Carrie

DePalma is a demon and his shot composition should be considered a national treasure. In some shots (like the opening prom) he goes from almost a panorama to a medium close-up of a character the shot ends up following, which must be a real art, considering almost everything in that shot is in motion. Sissy Spacek is ingenious, and it's by working together with the director that they are able to create in record time a solid relationship between the main character and the audience such that it’s a wonder they don’t clap along with the audience as Carrie and Tommy become the queen and king of the evening. Not to mention that we all know how it's going to turn out anyway. Otherwise, the De Palma-esque tension here isn't even based on when things break and Carrie wipes out the school, it's based on Carrie losing all illusions and going from feeling absolutely happy to the very bottom, which no one wishes for her. An awesome King adaptation that's only killed by five additional endings (the movie should have ended imho either like the book or, if there's no money, by leaving the prom) and the occasional haha scenes like something out of Grease. Anyway, I'll give it a five for the directorial bravura. (01/06/2011)

The first King’s film adaptation turned out to be quite good, great, in fact (which is something you can’t say about most adaptations of his books, but let’s be happy with the few good ones – and when the stars align, they can be great). For most of its runtime, Carrie is a drama rather than horror, but the tension escalates with every minute and and it keeps you expecting something unpleasant coming. The story is quite predictable (and it must have been so even in the 70s), but that’s well compensated by the psychology of the characters – the mother is especially good. PS: At least one and a half stars go to Sissy Spacek, she’s great in the role. (22/05/2008)

After many (and I mean many) years, I returned to this film, and I hate to admit it but I noticed some goofs that I hadn’t noticed before. Despite that, it is a film whose creators (as one of the few) did not butcher King's novel. Anyway, Sissy Spacek was brilliant and it's a shame that Piper Laurie didn't get more screen time, I think it would add to the atmosphere. 4- (14/01/2021)

The king froze me with how he drove Carrie towards the magnificent finale without any signs of emotion or understanding, only occasionally peeking into her thoughts and wrapping everything in almost documentary form. De Palma and Cohen do it exactly the opposite way. Carrie becomes a supernatural being, not belonging to the ruthless and cynical world around her. Her feelings, whether it's anger, astonishment, or joy, are the main driving force of the story, which, thanks to its brilliant form, elevates the story almost to a message. The original and the adaptation are ultimately quite different, yet they easily won my favor. 85% (06/09/2008)

It’s not really a bad thing that I first watched the new Carrie and only then returned to the original that was created under the wings of a movie legend – Brian De Palma. That’s because the new Carrie only seemed decent before I watched the original. I had no clue just how original De Palma’s horror is. It’s perfect, considering when it was made. It barely mentions telekinesis only to showcase an array of brutal scenes at the end that every one of us has been waiting for. It’s really worth it. I’m taking one star away from the new Carrie just by default. When I realize that this movie is nearly 40 years old and it still has a lot to offer, I’m almost terrified to think what the youth of today, the target audience of the new version, would think about it. You’d hardly find as many original ideas as the original Carrie came up with in a modern horror movie. (25/07/2015)