She's Back! CARRIE - First preview !!! — Page 26
Posted: 2/8/12 at 3:18pm
Posted: 2/8/12 at 3:20pm
Have Sue do a blow-by-blow monologue (aka interrogation sequence) while Carrie is shown (in abstract ways) on her rampage, whether she goes out into the audience or not---which I still think would be very unsettling. I could imagine quiet giggles and squirming and general uncomfortableness from the audience, etc., to have "bloody Carrie" brush by them.
blocked: logan2, Diamonds3, Hamilton22
Posted: 2/8/12 at 3:20pm
There are some faint sirens but no big sounds of the town being destroyed.
It really is kind of lame.
Updated On: 2/8/12 at 03:20 PM
Posted: 2/8/12 at 3:20pm
Updated On: 2/8/12 at 03:20 PM
Posted: 2/8/12 at 3:23pm
There are some faint sirens but no big sounds of the town being destroyed.
It really is stupid.
That's it?!
Oh, lord.
"And then the ship sank."
The end.
blocked: logan2, Diamonds3, Hamilton22
Updated On: 2/8/12 at 03:23 PM
Posted: 2/8/12 at 3:25pm
Like I said, I was satisified. I found the lighting/sound to be quite good, if glitchy last night. My problem with the part of the destruction that we DO see in the gym, was the choreography.
Also, who knows what else they have up their sleeves. There are many more weeks to get this together.
"In Oz, the verb is douchifizzation." PRS
Posted: 2/8/12 at 3:37pm
What are the projections depicting? Do they show any of the town being destroyed? Innocent people who live there? Carrie acting ruthlessly and without mercy? Are they filling in those gaps, then?
Or is it because you already know the novel and the movie, and your mind is completing the circle for them?
(Just a question.)
blocked: logan2, Diamonds3, Hamilton22
Updated On: 2/8/12 at 03:37 PM
Posted: 2/8/12 at 3:51pm
MB, last night there was more destruction sounds and projections than you describe before Sue comes out.
Besty, it's more abstract than specific acts Carrie does...explosions, sirens, both as sounds and abstract projections, fire, etc.
Perhaps they are tweaking this part of the show and adding to it to find the proper audience reaction...for me it'd be better to cut half of the teenage stuff, including Chris' song and the scene between Tommy and Sue before the prom....and getting Marin more fired up.
I forgot that they cut one of my favorite lines!! Carrie mentions that the cake gives her pimples, but Margaret doesnt say, "that's the lord's way of chastising you, child!"
I was more disappointed than leaving out the dirty pillows line!
"In Oz, the verb is douchifizzation." PRS
Posted: 2/8/12 at 3:55pm
Wow, Jane, that's an Olympic-sized leap in logic that I'm not sure I can follow. I think you're translating my post into something that you want it to be.
All I said was that when you (and others) root for Carrie's revenge, for the murder of large numbers of people, it may represent a shift downwards in morality from a time when revenge was not considered a thing for which to root, but rather a lowering of oneself.
I certainly wouldn't try to guess King's point of view on revenge; nor would I try to guess whether morals change popular entertainment or vice versa. I leave that to another thread, another site (Philosophy World? Social History World?).
Posted: 2/8/12 at 3:59pm
That says a lot that your friend "got it."
You have to understand that I think it's a fault of the film, too. Carrie performs "random acts of killing," not just "revenge killings" of the people who did her wrong in the high school. She is the "monster," at this point, killing and destroying innocent people with no connection to her at all. I do think that's important to this story (and relevant to today's Columbine-type incidents and headlines). It was missing from the movie.
If your friend got it, even though it was only briefly mentioned, that's a step in the right direction. And it says, to some minimal degree, that it's being understood by the audience.
blocked: logan2, Diamonds3, Hamilton22
Posted: 2/8/12 at 4:06pm
Not really. I didn't want your post to be any particular thing.
My post was meant to point out one discrepancy between what I originally posted, and what I inferred from your post.
The discrepancy is that I was viewing Carrie as a work of fiction, not based on any current or past real life societal attitudes towards revenge. I wasn't drawing any connection between the two. I thought you were seeing the message in the film as related somehow to a trend in society's thinking.
Updated On: 2/8/12 at 04:06 PM
Posted: 2/8/12 at 4:10pm
That said, none of my companions (most of them in the biz) liked it too much, and I was the only one who knew the musical and read the book, so many years ago. The others only knew the film.
"In Oz, the verb is douchifizzation." PRS
Posted: 2/8/12 at 4:15pm
Posted: 2/8/12 at 4:16pm
One's reaction to fictional revenge (murder), and one's reaction to real revenge (murder), although not exactly the same thing, are related.
