factors, including the fact that it in its quality and presentation of material is much superior to typical youth horror films, of which over the past 40 years an immeasurable number has appeared.
Who knows how the fate of Carrie could have been if Martin Scorsese had not dissuaded his friend De Palma from staging Taxi Driver. By that time, Brian had been working in movies for more than 10 years, but his paintings were not successful with the general public due to their underground nature. Having started his career with art-house “New York” comedies with the participation of the little-known Robert De Niro, by the early 70s he switched to thrillers. The film “Sisters” was the first serious experience in this genre. In 1976, in addition to "Carrie", De Palma also released another thriller "The Obsession", which in style more reminiscent of the cinema of the fifties, since it was performed in Hitchcockian traditions, and its action began in the same decade. “Carrie” in contrast to “the Obsession” looked more modern and had a clear mystical bias.
When creating the painting, De Palma did not take commercial risks. The budget of the film was small, but the talent of the director is always above that. And the cast did not shine with star names. John Travolta would only become famous a year later, having played in Saturday Night Fever. Piper Laurie, who played the role of the mother of the main character before Carrie, did not appear in films for 15 years. Sissy Spacek had previously flashed in Terrence Malick's iconic "The Wastelands." I think the basis of the film’s success was the success of King’s novel. Not a masterpiece of literature, the first major work of the King of Horrors became a bestseller. However, its adaptation largely surpassed the original source. The author himself was very pleased with the film adaptation, and already in the late 80s expressed the opinion that after “Carrie” for 10 years until “Stay with me” there were no truly successful adaptations of his works.
Sissy Spacek and Piper Laurie were nominated for an Oscar for their roles in Carrie, but the awards went to Faye Dunaway and Beatrice Strait, who starred in the film The Network. But the very fact of the nominations testified that De Palma did not shoot another horror movie, but something really worth attention.
This film, as a hymn to all the humiliated and insulted, outcasts of society, showed a powerful moral message and appealed to all people who consider it an honor to humiliate the weak, so that they see what such actions can lead to. Despite heavy material and shocking scenes, De Palma acted as a genuine humanist.
This year there will be a new (third) adaptation of this novel. About the second film adaptation, released in 2002 on television, I prefer to keep silent. Judging by the trailers, the creators in technical terms, of course, surpassed the De Palma sample of the dense 1976. But whether they retained depth, psychology and a high level of directing, we have yet to know.
Once upon a time, there was Carrie, a high school senior at an ordinary American school in a small town. She was raised by her mother in the strictest traditions of Puritan morality, without even telling her what tampons were for. Carrie wore long shapeless dresses, did not wear makeup and served as a whipping girl among her classmates. Classmates did not come close to her, not noticing her against the wall, until one day the captain of the basketball team invited her to the prom. But the envious did not leave the poor girl alone, preparing a cruel joke for her.
Isn't it the story of every second youth comedy? The story of Cinderella, who did not manage to return home safely before midnight, only slightly destroys the stereotype of Brian De Palma. To be honest, until the climax, the film is very difficult to attribute to the genre of “horror” or “thriller”, because the first period and throwing pads could scare only Carrie. For the viewer, these scenes are quite funny, and neither the play of Sissy Spacek, nor the pressure of the atmosphere with the help of “chilling” music, correct the situation. For most of the film, we are forced to watch the vicissitudes of the relations of schoolchildren, the crazy mother Carrie and the sharp slamming of doors (“magically” associated with the abilities of the main character). However, everything looks quite natural, and the age of the picture is easily forgotten, because teenagers do not change, they just wear different hairstyles and other clothes.
But "Carrie" wouldn't have thundered around the world if it were just a prom story. The amateur play ends with a climactic scene in the school gym, when a wicked joke turns against pranksters and everyone nearby. For 76, a twitching hose, a fire and an overturned car may have seemed like the most powerful special effects, but now it looks rather dull. The moment was emotional, although it was difficult to understand the reaction of others. The teacher, who had previously supported Carrie, laughed with the crowd, and Tommy stood there like an image. One word could fix the situation and prevent the inevitable, and Carrie could resist the rage. But Brian de Palma was filming a cult horror movie, so there will be blood.
In 2013, "Carrie" doesn't impress, scare, or elicit much sympathy. Compared to modern horror films, the film is much cleaner and much less stupid, but, alas, this does not make it a masterpiece.
