Rating: 
Summary: Similar, sure--but good in its own right
Review: You know, this is a film that will be met with instant critical disdain to a certain degree, simply because it's a sequel made 23 years later. The original "Carrie", if anything I've read is accurate, wasn't met with instant critical success. But due to DePalma's growing reputation and developing career, it has taken on a cult status for sure. And for good reason.I made sure to watch the original before viewing the sequel. The original has a lot going for it, most notably in the style and thematic department. However, I believe it lacks to some degree in character development, and the sequel actually succeeds at creating more believably motivated characters than the original. For instance, William Katt's character in the original, Tommy Ross, sporting the Sammy Hagar-esque mop, is a very ambiguous character. The top jock who is also a straight-A student and with a popular girl, he doesn't get to do much for the film except show a nice smile. He gets enlisted by his girlfriend Sue Snell (Amy Irving) to take wallflower Carrie to the prom in order to make up for the vicious hazing in the opening shower scene. Tommy agrees, the administration finds out and thinks it's another joke, but the couple do it anyway. It's never really clear through the script and character development just how much they really care about making it up to Carrie. It's a gaping hole that could have been simply filled with some more dialogue or additional scenes of Snell's character. Then, instead of offering resolution for Katt's character, he gets clonked on the head with a bucket and presumably dies on the prom couple stage. Huh? The Rage, on the other hand, features a heroine who is less a victim than a tough survivor. No wallflower is she, like the pathetic Carrie of the original. No insane religious overtones here, except for the opening. Rachel, played with a very believable control by cutey Emily Bergl, is not beautiful or even stunningly cute like Sissy Spacek was. The key to the original, in my mind, are those amazing eyes of Spacek's filmed in the red lens as she's covered with blood, during those split-screen, slo-mo shots of the revenege and the rampage. That trance-like state during the murder sequence is CREEPY. The Rage features one heck of a revenge ending as well. Don't underestimate. People get it, but good. The effects are better than the original, they're graphic, and they're appropriate. Talk about CD killing--this is better than Hellraiser III's CD slicing. And one of the jocks gets a comeuppance involving a spear gun that's...well, appropriate, especially since he's played by the believably dimwitted Brad from TV's Home Improvement. (Bit disappointed about the head jock's demise...though it was stylistically impressive, I must
say.) Which brings me to the acting and the chemistry with these characters. First off, they look more like high school kids than the original film portrayed. They act like it, too. Nancy Allen, Amy Irving, PJ Soles--they looked old in 1976, and the latter looked old in Halloween playing a cheerleader another 2 years later. Another treat--we get a returning cast member. Always a BIG plus in my book when someone agrees to come back. This time it's Sue Snell (Irving), now a guidance counselor at the rebuilt high school. She has her own checkered past, including commitment to an asylum following the events of the original. I was quite surprised by her fate in this film, that's for sure. Gutsy. Perhaps one of the biggest notes on this film is the fact that, being a 90s horror remake, which everyone thinks will just be an excuse for wall-to-wall violence, or in this case, telekinesis non-stop, it's not. Save for the very bloody end (appropriate--this is a revenge film, remember) the telekinetic power portion of the film is handled very well and controlled in terms of Rachel's acceptance. In the original, the wallflower came out so quickly and was suddenly throwing her mother to the bed. I don't know. I think this film got an automatic panning or a lackluster reaction for no good reason. In its own right, it works well. It's more about what's going on in American high schools everywhere today than it is about telekinetic powers, etc. (Though we get more info on it than the original). So let's not be so quick to scoff at a film that's a sequel to a DePalma. Take this for what it is: a good modern revenge film about the timeless cruelty of kids and the curveball of telekinetic powers. I think director Katt Shea (who once was retrospected at MOMA) put more into this than most people think. Another point of recommendation--extras. 3 extra scenes are here which are interesting, as well as the original ending, which thank God they didn't use. The more subtle and shocking effect of the last scene is chilling and fits perfectly.
