Unseen Terror 2023: Dirtier Pillows (Day 8)

 

While assembling this year's list, I was at a bit of a crossroads when it came to including the necessary Stephen King pick. Yes, I did cover the first six Children of the Corn flicks, but only one of those is an actual adaptation of printed material. Ultimately, I landed on a film that I keep forgetting exists: 2002's made-for-TV adaptation of Carrie. His first full novel was previously turned into a full-length feature courtesy of famed director Brian De Palma, but as is the usual case with the Maine mad man, he disliked the movie. Nearly 30 years later, the tragic story of tormented, bullied, and (eventually) murderous Carrie White would come to life again thanks to writer Bryan Fuller and director David Carson, whose works on television programs (mostly Star Trek-related) were met with mostly praise.

Unfortunately, 2002's Carrie is a bizarre misfire and is arguably a little worse than the next adaptation that would follow eleven years later (previously reviewed here). This is mostly because it both equally tries too hard to stay faithful to its source material and also takes the kind of risks that will end up pleasing nobody in the end. Oddly enough, there are aspects in this version that never made their way into either of the other adaptations. We have the police interviewing survivors of the infamous prom night massacre and Carrie summoning what seems to be small meteors while arguing with her mother (does this make her a contender for "Death Battle" on YouTube?), which were excluded from both the De Palma film and the Kimberly Peirce version starring Chloe Moretz. Faithfulness to the source material is always appreciated, but sometimes there is a reason small parts are excluded from theatrical interpretations: they don't translate well to film. Take another Stephen King project as an example: It. Whichever adaptation of that you prefer is fine, but there are scenes from that book that did not (and SHOULD not) make it into a film because they are either too goofy or just a little too gross.

Cast-wise though? It's perfectly acceptable. I'm a bit of an Angela Bettis fanboy going back to her time in the criminally underrated May, and despite her being nearly thirty at the time of filming, she still does a commendable job as our lead character (though she has been more vocal over the years about disliking the movie itself). There are a few other recognizable performers scattered throughout like Katharine Isabelle (Ginger Snaps, American Mary) and Emilie de Ravin (Lost, Once Upon a Time), but I'm sure the performer that will catch your attention the most is Patricia Clarkson (of The Untouchables and The Green Mile fame), who portrays Carrie's fanatical, abusive mother Margaret. She's also doing perfectly fine, but if I'm being brutally honest, nobody can touch Piper Laurie. The script seems intent on letting the viewer know that she's crazy solely because of hearing others talk about her, whereas in De Palma's adaptation, all one has to do is just look at her and observe even the smallest of mannerisms. Perhaps the biggest complaint about this motion picture comes from the utterly insane twist the filmmakers decided to come up with during the final ten minutes. Spoiler alert at the end of this review for those who care.

I just can't see any real reason to watch 2002's Carrie unless if you're say, the type that has to watch EVERYTHING with Stephen King's name attached to it. Sure, the 1976 feature is a little dated, but it feels timeless in terms of execution and the filmmaking process that went into it being completed and released. This is littered with some terribly dated dialogue, a final act that borders on insulting, and some VERY bad CGI. Plus, it's made-for-tv, so the bloodshed and kills aren't even impressive. It isn't timeless, but just a time capsule that's best left buried. If you still wish to seek out this shockingly long flick, it's currently streaming on Tubi, and there is a Blu-Ray from Scream! Factory out there to purchase (though it's a possibility it may be out of print).

Ah yeah, so that spoiler, eh? Well, when I discussed changes that will leave you scratching your head, how about this one? Carrie White, after killing hundreds, survives her mother's attempt at trying to kill her. Like in the novel and other adaptations, Margaret White dies, but unlike in the book, Carrie is then rescued by a surviving Sue Snell. They manage to fake Carrie's death and then drive away from town in an attempt to give Carrie a new start in life by moving to Florida. This would have supposedly led to a Carrie TV series where she would help others with telekinetic powers similar to hers. Not only is that just an utterly insane and moronic idea, but it turns the story of Carrie White from a horrifying tragedy into a poor man's version of assembling an X-Men team. Main star Angela Bettis, herself a rather large fan of the source material and the De Palma picture, admitted years later that she only signed onto this film in hopes that the aforementioned series would be made, because regardless of quality, she would have a steady flow of income while still focusing on independent cinema. It did not. Seriously, can someone please give this woman her flowers?

