THE RAGE: CARRIE 2 (1999)
My friends, I have seen bad films. I have laughed in the face of Batman and Robin, cackled maniacally at Hope Floats, giggled all the way through Highlander II: The Quickening, and received a perverse sort of pleasure from them all, I might add. When it comes to the enjoyment of bad movies, you will be hard pressed to find my equal. An Ed Wood retrospective? Count me in! A Roger Corman marathon? I'm there, my friend, I'm there!
That introduction was necessary in order for you to understand the magnitude of what I'm about to say. As God is my witness, I have never seen anything like The Rage: Carrie 2, a film which has no reason to exist on this planet other than to emotionally scar anyone who sees it. I'm not sure, but I think it made me sterile.
Who in the hell thought Carrie, Brian de Palma's 1976 macabre masterpiece about a teenage girl cursed with telekinetic powers, needed a sequel in the first place? The tale, based on Stephen King's novel of the same name, was engrossing and touching, as the outcast Carrie (Sissy Spacek) fell for a handsome senior (William Katt), not realizing that his friends were using their relationship as the set-up for a cruel joke. Carrie was warm and undeniably human; we could understand her pain, which made the film's final 20 minutes all the more tragic. (Even people who have never seen the movie know all about the famous prom scene, which ranks right up there with Psycho's shower montage in terms of pop-culture familiarity.)
The Rage: Carrie 2, which is really more of a remake than a sequel, doesn't bother to give the same depth to its so-called "heroine," a goth-girl named Rachel (Emily Bergl). We're supposed to sympathize with her. I think. Like Carrie, Rachel is a social outcast who possesses a limited telekinetic ability, which grows stronger when she gets angry. Unlike Carrie, Rachel never earns our sympathy: most of her problems seem avoidable, and if she appears to be an outcast at school, I blame it on the fact that she's a bitch to everyone she encounters.
In her defense, the script doesn't give Bergl much to build her performance on. We learn very little about Rachel over the course of the story. What are her hobbies? Her aspirations and goals? How does she feel about her mother, who is locked up in a mental institution? The movie couldn't care less, and nothing I saw made me curious to know more. Nor does Bergl possess the ability to rise above the material: her main method of dealing with a crisis is to deliver her dialogue to the floor. (See for yourself! Anytime she gets a major speech, Rachel drops her eyes, as though she were talking to the ground. I was actually disappointed the floor didn't receive a co-acting credit for its fine work here. It certainly gives the best performance in the movie.)
It's not Bergl's fault. Every character in this film is here for one specific purpose, and no more: Rachel's best friend is here to die, thus allowing Rachel's emotional stress (and her telekinetic power) to skyrocket. The in-crowd characters are here to instigate this movie's equivalent of the prom scene massacre. Jesse (Jason London) is here to fill the Katt role from the first movie: he's the handsome, popular jock who goes out with the shunned girl, earning the scorn of his friends in the process. He's supposed to be likable, but he's not: witness his notebook, in which he keeps track of all the girls he's had sex with and awards them points based on their physical attractiveness.
But the most laughable character is Sue Snell (Amy Irving, reprising her role from the original film), who is here to gasp dramatically at key moments. She's the school's guidance counselor, and makes her living by consoling distressed students with astute observations like, "Losing people close to you can hurt sometimes." Not exactly Sigmund Freud, is she?
Events are so obviously set up that only a dummy, or Rachel, wouldn't be able to see through them. When she starts dating Jesse, the in-crowd at school pretends to accept her. But Rachel discovers that they're just putting her on during a crowded party, thus giving her a reason to go ballistic and wipe out most of the people in attendance. And because the story opens with a scene of Rachel and Jesse discussing the ending of Romeo and Juliet, we know that either Rachel or Jesse, or perhaps both, will be pushing up the daisies by the end of it all. Blame director Katt Shea for adhering to cliché and violence rather than story and characterization.
The movie eschews restraint during its climactic apocalypse. We're treated to several graphic decapitations, and numerous shots of people being speared like pieces of fruit in a mixed drink. A young man's testicles are separated from his body before our very eyes. Ah, thank you, movie.
But even this doesn't begin to convey the pure wretchedness of this piece of tripe. Just how bad is The Rage: Carrie 2? Well, here is a list of things I learned while watching it:
1) If a teenage girl hears a noise outside while clothed in nothing but a towel, she should immediately fling the front door wide open without bothering to establish the source of the sound. If no one’s there, she should futz around in the dark shadows surrounding her on every side, while still wearing only the towel.
2) Breaking out of an asylum is a piece of cake. One merely has to say "Hey, look over there!" to the guard. (At least In Dreams made it look like an escape took some ingenuity.)
3) Girls think vomiting is cute if it's performed by drunken football players.
4) Shaking the camera equals cheap telekinetic effects! It's hours of fun for the whole family!
5) If the guy you're dating likes your kind of music, he's obviously your soul mate. (Rachel eyes Jesse warily for the first half of the movie, until he mentions that he likes the band Garbage. Immediately she perks up: "You like Garbage?" Obviously he does: he's in this movie, isn't he? And in case you miss their passion, a computer-generated spark is inserted when their fingertips brush together.)
The only moments of life contained in this film are the flashbacks to the original Carrie, which really have no business being here at all, but do at least make this piece of excrement watchable. (Hint for the filmmakers: don't insert footage from a good movie into the middle of your really bad one. It just makes your offering look even worse by comparison.) Actually, I take it back: there is a reason to include the flashback scenes: to entice modern teenagers into buying a copy of the original Carrie, which is now 35 years old and has probably not been seen by the sequel's target audience.
Why would anyone take a classic film and butcher its memory so badly? I tell you, Stephen King must be rolling over in his... great big pile of money? Uh, you know, I think I just answered my own question.
Under no circumstance should you see The Rage: Carrie 2. Your very salvation depends on it. If there's any justice in the world, this thing will be outlawed by the Geneva Convention.
RATING: F
The Rage: Carrie 2 is available on DVD and VHS. I've spotted the DVD on several occasions in the "we can't give these things away" bargain bin at the Dickson City Wal-Mart. Now you know why.
-----
Follow me on Twitter!
Comments
good article... sterile? lol
Great article on pointing out how horrible The Rage: Carrie 2 is; I agree!
That sterile comment was hilarious. Nice observation. It was a crappy script but for some I have watched it two or three times. I guess in hopes of seeing something I fell asleep on the first two times, no such luck. lol
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!