data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/38173/381736211915191712177efce9c7837a7d176d9c" alt=""
But, in execution, the completed film is
something else, and part of me would like to point to Marvel Comics wunderking Roberto Aquirre-Sacasa, brought in as co-scenarist and to seemingly mess up Cohen's model script, specifically the ending. Seemingly (I hasten to stress).
Whatever the reason, a mess it is.
While DePalma’s “Carrie” is unusually painterly
for a horror film, Pierce’s is blunt and, frankly, crass, qualities in full
view in the film’s gross and gratuitous opening sequence – in which Margaret
White (Moore) is a frantic, demented bystander to the blood-spurting birth of
her own daughter, Carrie. While Piper
Laurie was almost ethereal as the religious-nut mother in the first film, poor
Moore is presented as a perspiring, smelly hag. As for the gifted Moretz, she
does little else here than walk around with her shoulders squeezed up to her ears.
It’s a hunched performance in more ways than
one. Sissy Spacek, twice Moretz's age when she starred in the original, somehow seems years younger - a permamently, fascinatingly stunted child, if you will.
Pierce, whose first two films (1999’s “Boys
Don’t Cry” and 2008’s “Stop-Loss”) I admire, may be a case of someone who was prematurely lauded
by the critics. Aside from being hardly
prolific, she seems to lack a feel for the camera’s eye. Pierce inarguably knows a solid story
when she sees one and she’s a good director of actors, but she simply isn’t a filmmaker. And that’s what sets her apart from Brian DePalma
who is.
And it’s what makes her film so wildly different from – and inferior to –
the original. The new “Carrie”
underlines Kimberly Pierce’s few strengths as a director, as well as her major weaknesses as a
filmmaker.