Rating: 
Summary: Better Than The Orginal
Review: I found the sequel to be quite a suspenseful movie. You sort of care for the characters but more so for the inevitable tragic doom that will happen. It kept me anxious & guessing through out. There is a classic line in the early classroom scene giving a preluding hint about the romance between the lead actors. The teacher asked about the class's view on love & Romeo & Juliet, & only 2 people answered. London believed in love. Bergl on the other hand was more cynical about it. You could tell from that scene what the love interests were going to be with. A very appropriate hint & a prophetic line. At the end of the movie I found the climax to be very impactfull & very very gory (all the better). You actually cared and sympathised with Carrie. The football jocks deserved everything they got. It was a great lesson to teach high school students to value & respect the opposite sex & not just use them for animal sport sex. And of course bullying is bad. While not the real life solution to the problem, it raised the issue in true Generation X style, and serving as morale and warning not to do it.
There is a few surprises at the ending that will have you a bit startled too. I was very disappointed with the editorial amazon review above. I thought it was too harsh. The only criticism I have of it is the romance was a bit lame & unbelievable. The more I think about it I don't believe they could have fallen in love in such a short amount of time. But ironically you do end up caring for the characters. It's just the circumstances which by they fell in love was bit if-fi & weak. But never the less, it's still a worthwhile movie.
For some reason I enjoyed the sequel better than the original, both of which I watched back to back. In fact both movies were quite weak in the character's romance development. I think the original is overrated. It was very uneven. The original was very dark & horror with the ultra religious mother. Yet in other scenes it was light, comedy & even plain boring. However I found The Rage Carrie 2 to build along nicely and possess (no pun intended!) a stable, coherent & fluid rhythm.
Rating: 
Summary: Pathetic Attempt for a sequal
Review: No one can compare to Stephen King. I bought this movie because I assumed it was written by Stephen King. Needless to say, it has layers of dust and I'm thinking about selling it because it was not worth a dime spent on it. The plot was not unique, basically a distasteful remake of the first movie.
Rating: 
Summary: Sequel only underscores greatness of the original
Review: The Rage: Carrie 2 would be considered a dandy little horror flick, if it were not for the fact that it is a sequel to Carrie, a classic of this genre. It is a prime example of the pitfalls of trying to copy any movie that has attained cult status. Of course, if you haven't seen the original, the new movie should work for you. Your best bet is to watch this one first, then see the original. The Rage takes place twenty-plus years after the original Carrie wreaked havoc on most of the students in her high school. The new heroine with an attitude is called Rachael, and she is played rather well by Emily Bergl. Rachael is the quintessential movie character with a rotten childhood. Mom flips out and is thrown in a mental institution when Rachael is five or six years old. Fast forward to the present. Rachael is now a high school senior. She's been brought up by cold foster parents, who seem to be keeping her around for the money the state pays them. Girls in movies like this are allowed only one friend, who is usually female and always crazier than she is. Rachael's friend goes from girl on top of the world on a Monday morning to girl who jumps from the top of the school that afternoon. All of this serves merely as an excuse for Rachael's madness to be unleashed. As soon as she discovers that her friend's leap was caused by group of callous, rich, beautiful students, she goes to work. Like the original Carrie, this young woman has telekinesis, which is the ability to move objects. She moves them with a vengeance. Poor Amy Irving returns as Sue Small, who was student in the original movie. She tried to befriend Carrie. That attempt gave her a nervous breakdown, and now, as the school's principal, she has not learned her lesson. She does everything to help Rachael, including enlisting the aid of Rachael's insane mother. Sue doesn't really deserve to be principal of anything. Jason London tries hard as Jesse, the boy who falls in love with Rachael. I found his fate in the movie to be a bit bizarre, or at least less logical than what happened to the kid who fell for Carrie in the original. The music is properly eerie. The photography is decent. The dialog does little more than move the plot along. The special effects are quite good, but in comparison to those in Carrie, it's obviously true that less is often more. By the way, Carrie, which was directed by Brian De Palma, was the movie that originated the surprise double ending that all horror movies use to this day. Sue Small went to visit Carrie's grave. As she kneeled over it, a pale arm shot up from the ground and tried to pull her down into the earth. Young moviegoers can hardly imagine the impact that scene had. The audiences were literally screaming. In The Rage, there's a trick ending, but the only thing much of the audience screams for is for the movie to be over. I think one way to determine how a important movie is to you is to see how much of it you remember later on. In The Rage there are several flashbacks which are taken from Carrie. Each of these reminded me of how much better and more memorable the original was. They even caused my mind to recall other scenes. And that's the power of the movies in action.
