Click to Skip Ad
Closing in...

First Official & Bloody Look At Chloe Moretz & Julianne Moore In Kimberly Peirce's 'Carrie' Remake

by Simon Dang
August 23, 2012 8:38 AM
  • |

It would seem that, for whatever reason, folks are more curious than wary about Kimberly Peirce's remake of Brian De Palma's classic adaptation of Stephen King's "Carrie." Whatever the outcome may be, we're guessing that curiosity will continue to win out with the arrival of the impressive first official look at Chloe Moretz and Julianne Moore, who'll be starring as timid high-schooler Carrie White and her fundamentalist mother Margaret respectively -- roles portrayed in De Palma's originally by Sissy Spacek and Piper Laurie.

Moretz already has strong horror remake genes, having starred in Matt Reeves' "Let Me In," a re-do of Tomas Alfredsson's Swedish film "Let The Right One In," and described Peirce's new take on King's tale as "more like the book. It’s a more 'Black Swan' version—it messes with your mind. You’ll see things, and you don’t know if you’ve seen them.” A more psychological depiction of the story? So far, so good.

"Carrie" centers on the titular high schooler who unleashes her telekinetic powers after being pushed too far by her fundamentalist mother and fellow school mates at prom. Judy Greer co-stars as empathetic teacher Miss Collins with Portia Doubleday playing Chris Hargensen, Alex Russell as Billy Nolan and Gabriella Wilde as Sue Snell.  The film lands on March 13, 2013. [EW/ComingSoon]

Free Indie Movies and Documentaries    


  • Archer Slyce | September 19, 2012 2:53 PMReply

    So, Sony will give a first look of both Evil dead and Carrie at the New York Comic Con ... interesting.

  • Tom | August 23, 2012 1:24 PMReply

    No shower scene, no deal.

  • Zack | August 23, 2012 12:49 PMReply

    Also, if they were really hewing closer to the book, Carrie's supposed to be overweight and have acne and thinning hair. So I'm guessing they mean "closer to the book" the same way Tim Burton meant it when he kept repeating that while he was promoting "Charlie & the Chocolate Factory", i.e. "We're deviating from the book as much as the first movie did, but we don't want you to think we have nothing new to offer because we would very much like your money, if that's okay."

  • ArcherSlyce | August 23, 2012 11:39 AMReply

    The book is far from being King's best work, its pseudo-scientific approach (telekinesis et al.) tends to ruin the whole thing. Which is why De Palma's take on the book was great... it's no just visually stunning, it deals with what really matters in the original story (namely that bullying thing, the relationship between Carrie and her mother). So I don't see why they should get closer to the book. Another common thing with remakes is that we tend to read the very same arguments and every press release is a carbon copy of the others... we're reworking the thing ... we're re re-imagining it. Hell for some reason kids discovering Carrie and Suspiria seems to think they have something to do with Black Sawn ! In any case, granted we only have two pictures to look at right now ... but common they look exactly like the original.

  • ArcherSlyce | August 31, 2012 4:46 AM

    Said third picture : Look at the hands gesture. Compare with the DVD cover of the 1976 movie.

  • ArcherSlyce | August 31, 2012 4:05 AM

    For the record The 47 Ronins has more than 200 film versions and I have no problem with that. To sum-up what I said above a/Going back to the book is not a great idea. b/ The book has nothing to do with black swan. c/ We have (only) three pictures and the third one look even more like a total carbon copy of one of the most iconic moment in DePalma's movie !!! who is in itself one of the most iconic horror movie of all time: that just can't be a coincidence. d/ Most off all, who knows the movie might be good, all I'm saying is that it's not all these remakes that are boring, it's the phony communication that comes with them.

  • cinephile | August 23, 2012 4:26 PM

    Again, it's not a real remake, and new film versions of novels are there all the time. Great Gatsby, Jane Eyre, Anna Karenina, etc.etc.

  • Zack | August 23, 2012 10:21 AMReply

    OHMIGOD SPOILERS YOUSE GUYS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    Also, wow, nice big-ass cross on Julianne Moore, just so we know she's a religious fundamentalist, which will presumably not be established in any other way. I guess if they already got you to go to a remake of "Carrie", it's kind of their prerogative to assume you're a moron.

  • Taylor | August 23, 2012 9:34 AMReply

    Looks awful.

  • james | August 23, 2012 9:11 AMReply

    What's the f-king point? What's the f-king point? What's the f-king point?!!

    Stop it Hollywood. STOP. IT.

  • cinephile | August 23, 2012 11:05 AM

    The point is that this is NOT an actual remake. It is a new adaptation / reinterpretation of the Stephen King novel. Here's what director Kimberly Peirce said: "I have gone back to the wonderful STEPHEN KING Book CARRIE; I am also modernizing the story as one has to in order to bring any great piece of work written in one era into the next and especially given how very relevant this material is right now." Also, bullying is more topical than ever nowadays.

  • Kelly | August 23, 2012 10:20 AM

    They will stop making so many remakes when they stop making money. I was saying the same thing about all the spoof movies that were coming out in the last decade. Those were cheap to make so they made them. Finally audiences gave up on them so they stopped making them. I like to hate on a lot of remakes, too. I can't say I haven't seen some, but yes most of them are pointless, especially when they are remakes of movies that aren't even 20 years old. I think the point of remaking movies, if you must, should be to find a way to improve on the original. Most of them lately have just been almost exactly the same.

    My main problem with these pictures are showing too much. As much as I'd say watch the original, isn't the point of it to show it to a new generation? Why show a picture of her in blood? That's the big moment of the movie so you're going to spoil it in a picture? Because they are hoping that in case the younger people don't want to see it, a bunch of fans of the original will watch it. Why, I don't know.

  • rex | August 23, 2012 9:24 AM

    the point is Hollywood wants to make some money so no they want stop it

    and Carrie was already remade so who the heck cares if they remake it agian

    p.s. the orginal was not that great

Email Updates