Carrie White is considered a "state outcast." At school, a quiet and timid high school girl is poisoned by overripe teenagers, and at home, in addition, her own mother is abused - a religious fanatic, diabolically revering the word of God. The turning point in Carrie’s fate is the first period. Horror, turning into hysteria (mother-puritan did not even bother to inform her, and therefore at the age of 16 the daughter did not know anything about it), provides peers with another reason to mock.
Screaming, “Carrie has become a woman!” they throw a bloodied friend with sanitary towels and pads. But with her first menstruation, Carrie acquires something else: the ability to telekinesis. On the same day, she notices that her hatred can materialize. And when at the graduation ball classmates will arrange her the most cruel “joke”, which crossed out the last faith in the good, Carrie will begin to take revenge on everyone indiscriminately.
The occult horror of Brian De Palma was the first adaptation of Stephen King, who owed much to this film, which gave a tangible impetus to his career. Film studios immediately took seriously the “king of horrors”, and his books began to sell much faster. Now it is hard to believe, but the debut novel of King for a long time no one agreed to publish, not seeing in the book commercial potential, and the author – a writer’s gift.
After 7 years, King admits in an interview that "the film is much more elegant than a book that captures reading, but repels with some heaviness ... a quality that is missing in the film." It's amazing that this "easiness" De Palma was able to achieve with a meager for the present time budget - $ 1.8 million. But they were enough to make a movie that for many years predetermined the style of the genre of “mystic horrors”.
The story of a teenage girl who keeps away from the “pack” of classmates, and the use of religious symbols could formally predetermine the appearance of our “Stuffed”, filmed by Rolan Bykov in 1983. Moreover, echoes of Carrie can be found in other European paintings. So in three years, the German boy Oscar will similarly beat the lanterns and glass in the Tin Drum, the autistic girl from Stalker will move objects, and the young Perhan from the Hanging House will also famously deal with cutlery with the gypsy baron.
However, "Carrie" with the same success can be attributed to the author's film. It is obvious philosophical overtones: the heroine destroys the smug existence of a well-fed middle class, and with her revenge, a destructive mystical evil invades the well-fed world of the American suburbs, leading everything to disharmony and chaos. And De Palma’s famous travels, stretching the action in climactic scenes to increase tension, still remain unsurpassed.
26-year-old Sissy Spacek is very convincing in the role of 16-year-old “ugly duckling”. In the future, this actress will be nominated for an Oscar more than once, but she will only take her own one time – four years later, when she will receive a golden nude for the main (but much less expressive) role in the film The Miner’s Daughter. Spacek does not fall under the standard “Hollywood beauty”, and Carrie is still something of a business card of this actress (just like, for example, the main role of Katie Bates in another film adaptation of King – “Misery”).
No less chances to win the Oscar that year was the second (and last) nominee from “Carrie” – 44-year-old Piper Laurie, who played Margaret White, the mother of the main character. Neither before nor after, this actress, who worked mainly on TV, missed the stars from the sky. In addition, the film opened up a whole galaxy of young talents, but the only superstar in the future was only John Travolta, then unknown to anyone 22-year-old actor, who did not particularly show himself here. And it is not surprising: his role - the friend of the main villain - did not have much to it.
But what's interesting: the "bad" itself. Chris (who gave a blowjob to Travolta, and because of this and other explicit scenes, the film had serious age restrictions at the box office) was played by Nancy Allen - the future wife of De Palma, and Sue, the only surviving classmate Carrie, was performed by Amy Irving - the future (first) wife of Steven Spielberg.
I wanted to write a review of "Carrie" for a long time, I have already taken several times, but I quit.
This film and this book is probably the best of the horror genre, and the film is one of the most brilliant adaptations of King.
Despite the fact that many do not recognize this film as a horror film, and the game is considered disgusting, for me, the atmosphere of everything that happens is transferred to “excellent”, and Spicek is gorgeous.
There is nothing to say about history itself, it is chic, nothing superfluous, but at the same time everything is in place and nothing needs to be added. Here you have love, and hatred, and some friendship, and fiction, and human relations. Everything you need for a beautiful picture.
For a long time I wanted to write something, but now I realized that there is nothing to write. Great.