Unseen Terror 2013: Day 18

The product of a fundamentalist household, shy & quiet Carrie White discovers that she may nest telekinetic powers. While researching these suspicions, she is soon asked to the prom by a fellow classmate. Initially reluctant and suspicious of trickery, she agrees. What follows, however, is a night that nobody at Carrie's school of Bates High will ever forget...should they live to tell about it.


So Stephen King, we meet again. We've taken a brief intermission so that I may take a break and deal with some killer women and killer animals, but you inevitably found your way back into my countdown. True, your invention of the troubled teenager Carrie White is indeed a "killer woman," but only after having her period in the shower. Guess I have to write about her all over again then.


Oh! You're asking why I decided to copy and paste my synopsis for the review that I posted of Brian De Palma's adaptation of Carrie. Well, as late as it might be over here, I figured I'd give in to laziness, as the filmmakers behind 2013's version of Carrie decided to seemingly do the same by essentially remaking his version of the film, but of course, with minor adjustments in order to satiate the modern horror movie fan. Some aspects are understandable, like the addition of more modern music into the big prom night scene, but others, like Carrie's mother driving a car with a Jesus fish on the back and the infamous "plug it up!" scene being filmed on a camera phone by other students just felt ridiculous and lead to nothing down the line (more on those particular characters in the second paragraph). There's also a heavy abundance of CGI in Carrie's notorious prom bloodbath and its aftermath, which of course, is a poor exchange for practical work. After seeing the great practical work done in something like American Mary recently, or even the reboot of The Evil Dead, it baffles me that some creators still can't get the simplest of things right and make them look convincing.


Early critics, for what ones were able to gather the information they could, made the argument that this was supposed to be the breakout role for Chloe Moretz, though she's already arguably a star. Though she doesn't have the same haunting, awkward innocence that Sissy Spacek had, she does a more than commendable job as the title character, even if she doesn't physically look like the character. I know that I said my piece about Spacek's appearance in the original film, but Moretz before prom night and day of prom night look nearly identical, and it just isn't very convincing. These minor flaws are especially apparent when she goes on her "massacre," which just didn't make you fear her, but gave you the feeling that she was like a kid in a candy store, or worse yet, a member of the X-men, whereas Spacek's ghostly appearance is now one of the most recognized in all of cinema. Okay, I'll stop with the comparisons, or at least try my best to.


Gabriella Wilde plays a fairly decent Sue Snell, the only high schooler to ever show Carrie an ounce of sympathy throughout the story, but I couldn't say the same for the rest of her classmates, who are fairly flat or just plain forgettable for the roles they are playing (whoever they cast as Billy Nolan was absolutely abysmal). This brings me to the one thing I truly regret having to talk bad about: Julianne Moore. Have you ever witnessed a performance that just feels like someone is trying too hard to go for "crazy" when it should just come naturally? That is Julianne Moore's Margaret White, and it breaks my heart to see her turn in something so mediocre when you know she is a much more capable actress than this. I do love this woman, I truly do. She is rarely bad in anything she chooses (notice that I said rarely), and I know she was taking this role originally from Jodie Foster, which is ironically the second time she's done this from the woman in the horror field (the first being Hannibal). No matter the amount of times it has been done though, she borders on comical at points in Carrie and is a poor substitution for Piper Laurie, which is all the more bizarre when a considerably large amount of her behavior and mannerisms seems lifted from Laurie's own portrayal of the character.


