Surely it will be 3D also?
Perhaps it should be set in the UK, or Italy, to be truer to the original too?
Film fans who consider Brian DePalma's 1976 movie Carrie an inadequate interpretation of the Stephen King novel will be delighted to learn that MGM is planning a "retelling". Sissy Spacek in Carrie According to the Hollywood Reporter, the studio has teamed up with Screen Gems for the project, and brought on board playwright …
Roland, the Gunslinger, did eventually make it to Maine, and even met Stephen King (yeah, the storyline was kind of falling apart by that point). Now, Eyes of the Dragon clearly doesn't take place in Maine, but it does take place in the world of the Gunslinger. And Randall Flagg, the main bad guy in that book is also the main bad guy in The Stand. There were a couple characters from Maine in that book too. So, now you can play a variation of the game, "the six degrees of Kevin Bacon" with Maine in all of his books :)
This just goes to show (again) that the Movie Industry can't come up with any original ideas.
Damn near everything from Hollywood is a prequel, retelling, ripped off comic book/graphic novel storyline, re-written by vestigial cretins who have killed their last remaining brain cell with one last snort of powder du jour (bath salts anyone?).
For a "B" movie intended to entertain teenagers at Drive in Theatres, Carrie was actually pretty decent. Sissy Spacek played a truly innocent and believable character that made the movie work.
In today's world of jaded overpriviliged teen queens, there is not one that could even come close unless they find an unknown virgin talent someplace in south Texas. (Lottsa luck with that).
Todays teenagers could not even begin to relate to the character so the "cretins" would have to ruin the story to get today's "Yoof" to see the film.
The remake will be on video in less than a month, mark my words!
...scare the living daylights out of me, as a kid!!! For some reason, probably being Christmas, I was allowed to stay up and watch this back in the 80's. The scene in the Gym with the split screen could go toe-to-toe with anything from Alien 1, and, to top it off, when I went to bed, a toy box 'threw itself' off of my wardrobe, prompting me to start screaming that "Carrie has come to get me!!!".
I'm now 39 , 6'9" tall, but I still haven't bought myself to watch it again, since.
P.S. I'll probably watch the new one, when it comes out, probably....
To be honest, there was a number of BAD Stephen King conversions around that time. Carrie was a bit ho-hum, with the only really frightening bit coming when her hand pops out the ground at the end. John Travolta having a BJ and then slaughtering a pig is only frightening when you think about it! Cujo is totally lame, Christine is a lamentable swear-fest (how many times do we have to hear C*ntingham??), Firestarter is a total missed-opportunity and The Running Man even made Arnie look bad!
I hope the new version turns out a little more like the more recent offerings (Green Mile, Misery, etc.) with a WHOLE cast of decent actors and at least some credence to the bloody book!
For an Arnie flick from those days it was not that bad. Compare it with Commando for example.
I agree - it was a missed opportunity, but even in this shape and form it is still worth being shown on TV right before (or after) "I am a twit, get me out of here".
Firestarter needs to be remade. Properly. With someone like Spilberg at the helm. The book has the potential to become a phenomenal movie which was lost completely in the process.
I never new that Stephen King had anything to do with "The Running Man". A movie i actually always enjoy watching - a classic old school Arnie movie with OTT Vilans.
I alway assumed that is was a Hollywood remake/rehash of the French film "Le Prix du Danger".
The main reason I never associated King with "The Running Man" is probably because I find most of his works are rather dull, predictable and derivative.
Two minds on this one... I like the original film, always have, so a remake may ruin it (Hollywood are good at doing that). But, having read other Steven King books and then watched the 2nd rate movies, maybe the book is better than the film and needs a more faithful reproduction. Unfortunately, Carrie is one of the many Steven King books I have yet to read.
Whatever happens, unlikely the remake will contain such classic "ouch" moments as James Caans right angle ankles in Misery and the hand creeping from under the bed, with scalpel (?), in Pet Sematary....!