Posted: 2/8/12 at 4:17pm
Posted: 2/8/12 at 4:23pm
To me, this actually (slightly) makes up for not being able to burn down the whole town in the film (again, because of budget) and show Carrie's full rampage and "random acts." In the final moments of the film, Carrie is definitely a "monster" coming back from her grave to grab Sue. Movie audiences were left thinking of Carrie in that way, and it's quite an impression to leave behind.
I remember I saw it opening weekend (a Friday night) when I was in junior high. It was rated R, so a friend's parent took us. (I had already read the best-selling book.)
When the hand came up, it's probably the single loudest and most unified "scream" I've ever heard from an audience before or since. It was really mass-hysteria in the theatre. I don't remember being able to hear the sound to the film at all after that, until the credits rolled.
blocked: logan2, Diamonds3, Hamilton22
Posted: 2/8/12 at 4:26pm
Sorry but the funniest question in the thread
Maybe they did not do that because....i don't know, they are dying and trapped in an inferno?
Also as for the wanting to see the town get destroyed by Carrie.
Come on, really? visually it could never work, as a monologue it would take away from the scene that just happened (The Destruction to a Monologue about what she did next is just terrible pacing). It really does not matter we don't hear this info. Most novel to stage adaptions leave many scenes out, hell the film left it out.
As for Carrie being a monster, i don't by that for a single second. The whole thing is about how far can somebody be pushed before they finally snap. She was a sweet, awkward girl who just wanted to be loved at home and at school. She was humiliated terribly that her powers started to become much bigger and out of control, she could not have stopped them if she tried. Her powers are a link to her emotions. Tipping a load of pigs blood on you in front of the entire senior class is not gonna make hair brushes and combs float around, it's gonna trigger something dar and destructive.
Posted: 2/8/12 at 4:27pm
I am happy to hear that if they are indeed committed to going that route that they are fully committing and finding more ways to incorporate it into the show's design.
How about projecting some additional bodies into the prom sequence?
EDIT: Song, I think you are missing the point about Carrie being a 'monster' - nobody is arguing what pushes her to the breaking point, but what makes her a monster (in the book at least) is her giving into the behavior shown her earlier in the book by gleefully destroying not only everyone at the prom but the entire town, including innocent people that have never harmed her.
It may be only fleeting, but Carrie lets herself 'go there' - she does indeed become the absolute monster-manifestation of the hatred she herself has suffered.
Updated On: 2/8/12 at 04:27 PM
Posted: 2/8/12 at 4:33pm
Maybe they did not do that because....i don't know, they are dying and trapped in an inferno?"
What an a-holish response.
"In Oz, the verb is douchifizzation." PRS
Updated On: 2/8/12 at 04:33 PM
Posted: 2/8/12 at 4:35pm
aw, relax hon. No need to be nasty.
Posted: 2/8/12 at 4:51pm
I agree with you totally there. I don't seem to be able to make my point clear in a written post, although it's clear in my mind. If we were speaking in person, I think I could make myself understood. thanks for responding."
Posted: 2/8/12 at 5:47pm
MB Yes she goes to a place that is shocking and terrible but as i said i always saw it that if her powers were triggered by her emotion then she would not be able to stop them anyway. However yes you are right, it;s a monstrous thing that happens at the end
Posted: 2/8/12 at 6:11pm
In the book, after Carrie traps everyone in the high school prom and burns the auditorium down, she leaves (just as she does in the film) and begins to systematically destroy the entire town. It's a calculated and meticulous rampage. And she kills everybody. She does "off" Chris and Billy, as she does in the movie, but she keeps going. She sets the entire town on fire.
Granted, it's a small town, but nobody survives her wrath. They ALL die. People she's never met before with no connection to her or anyone in the high school.
At the end of the killing spree, after Carrie returns home, kills her own mother and then dies herself, there is only one person in the entire town who is left alive ... Sue Snell.
EDIT: MB is right, she is "gleeful" in her destruction. She takes cold pleasure in her calculated approach to each new destruction. Also, as I recall, it goes on for most of the night, with her blowing things up, setting things on fire, etc., and it lasts several hours, almost until dawn. It's not in a "brief fit of rage" or a "momentary lapse in judgment." At that point, her mind has completely snapped, and she has become a total "monster." It's a night of terror.
blocked: logan2, Diamonds3, Hamilton22
Updated On: 2/8/12 at 06:11 PM
Posted: 2/8/12 at 7:26pm
Updated On: 2/8/12 at 07:26 PM
BroadwayWorld TV