The Carrie remake with Chloe Moretz in the title role of the girl with telekinetic powers and an insanely religious Mother was set for March 15th. Now, the studio has made the decision to push it WAY back to October, because they believe since it’s a horror movie, it will make more money then.
Funny as horror has been pretty profitable in the spring. The Dawn Of The Dead remake made a lot of bank back in March of 2004. Yet another remake, The Hills Have Eyes, also did good business in March of 2006. Even the Friday The 13th remake, which came out in February made $40 million during its opening weekend. Despite all of this, their new release date is set for October 18th. That is the week before the next snoozer entry of the Paranormal Activity franchise comes out, which will probably once again take money from silly teen girls who scream loudly at the smallest things happening onscreen.
I always give remakes the benefit of the doubt. I’m also usually fine with the end result, or thoroughly impressed. Such was the case with the above 2 remakes when they came out. Chloe Moretz being cast also meant that they wanted a solid actress to bring her take on poor little Carrie White. So lets hope that this decision to change the date to October (despite a spring release date probably working better for them. Prom is in May!) works out for them.
So what’s your take on this? Is it a good idea to push it back several months? Sound off in the comments or on the message board.
Source: Cinema Blend
6 comments
Maybe they are using the fact that the Carrie sequel, The Rage: Carrie 2, came out around March in ’99 and didn’t, for lack of a better phrase, set the world on fire. Quite frankly, the idea of a Carrie remake bores the crap out of me. What can you possibly add to a new telling of that story that justifies it’s existence? Nothing, in my book. I await the articles eventually that detail how they’re cutting it to a PG-13, though. Those are hilarious.
Heh. I had completely forgotten about that. I don’t think they’re thinking about that though. That’s a long ways back, and they’re probably thinking people won’t remember it. I barely even remember it, and I’ve only ever seen some of it. I just remember the lead is another girl, one of the London twins is in it, and Sue Snell shows up as a counselor now.
The important part of this story is that this now opens on the same day as Gravity, so my ticket money for the midnight show and ensuing weekend (yes, all of it) is already spoken for.
This isn’t all that mysterious. They just need some time to go in and add more Channing Tatum.
I can see them being more faithful to the book… With the rain of meteors and her pretty much nuking the whole town at the end. … I also think it’s a given that this will be PG13 – and the material frankly allows for that rating. This is a good, primal adolescent rage story. They’ve got two good actors in the lead roles.
…
But no. I can’t really justify its existence nor am I hopeful that the movie will be any good.
They’re structuring it more like the book from what I understand with the people talking about the event afterward as we’re watching it unfold. And there’s really nothing in Carrie that justifies an R rating beyond the language. Personally I’d just settle for something less shrill and grating than the original.
Comments are shown as archived from the original site; new comments are closed.