Rating:
Summary: You have got to be kidding!
Review: I am not often this blunt, but anyone who sees this movie and thinks it's a good movie knows nothing about film. This movie was an absurd piece of garbage and nonsense. The original Carrie was and still is a classic. To even try to relate this "sequel" to it an an insult. Go ahead and watch this piece of trash.
Rating:
Summary: Hell hath no fury like a telekinetic teen...
Review: In some way this film is a sort of remake of 'Carrie' for todays younger audience. A tragedy filled film, but with a revenge theme, 'The Rage: Carrie 2' is not a bad film at all. The acting is decent enough and you are made to feel for Rachel (Emily Bergl) whose character is a long suffering victim. Naturally all those who taunt her get their comeuppance. Its not particularly uplifting but then what do you expect? Thought provoking and often both funny and sad, this movie should appeal to most genre fans, despite constant comparisons to the 1976 original.
Rating: 
Summary: Great Movie!!!!!!!
Review: I saw this movie it was great!!!It is mostly about a girl who has telekinectic powers which means she can move things with her mind.Sound kinda boring?Its really not that bad of a movie.But if you are looking for a thriller it is not that great because its not that scary but I still loved it!!!It is one of my favorite movies!!!Emily Bergl does a great job playing Rachel.I give it 5 stars and I defenitely think you should watch it!!!
Rating:
Summary: Good Sequel For Gen Xers only!
Review: First of all I just want to say to all those haters of sequels GET OVER IT SEQUELS Are "SEQUELS" THEY ARE NOT MEANT TO BE BETTER THAN THE ORIGINAL OR TAKE ITS PLACE!!!! Now having said that I can move on and give my opinion about this highly entertaining MTVstyle/GENx Movie. This movie was alot better than I expected. I thought the new character "Rachel Lang" (aka New Carrie) Emily Bergl was great as the tortured half sister of Carrie who honestly tries to control her genetic disorder (telekinesis) which she inherited from her infamous sister and Carrie's father and hers...The actual portrayal of the mean popular kids was a bit contrived they seemed like they had nothing better to do than pick on Carrie. In real life although there are alot of jerks in school I do not think their main concern is messing with unpopular people. I was a bit puzzled as why they thought Rachel was ugly I thought she was attractive and also prettier than some of the "popular girls" but that is another story. I thought the movie had a great rhythm It was not overlong nor boring. Jason London as the sole good guy who really liked Rachel was good too and brought some humanity to an otherwise jerk cast. The climax which paralleled the famous prom scene was a justified (they pushed her to the brink after ridiculing her cruelly although this cast didnt just stand there like helpless creatures but actually wounded her and tried to kill her. Note: (Murder is never the answer for Bullying)...This movie was pretty Good!
IF you are looking to a Better Carrie movie this is not the movie. If you are looking to judge sequels as the original you will be happy there is plenty for you to pick apart. This movie is simply a sequel plain and simple and aimed not at expert filmmaking or filmgoers but generation x and Y . I do not think anyone over the age of 30 would like this. However it is good entertainment take it at face value. Since I am 23 this is right up my line :)
Rating:
Summary: Minor horror film won't displace original
Review: In-name-only sequel of sorts, as the new girl's name is Rachel, has "Carrie" survivor Sue Snell (Amy Irving) as a high school guidence counselor with - bingo! - Carrie White's half-sister Rachel (Emily Bergl) as a student. Snell and good guy jock Jesse (Jeremy London) attempt to help her while all the other mean kids pounce, but not quickly enough. Story updated for '90's audiences has marginal results, and certainly not in a class with the 1976 film. Sissy Spacek declined a cameo.
Rating:
Summary: One Of My Favorites!
Review: Emily Bergl(Rachel Lang)did a great job and fulfilled the part as the raged girl. My school needs to watch this film especially my principal. The reason for the R rating was some nakedness in the boy's locker room. Much Violence at the end. One Of my favorite parts and some profanity and sex game issues. That would be so neat to make a Carrie 3, this film is good, but it kind of scares you in the beginning, but once you go through it the endig seems to be the best. The more blood the better. I would recommend some schools should see how much torture kids go through. Alone 160,000 kids stay home from school because of being teased, bullied, or humilated. I would recommend it. You know it was one of my favorites.
| 