Here's a look from a 2013 viewer who decided to watch a "cult suspense," and this look does not flatter "Carrie." There is nothing here not only terrible, but also in the broad sense of “detective” or keeping in suspense. Brian de Palma simply wears out the viewer on the climactic prom scene as he prepares to bring a bucket of blood over Carrie's head for five minutes. Boring scenes of the death of schoolchildren, dialogue at the ball, boring quarrels Carrie with her mother. At the same time, it is a meditative and beautiful movie, ennobled by the gentle music of Pino Donagio. This is a long video about the fashion of the 70s, religion, family and sexuality of young women (in which, incidentally, there is nothing immature: Cece Spacek at the time of filming is 26 years old). “Carrie” could be a black erotic comedy about prom, and in part it turned out to be.
And Stephen King’s novel is amazing, it is, among other things, a love novel (which de Palma does not have in mind), I highly recommend it to everyone.
Perhaps only those who have been to Carrie’s place will be able to fully appreciate how accurately the feelings of the poor girl are conveyed. It is very difficult to live in a circle of offenders. Violent offenders. When you can't do anything about it, you can't answer them. You're just waiting for another joke, another humiliation. So you come home, and there's a bigoted mom who's scolding you for nothing, doesn't hear you, and makes things worse. And only a physical education teacher sees the whole situation and somehow tries to help you. She sees in you a person, that beauty that no one sees, sees the same person, with a good soul and the same feelings as others.
I remember the scene where the teacher convinces Carrie that she could have been invited to the ball not only with the intention of mocking. And the next scene, where she asks Tommy and Sue for the real reason. She says, “Tommy, don’t you think you’re going to look funny when you go out with Carrie White?” It is worth noting how well the actors were selected. Such a beautiful couple Tommy and Sue. How good they look.
What a ball. A scene in the car as White asks Tommy to "sit in the car for another minute." God, this is so true! Stiffness, and then sincere joy at the celebration. At this point, you start empathizing with her. A person is just beginning to adapt a little to society, and then there are two who are not satisfied with this.
The depth of the poor man's soul is striking. How much she loves her mother. It is difficult to call this woman such a holy word. Because of her, because of her beliefs, the girl lives like hell. But Carrie continues to love her, soothing, so tenderly hugging her.
I didn’t really like the idea of telekinesis, mass murder and a crumbling house. But this is not a fiction of the writers and the authorship of the genius Stephen King. Well, I don't like fiction. All right, another falling bike and ashtray, but no more.
8 out of 10
In anticipation of the release of the updated “Carrie” on the big screens (if anyone can explain to me why it was decided to title “Telekinesis” I would like to tell you about “Carrie” original. About the film, which immediately after the publication of the book brought Stephen King worldwide recognition.
Carrie is a film about violence, hatred, misunderstanding. This is a film about all the single girls who can’t find themselves, who endure constant ridicule. Of course, this is due to the stunning plot, gilded initially in the novel. By the way, if you liked the film, do not be lazy to read the novel, in some moments it is still better than the film. On the other hand, even Stephen King himself, when writing about the film, stated that the film is more analyzed and collected. In my opinion, he is not completely right, but we are not talking about this now.
Of course, the most beautiful thing about this film is the amazing acting. The characters just converge with their prototypes from the novel. Of course, I would like to single out Carrie's mother. In the novel, she is described in a completely different way, but who cares about her appearance, if her character is shown with such scrupulousness? All other characters are also fully represented. I really like the fact that they did not turn out so flat and clear, except maybe only Chris, but they turned out very multifaceted, which again confirms the fact that the film was played at a very high level.
I would like to talk about directing. Brian De Palma is probably the only one, with the exception of Frank Darabont, not spoiling Stephen King's original idea. In general, the film adaptation of King's novels is very difficult for many reasons - among them their strong atmosphericity and the connection between different novels, but De Palma was able to preserve the original atmosphere, original idea, tension and its build-up. This is why the film gets so many positive reviews.
In addition to the director’s work, the operators also performed well. Especially successful was the scene at the ball, where Carrie dances with Tommy. Due to the whirlwind, we understand what a hurricane of thoughts and feelings at that moment permeates the characters, what a poor girl feels. In addition, the operator plays well with the color solution. For example, when the picture is painted red at the end, it narrows. Or when the plans are abruptly shifted and Carrie’s eyes are focused to show how she uses her powers. In my opinion, at the then level of special effects, such a decision can be called genius.