The Running Man was only marginally related. There was a game show, but nothing like what was made in the movie. He mostly spent time hiding all over the country, just trying not to be found.
The most laughable "Stephen King" interpretation was Lawnmower Man, where they got the title and the profession of the main character right. As I recall, the short story was about a guy who mowed really long grass, and crawled along behind it, eating little animals and other stuff that came out of the lawnmower.
Apparently when touting for a re-make around Hollywood, an executive said "Does the fat boy have to die?"
That sums up their stupidity nicely.
Also, after being thoroughly shocked by the original I just could not be bothered to watch the re-make of "The Vanishing". What idiot thought that changing the ending was a good idea?
Apparently, when Sir Terry Pratchett was negotiating a deal to have Reaper Man filmed in the US, he was told: "Yeah, nice script, but lose the skeleton."
That deal fell through, for some reason. Possibly Mr. Pratchett telling them that he was already filthy rich, and didn't need to have one of his books violated in that way.
I can imagine some of the technical aspects of the film looking a bit tired, these days. We are talking a movie made with 1976 technology.
Oh, and there was a 2002 TV movie.
It also, inevitably, looks 1976 in the setting.
This could easily be a complete mess, but I can see why the idea would be taken seriously.
Stop complaining everyone, since this has already been done... twice. "The Rage: Carrie 2" was essentially a remake, and there was a 2002 TV remake as well. One more isn't going to make much difference!
@Alex Walsh: The Shining has already been remade as a miniseries in 1997 as King was unhappy with Kubrick's version. If you're looking for sacred properties, King's work is the wrong place to look :)
Probably because he wasn't in it AND it was a good movie.
I still enjoy Carrie even though I was a kid when it came out. Piper Laurie was fantastic in it, playing such a psycho parent. The ending was quite sad. The mother stabbing the daughter was far more horror to me as a kid than the hand coming up, out of the ground. Still don't like seeing that part, because the mother was so brutal.
King's movie are hit and miss. Think part of that is due to the fact that he can't write a decent ending and that very few hire a decent screenwriter and a director with a vision.
I am at a loss to see a reason for this. For a Horror movie, the original Sissy Spacek version generated a lot of empathy for the lead character and won well deserved awards. Aside from the social era it is set in, it holds up even today as a classic.
Hollywood needs to take a lesson from this. HD, 3D and CGI are purely enhancements and do not make a good movie alone. Maybe I'm just out of touch or expect too much, but I'm not impressed by insipid wooden teenies who sparkle in the light and stereo typed clueless grown ups.
Actually I've not read a single Stephen King book that I liked. I don't think of them as horror stories at all, just pointless killing off of characters for no discernible reason. Depressing rather than anything else.
The original film was just as pointless as the book. Doubt I'll bother with any remake.
If Hollywood is looking for source material for new horror flicks, they could do worse than look to Richard Laymon for inspiration. I'd love to see The Travelling Vampire Show or the Beast House books made into a movie.
Oooooooooh. Just googled and TTVS is in production, apparently.
"Christine" misses the point in every way - the book wasn't about an evil car, it was about a car possessed by its ex-owner, and the boy who takes on the car slowly turning into the ex-owner. "Salem's Lot" is just another vampire film. "Firestarter" was gutted. "The Running Man" was fun but missed the point. "The Stand" miniseries cut a load of stuff which led to a lousy deus ex machina ending. And "The Shining" was screwed up by bizarre arthouse directing.
"Misery" wasn't bad, and "The Green Mile" was OK too.
But there's actually only one good Stephen King film made so far, and that's "Shawshank Redemption". Sure, it changed practically every detail from the book, but it kept the soul of the book, and that's what matters. Plus it was immaculately scripted, cast, directed and acted.
Actually the worst of the bunch are the made-for-TV ones where King's decided to do some of the screenwriting himself. He can't write scripts for crap.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019