Over a month delay for the UK release of Carrie

darkjedimasterdarkjedimaster Posts: 18,620
Forum Member
✭✭
I just noticed that even tho Carrie gets released in the USA on the 18th October, it doesn't get it's UK release until the 29th November. In an age where film distributors are trying to reduce piracy, why on earth are they making other countries in the world wait a silly amount of time for the film. ?

Comments

  • JEFF62JEFF62 Posts: 5,093
    Forum Member
    I think it was meant to come out in March but has been pushed back. Really not sure about this. The original is one of my favourite horror films ever. I really cannot see how they will live up to that shock ending which I still regard as one of the greatest moments of horror ever. See it a dozen times and still you cant quite see it coming! Maybe they will not try and copy the ending. I will give it a go but sure it will not live up to the original.
  • Roland MouseRoland Mouse Posts: 9,531
    Forum Member
    OFFS! Not another remake! :mad:

    How are they going to beat the original and why bother trying?

    Like they are ever going to scratch Piper Laurie's performance. It was a one off!
  • GortGort Posts: 7,460
    Forum Member
    JEFF62 wrote: »
    The original is one of my favourite horror films ever. I really cannot see how they will live up to that shock ending which I still regard as one of the greatest moments of horror ever. See it a dozen times and still you cant quite see it coming! Maybe they will not try and copy the ending. I will give it a go but sure it will not live up to the original.

    To be honest, I'm more concerned about them getting the rest of the film right than some final shock moment at the end, no matter how good it was (which was heightened due to what's happened previous). Carrie was far more than its "boo!" ending; it's not just some shock film, it's more than that (I'm not saying you don't think that, BTW). I doubt that the remake will carry off the rest of the film, its atmosphere, its characterisation, its story, the loneliness, the hope, the anger, etc. Still, here's to be proved wrong, but I doubt it.
  • LMLM Posts: 63,324
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    I thought the original was hilarious (clearly not the intended point to be)
    Especially that scene when she has her period in the shower. Just found the acting and how it was all portrayed as laughable and not very emotional.
    The only thing about the remake that is attracting me to it the amazing Ms Moore.
  • JEFF62JEFF62 Posts: 5,093
    Forum Member
    Gort wrote: »
    To be honest, I'm more concerned about them getting the rest of the film right than some final shock moment at the end, no matter how good it was (which was heightened due to what's happened previous). Carrie was far more than its "boo!" ending; it's not just some shock film, it's more than that (I'm not saying you don't think that, BTW). I doubt that the remake will carry off the rest of the film, its atmosphere, its characterisation, its story, the loneliness, the hope, the anger, etc. Still, here's to be proved wrong, but I doubt it.

    No I am concerned about the whole film, As well as the ending I loved the whole film. The music, the creepy atmosphere, the acting,. The way it led up to the prom scene with some light hearted stuff and then the shocking split screen stuff when Carrie goes berserk. And of course that ending! Just cannot see it being as good.
  • Callum_BrownCallum_Brown Posts: 745
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Doing the same with Gravity. Came out last Friday in the US, not out till November 8 over here.
  • EVILSPEAKEVILSPEAK Posts: 980
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Talking of the remake, this is pretty clever, and impressive, way to advertise the film......

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VlOxlSOr3_M
  • Inky BinkyInky Binky Posts: 2,261
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    EVILSPEAK wrote: »
    Talking of the remake, this is pretty clever, and impressive, way to advertise the film......

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VlOxlSOr3_M


    That was EXCELLENT! :D
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 7,488
    Forum Member
    I was more offended by the 6 months we were made to wait for Cloud Atlas and Wreck-It-Ralph...
  • Johnny ClayJohnny Clay Posts: 5,315
    Forum Member
    I just noticed that even tho Carrie gets released in the USA on the 18th October, it doesn't get it's UK release until the 29th November. In an age where film distributors are trying to reduce piracy, why on earth are they making other countries in the world wait a silly amount of time for the film. ?
    There's many reasons for a film's release date to be different from country to country. Always has been. Those worldwide day/date releases are very expensive to mount for the studios/distributors, and thus mainly favour the cash cows/moneyspinners where the marketing campaign has the muscle to cover the biggest markets from the off.

    America is still the testing ground for many films. If it proves a hit there they can go about ramping up the film's marketing/profile elsewhere etc. Worldwide day/date releases for the majority of films would be a great thing of course, but could well be a major headache for the studios, not least financially.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 7,488
    Forum Member
    There's many reasons for a film's release date to be different from country to country. Always has been. Those worldwide day/date releases are very expensive to mount for the studios/distributors, and thus mainly favour the cash cows/moneyspinners where the marketing campaign has the muscle to cover the biggest markets from the off.