I can say a few words about special effects. Many people scold them, saying that they are too simple and obvious. Yes, it is, but please remember that this is the middle of the seventies. The special effects were excellent at the time. Well, modern viewers should appreciate how hard the filmmakers tried and how well they did everything.
The last thing I want to mention is the soundtrack. Music replaced by cacophony is ideal for this film. It's as beautiful as the characters.
Well, dear lovers of good movies, if you are going to see this film or just want to get acquainted with the work of Stephen King through it - I advise. In addition, I advise all insecure girls who suffer from ridicule to watch it (just do not act like Carrie, this will not end well). And it’s not just women who should watch this movie. Just because it has a very subtle psychology, each character is just a treasure trove. Look, learn, analyze.
A few words about the new Carrie. Of course, I'm really looking forward to this movie. But the creators will have to try very hard, because the bar is very, very high.
8 out of 10
Brian De Palma’s film Carrie, which was released in 1976, stands out from a number of mystical paintings at once for several reasons. The novel on which the film was directed was the first published work of the cult writer Stephen King, and Carrie is the first and one of the most successful adaptations of his books. This picture became an important milestone in the work of the leading actress - Cece Spacek, for whom the image of Carrie became one of the main in her career. The film is valuable not only for the story itself, transferred from King’s novel, but also for the methods of shooting – non-random attention to detail, setting plans and an unusual approach to depicting time when moments become tangible and the tension is felt by each cell. Success among critics and ordinary viewers has led to remakes, sequels and even a musical. And the name of an outsider girl with telekinetic abilities became known to everyone.
The life of sixteen-year-old Carrietta White is like endless torture. At school, she becomes a victim of constant ridicule and bullying by cruel classmates. At home, too, the mother, whose religiosity borders on bigotry, has turned her daughter’s life into a nightmare, punishing the slightest transgression in the most un-Christian way. All life here is reduced to the fulfillment of Biblical rules, bizarrely mixed with Mrs. White's mad ideas about sin. Harassed and unhappy Carrie suddenly manages to find solace in her own supernatural abilities, accumulating strength for a thunderstorm that must break out.
The two different environments surrounding Carrie are equally poisoned by anger, stupidity and cruelty. For sadistic classmates, bullying and malicious jokes are just a game, a way to kill time, although they slowly kill a person. Young and careless children do not have a sense of responsibility for their actions, there are no moral norms that can stop on the way to sin in time, there is only a desire to agree with the majority and beat the bedridden one together with everyone. The main character is surrounded only by darkness, and only the flowers of evil can grow on this soil. The image of the main character surprises with inner strength, the desire to overcome all troubles and change your life, but it is difficult to call Carrie a positive heroine. After all, suddenly she ceases to be a victim, mastering a new role - the role of the executioner. Of great importance in Carrie is the image of blood. The blood of Jesus Christ on the numerous crucifixes depicted in the film, the first menstrual blood of Carrie, who changed something in the soul of the main character, and the blood of a pig that rained. In most religions, this symbol is associated with life and vital warmth, according to other interpretations, the shed blood contributes to the atonement of sins. Carrie seems to be sacrificing herself, taking on the sins of the world. The blood shed makes it clear that something terrible is coming, something that will forever change the way things are.
What is truly frightening is the image of Carrie’s mother, Margaret White, who is an example of horrifying bigotry. In the White house, the family dinner takes place against the background of a copy of the Last Supper, and in the closet, the guilty girl is waiting for a terrible crucifixion with Christ with eyes burning in the dark, from which you need to beg forgiveness of sins. In the hands of a fanatical mother, religion becomes not salvation, but punishment and torment. Although her mother believes her daughter’s actions are intrigues of Satan, Mrs. White, who turned her daughter’s life into hell, herself seems possessed by the devil. The very understanding of sin, which, if you look closely, is in each of us, is changing. In our thoughts and actions. Does everyone know that the road is paved with good intentions? Yes, Mom, we're all going to burn in hell.
