REVIEW: Carrie (2013)


Carrie: F

Yes, Chloe Moretz is a good actress. There. I got that out of the way. Now you go ahead and tell me what else this movie has going for it because I am at a motherfucking loss.

I have never seen a more pointless remake. This is the same exact movie from 1976 with only very superficial “updates” for a modern audience.

For example, the scene where Carrie gets her period in the locker room: Totally the same; they even throw tampons and do that cunty chant. One of the Plug It Up Girls uses a smart phone to capture the incident and posts it to Youtube. Other than that the scene is an awkward facsimile of the original. Why even remake it if all you are adding to it is a fucking iphone?

Maybe some viewers were all “Wow! So clever! Video! It’s like Carrie, but for our generation, bro!” If that sort of scene is all it takes to impress you, someone might as well remake The Shining and be sure to include a scene where Wendy loses cell phone service. Or how about a Jaws remake where they try to track the shark with GPS?

“Aw man, it’s like they are trying to stop that shark, but it’s like, set in present day, bro!

The whole movie is like this. It’s almost a scene-by-scene reconstruction of the original film with a lame product-placement-feeling layer of the 21st century superimposed on top. The car still gets destroyed, but it is a 2013 Challenger. They dump pig’s blood on Carrie, but they play humiliating HD video clips on a projection screen behind her. The wardrobes are updated (fucking name-brand central) and they work cell phones into a few scenes.

At least they had Carrie conduct her telekinesis research at the library with actual books instead of having a montage of her Bing searches.

I’m not upset to see a movie resurrected in modern times(even though my gripes may make it sound that way), but the movie didn’t seem to have much of a point otherwise. That’s what pisses me off. Maybe I’m undermining the idea that the cruelty and alienation of adolescence holds up across generations, but a Carrie reboot was not an effective vehicle for this message. I get that that is what the filmmakers were probably going for, but I couldn’t help saying (out loud) “so fucking what?! I’ve already seen this movie!”

The acting was clunky. Tons of unnatural and forced dialogue from the teenage characters. You could tell some adults in LA wrote the screenplay. Julianne Moore was not creepy as Carrie’s mom, but I just think she is funny as a person, so maybe you will think she is scary when she is holding scissors and laugh-crying.



REVIEW: Evil Dead (2013)




evil dead reboot: C

an ok horror movie that’s a little bit better than most horror reboots, but still not really a ‘good’ movie. i would probably be more lenient with it if it wasn’t such a typical horror movie that almost abuses the ‘evil dead’ name. i’m sure kids in high school are telling each other that it’s the goriest movie they’ll ever see and i’m sure raimi and campbell are in suits after the premiere shaking hands thinking they accomplished tastefully cashing in on an old brand. but as good of a horror movie as it is, it’s just too conventional, too lukewarm, too ordinary of a horror movie that makes me sad that it’s an evil dead.

sam raimi’s directing in the original series is what sticks out most in my mind as a breath of fresh air in the horror genre. it seemed campy for campy sake. the script was genius in its off kilter comedy and cheesy one liners, but none of that could have worked if raimi hadn’t shot it the way he did. fede alvarez was given the helm because of his exceptional work on short films that no one has seen. his not so subtle homages to raimi’s original directing style were almost irritating because you would want more of it amid his charmless own directing style. it’s like hearing the ice cream truck a street over but it doesn’t come down your street.

some of the logic issues were annoying as well, but i won’t get too into that. sure demonic possession and it’s a horror movie are great excuses for suspension of disbelief. but i mean, all sorts of questions popped in my head as soon as i saw that nail gun. what the fuck is its history at the cabin? did the thieves bring it with them or forget to steal it? considering it’s probably worth more than anything else there. it couldn’t have been there for that long since cordless nail guns are a relatively new technology…

all in all i probably took this movie too personal since it’s ironically stamping on sacred grounds. and i’d like to think that i’ll check out the unrated version eventually, but i probably won’t, since i doubt they edited out personality and the nail guns origins.