After all is said and done, I think this will end up going into the pile of remakes or re-imaginings that muster mostly "meh"s from its viewers. While I can still give it small points for having things that are more faithful to the original source material, such as naming the gym teacher Miss Desjardin (something De Palma didn't do in his movie) and keeping a more faithful ending, there just isn't a large rhyme or reason for its existence, save for Moretz to have another starring vehicle under her belt, and you're much better off revisiting the more brilliant De Palma classic (unless you hate watching horror films made prior to the 1980s). Like the remakes of A Nightmare On Elm Street, Black Christmas, or Halloween, you can just pretend that this one doesn't exist. In fact, it would be for the best that we all just let the story of the Whites be laid to rest, and work on fixing and readapting some other Stephen King works for the big screen.



Tomorrow, we're taking a trip back to the 80s and into the CLOWNHOUSE!

Unseen Terror 2013: Day 2

The product of a fundamentalist household, shy & quiet Carrie White discovers that she may nest telekinetic powers. While researching these suspicions, she is soon asked to the prom by a fellow classmate. Initially reluctant and suspicious of trickery, she agrees. What follows, however, is a night that nobody at Carrie's school of Bates High will ever forget...should they live to tell about it.


Holy jumped up jesus, had I never really seen Carrie until this year? Seriously? Well, yes, I never had. I am also currently in the process of reading the novel of the same name, which I hope to finish by the end of the month if I'm lucky. I would have been finished sooner had I not been occupied with finalizing this very list and with, again, dealing with hospital bills. If you happen to have eight thousand dollars to spare, you will be my best friend until the day that I die. And that is a promise.

Unlike Ms. Carrie White though, who seems to have no friends whatsoever (save for one or two highly debatable ones), and is one of the more fascinating and tragic figures of horror cinema. I can see why Sissy Spacek has become so synonymous with the title character. She may not have the look of Ms. White down (according to the novel, she's a bit more slovenly and chunky), but she has absolutely nailed the characteristics and personality. She's naive, stupidly earnest, likable, and creepy when the time is right. I wish I could say the same for her mother, played by the devilish Piper Laurie. She's a complete psychopath for most of her screen time, and her character is the first in many of Stephen King's long obsession and hatred for all things religious-related. I always have to blame one Doug Walker for ruining/enhancing my love for Mr. King by introducing the Stephen King Drinking Game, though admittedly that may only work for tales such as It and the like. But yes, Laurie is great as Carrie's mother, reciting bible verses in an attempt to keep her daughter as clean and pure as possible, striking her down, throwing water on her. You know, the usual fun stuff.


I would argue that Carrie also really helped make director Brian De Palma into a decently well known somebody, as the guy had a handful of well received pictures prior to the release of this King adaptation, but I doubt he would have been able to make a film like Scarface years later had this film been a critical or financial failure. Even more shocking considering that the original novel that this was based upon was thrown out by Stephen King himself, but urged to be finished by his wife. Truth be told, the chemistry and direction he's able to get out of everyone here is just fantastic, and I'm disappointed that Spacek herself didn't win the Academy Award she was nominated for here. Pino Donaggio's score deserves some sort of extra praise as well. I recall liking his work on last year's Unseen Terror entry, the rather well done Don't Look Now, and wish this very talented man had more work on his resume outside of a few select works. The violin, when utilized properly, is just as effective as a piano could ever be.


As it stands, I'd place Brian De Palma's adaptation of Carrie in the top five of best adaptations of a Stephen King novel to date, up there with films like Stand By Me. It cuts out a lot of the fluff I've been trudging through in the novel so far that feels wholly unnecessary and just cuts to the chase, leaving you with a largely more satisfying product and never forgetting to develop the characters into interesting people. Even if you know the whole concept and infamous conclusion to Carrie, but have never seen any version of the story, go watch this. It really is a great film. I'm curious as to how the upcoming remake with Chloe Moretz and Julianne Moore will turn out, as this version is forever fresh in the minds of the horror public, and even the public at large. They will have very big shoes to fill, despite their instantly recognizable names and attachment to a respectable director as well (Kimberly Peirce of Boys Don't Cry fame). Perhaps you'll see a review pop up sometime this month?



Come back tomorrow as we'll fly in for another Stephen King work with THE LANGOLIERS!