Ah, mother, you will never know what it is - to anxiously desire care and affection in his arms, with trembling throughout his body to melt and dissolve in beautiful music, soar upwards in the secret expectation of the first kiss. Because loneliness has eaten you from the inside out, Mother, because you don't love your neighbor. You’ll never understand how to really just feel life in yourself if you want to. Meaningless austerity, insincere repentance and endless self-humiliation - why, Mother? Why ask God if he doesn’t listen to your prayers? You don't listen because you don't feel God inside you. I know I can handle it myself. Your false faith in a transparent shroud covers your animal hatred and your cowardice. You are so blind in your beliefs that you cannot distinguish red from pink, and the fertile seed of love from the rotten seed of lust. True faith, Mother, is faith in oneself. I understand that now. And I thank you for opening my eyes. If you want to, they will all pay. They will feel in their skin what fear and pain are. And there was never love in your eyes, Mother. You will feel it too.
In 1974, not yet known to a wide range of readers, Stephen King published his first novel, which opened the way for a novice writer to world fame. "Carrie" - a story about a girl being terrified at school and at home who discovered telekinetic abilities in herself - received public attention not only due to the depth of the content, but also the originality of the form. The novel is a compilation of quotes from fictional newspaper articles, monographs and memoirs dedicated to the terrible events that shook a small town in Maine. The screen adaptation of Brian De Palma, which was released two years later, of course, could not boast of such an authentic approach, but it became a brilliant actor's benefit Sissy Spacek.
In each class there is a child who, for one reason or another, is not able to resist constant mockery, ridicule and evil hamstrings. And he inevitably becomes a whipping boy. Or a girl. Raised in her mother’s gauntlets, Carrie White is shy and defenseless. There is perhaps nothing more shameful to a little woman than the beastly clatter of her classmates seeing her first menstruation - just one of dozens, perhaps hundreds, of acts of endless and merciless humiliation. Nothing is more painful to a young soul than the poison of the religious fanaticism of a mother, soaked in breast milk. Axiomatic daily stick without gingerbread.
But prom night is a time of magic, the beginning of the path to adulthood. The ugly duckling, unexpectedly for everyone, turned into a beautiful swan. Light curls, radiant silk gently pouring over the pale freckled shoulders. An impeccable camp, dressed in a pinkish-lavender dress, reflecting the soft moonlight of wide-open eyes - the eye of a newborn who first saw the beauty of the surrounding world. Blessed and happy, and therefore infinitely desirable. Yesterday's snub-nosed wretch turned into a noble maiden, a true example of kindness and chastity. And Tommy will have time to see this miracle before he feels the fatal blow to the dark. King would not be King if he did not remind us that God's ways are inscrutable. Like the huge black John Coffey, this beautiful flower that grew on rocky soil among weeds, is destined to wither when it has barely blossomed. The hair will stick together in a stream of foul-smelling slime, the evening dress will be painted with scarlet, sincere girlish happiness will turn first into an indescribable horror, and immediately after that - with burning hatred. An angel will become a demon.
Seeing this, you realize that there is no Carrie but Spacek. Especially in the remake, the ruthless PR of the Russian localization turned into a flashy and pathetic “Telekinesis”. This furious energy, this nerve, this subtle game on emotions, against which even the most powerful role of Piper Laurie, not to mention the unusually young and simple John Travolta, fades in its cruel truthfulness.
In one of his past lives, King was definitely a woman. Otherwise, it is impossible to explain his frighteningly subtle and versatile understanding of the nuances of female psychology. The tragic story of Carrie and her mother will be King’s first experience in creating a series of powerful and complex female images born in a bright writer’s head. In the head of a man who in all colors will show the maternal feelings of Wendy Torrance, and the mental disorder of Annie Wilkes, and the difficult marital share of Dolores Claiborne.
Carrie White is burning in hell, no doubt about it. But the irony is that after watching the film, the most vivid memory of the film is not the raging heat of righteous retribution and not even a miserable girl drenched in pig blood from toe to head. In the memory are shimmering happiness eyes, radiant smile and unique magic of the prom evening. Because we all want to remember the good.
Before watching this movie, I decided to read the book of the same name, because the name Carrie means a lot to me. When I finished the last page, I was amazed. I hardly read Stephen King, but this novel left me with so many positive emotions that I immediately started watching the film itself.
I can’t say that the film turned out better than its print progenitor, as there are many differences from the book, but I am sure that I will review the picture again. "Carrie" didn't like me completely, and I'm only positive about a few things: Miss Collins (based on Ms. Desjardine's book), a strict but caring physical education teacher, how I liked the character the most. In the book, she pretended to be kind, but in the film she was really worried about the quiet and shy schoolgirl, and I was also hooked by Piper Laurie, who perfectly played the mad religious fanatic Margaret, unfortunately turned out to be Carrie’s mother.