    America is still the testing ground for many films. If it proves a hit there they can go about ramping up the film's marketing/profile elsewhere etc. Worldwide day/date releases for the majority of films would be a great thing of course, but could well be a major headache for the studios, not least financially.

    Are they really any more expensive than a standard theatrical release? If so, how can indie films like Looper manage it?
  • Mr.LavigneMr.Lavigne Posts: 922
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Even more strangely, shouldn't they bring it out to get the Halloween market?

    Love Chloe Grace.
  • Johnny ClayJohnny Clay Posts: 5,315
    Forum Member
    Are they really any more expensive than a standard theatrical release? If so, how can indie films like Looper manage it?
    Depends how you define standard theatrical release. As I said, the promotion/distribution of a film can rest on its prior success elsewhere. Many films have their own factors of course (wasn't Looper an indie distributed by a major, btw?).

    In today's on-demand world, people's frustration at this sort of delay is going to happen of course. But bear in mind the situation is more complex than it looks, and a satisfying solution perhaps not feasible at present.*

    * I gather one theory is that eventually film will follow the Sky model and films will be satellite-beamed globally into cinemas. You can see this working, but it's a very big jump.
  • MotthusMotthus Posts: 7,280
    Forum Member
    I watched the Carrie remake today is an ok film but to be honest I don't understand the point in remaking it!
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 7,488
    Forum Member
    Depends how you define standard theatrical release. As I said, the promotion/distribution of a film can rest on its prior success elsewhere. Many films have their own factors of course (wasn't Looper an indie distributed by a major, btw?).

    In today's on-demand world, people's frustration at this sort of delay is going to happen of course. But bear in mind the situation is more complex than it looks, and a satisfying solution perhaps not feasible at present.*

    * I gather one theory is that eventually film will follow the Sky model and films will be satellite-beamed globally into cinemas. You can see this working, but it's a very big jump.
    Looper was distributed by Entertainment One in the UK, and Filmdistrict in the US. Though it was given a wide US release, via TriStar pictures who have a deal with Filmdistrict.
  • LMLM Posts: 63,324
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    It's a great film
    Chloe Mortez is quite the actress and Julianne Moore just freaked me out.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 46
    Forum Member
    I saw this yesterday and while it in no way is as as good as the original, it was a pretty decent watchable film. And I agree with the earlier poster about Julianne Moore being downright freaky! Maybe people will see it who haven't seen the original and it will make them check out the original afterwards? And surely that's a good thing?
  • LMLM Posts: 63,324
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    I saw the original years ago and found it totally laughable. I know it's a classic but didn't think much to it. Thankfully Sissy Spacek went on to even better things afterwards. She could of easily become another Linda Blair.
  • Trsvis_BickleTrsvis_Bickle Posts: 9,202
    Forum Member
    I saw this yesterday and while it in no way is as as good as the original, it was a pretty decent watchable film. And I agree with the earlier poster about Julianne Moore being downright freaky! Maybe people will see it who haven't seen the original and it will make them check out the original afterwards? And surely that's a good thing?

    Yes, this seems to be the consensus amongst the critics. Personally, I csn't see the point of a remake. The De Palma's original was excellent. I understand that the special effects are better than the De Palma film as he had no access to CGI, although some of the publicity stills look as though the heroine is covered in chocolate rather than blood.:D
  • PJ68PJ68 Posts: 3,116
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Yes, this seems to be the consensus amongst the critics. Personally, I csn't see the point of a remake. The De Palma's original was excellent. I understand that the special effects are better than the De Palma film as he had no access to CGI, although some of the publicity stills look as though the heroine is covered in chocolate rather than blood.:D

    ah do you know why this is? i've noticed it in quite a few trailers too. they digitally alter the colour of blood to make it not look like blood in promotional materials, posters, trailers etc. must be something to do with the ratings system
  • PJ68PJ68 Posts: 3,116
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    i thought this remake stank. she actually came across as evil and that's completely missing the point!
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 876
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    I'll probably check it out on DVD as I quite like Julianne Moore.
  • Trsvis_BickleTrsvis_Bickle Posts: 9,202
    Forum Member
    PJ68 wrote: »
    ah do you know why this is? i've noticed it in quite a few trailers too. they digitally alter the colour of blood to make it not look like blood in promotional materials, posters, trailers etc. must be something to do with the ratings system

    No, I didn't know that. How bizarre.:confused:
Sign In or Register to comment.