Carrie herself was presented as a timid girl who blooms at the ball like a beautiful flower. But happiness didn't last long. The girl, who recently had a heightened ability to telekinesis, was brutally pinned on, and after that, Carrie, succumbing to emotions, began to use her power against those she hated all this time. In the book, the girl destroyed almost the entire city, but in the film they decided to do with one school. Sissy Spacek quite coped with her role, but her character is hardly the protagonist, and I do not have a particularly good attitude towards Carrie.
Young Amy Irving, Nancy Allen and John Travolta were also able to “complement” their characters, for which they are very grateful. Even P.J. Soles as Norma's instigator is memorable to me, although I hate her character more than the arrogant Chris. But strangely enough, William Catt as Tommy hardly remembered me. Just creepy-looking guy with long light curls, nothing more.
Overall, the film left a positive impression on me. Almost all the actors did the job assigned to them. The film is not necessary to watch, but you should not have bad emotions from it.
It is very difficult to evaluate a movie if it is based on a book. Both those who read the book, because reviewers turn into harsh critics, and those who watch the film for the first time, not knowing what will happen next, because they have nothing to compare.
I belong to the second category of people. I haven't read the book. After watching this movie, I had no desire to read. I had only one view, and I doubt I will ever try to evaluate Carrie with a fresh look.
There are many reasons. In general, I heard quite a lot of opinions from my friends who worship the work of Stephen King and this creation of cinema in particular. Therefore, there was interest in this picture. It was interesting to watch throughout the film.
The story itself was quite original at the time. It will remain relevant at any time. School showdowns of this level always make you worry about the protagonist (and was he here?) and hate with all your heart those who dared to offend our introvert. The opening episode makes it clear that Carrie White is far from okay, but it is not her fault. Perhaps it is the episode in the shower, when our heroine, unaware of such a concept as menstruation, prays for the help of her classmates with tears in her eyes, takes the most alive. This is where regret and empathy appear, saving interest in viewing. The effect is added by a fanatical mother, who considers the usual biological process to be the machinations of Satan. Unfortunately, such people do exist, and they harm society. I don’t know if it was worse at school or at home. There's nowhere else to go. At school there are cynical and ruthless classmates. At home is a mother who considers her own daughter a vessel of sin and is ready at any time to slap the Bible on her face.
I unwittingly started to tell the story, so it's time to stop. Why? I think this movie is worth watching, although I personally thought it was long. More than half of the film doesn’t make any progress, which makes us forget one important thing. “Carrie” is primarily a horror movie, and it should be scary (given the year of creation and the vast number of films in this genre, my words sound absurd, but still). But whether the director succeeded, or the book says so, but the whole suspense, the whole climax occurs at the end of the film. It’s hard to explain, but personally I had the effect of the “templeness” of the final, which spoiled the overall impression. De Palma began in the mainstream of drama, and decided to quickly “wrap” the ending in horror foil. The dramatic component in this film is performed perfectly, which cannot be said about the second, called horror. The director jumped from one to another, as a result, it is unclear what kind of picture he wanted to shoot.
Come on, let's get to the technical details. It is not necessary to read, as everyone decides such moments for himself. The soundtrack to the film is disgusting. He's completely unattractive. I will say even more: it is not heard, but it is rather pleasant. In those fragments where we are allowed to listen to the work of composers, I want to reduce the sound. The melodies are intrusive and unpleasant. Sometimes, if you strain, you can notice a “freebies” (the scene in the shower directly confirms this). Cinematography is insanely good at first, but then it fades. Is that possible? I don't know, but the prom angles are like amateur photography. And Carrie's dancing with her boyfriend made me dizzy. There are no complaints about the film.
Regarding the cast. In my opinion, everyone coped. Sissy Spacek plays well, although what a sin to hide, such a non-standard appearance helps her. Separately, I will highlight Piper Laurie, who perfectly coped with the role of a fanatical Christian Margaret White.
Bottom line: if you want to watch a good drama, seasoned with something supernatural, then this film is for you. If you want to watch a Stephen King horror movie, Carrie is not your option. What is a review written for? In order to let readers know whether to watch the film. So, is it worth a look? Definitely yes.