Remembered this from my teenage years. Always pull it out from time to time

Better than I thought it might have been, but still could have been more interesting.Without spoiling,Most action comes in the last 20 minute of the film. And it's a very good scene worthy of any horror movie.I do agree with another poster who said that Emily Bergl's character was too pretty to play the outcast ugly-duckling. Honestly, she was better looking and more charismatic than ANY other of the young ladies in the film. I was mesmerized by her.I wish there was a little more action in the second act of the film rather than relying on faux horror character development. I didn't really care to know much about the other characters, other than Emily Bergl's character and her boyfriend---honestly, they were the only true interesting characters in the film.

Filmed as a sequel to the original 1976 Carrie, this movie is set some 22 years after the events of Carrie. High school student Rachel has lost her best friend to suicide and, in making matters worst, is the victim of tormenting from a bunch of punk football jocks who sleep with girls to score points. But, this tormenting threatens to put Rachel's power of telekinesis to action.Emily Bergl did a nice job portraying Rachel as an outcast, troubled, yet vulnerable and sympathetic. Dylan Bruno and Zachary Ty Bryan played love-to-hate portrayals of Mark and Eric, displaying that rich but spoiled, punky guys type. But their acting was dull, as well as Jesse Ryan's emotionless portrayal of Jesse Ryan. The plot device of Rachel's best friend committing suicide after finding out she is another pawn in the guys' sex games is a clever way to lead into the movie's turn-of-events and, eventually, into Rachel's unleashing of her powers. Add onto the return of Amy Irving as Sue Snell to serve as a link between the two films, trying to discover the history of Rachel's powers and the link between her and Carrie is a great piece of suspense. However, much of this drama is lost as the plot was rushed through toward the second half of the movie.***major spoilers ahead*** The ending carnage was action-packed, but many important plot elements were left unexplained, including the fate of Rachel's mother, the whereabouts of Ralph White (Carrie and Rachel's father) and the town's reaction after Rachel's wrath. And, Sue Snell served as a very important link between the past and present and wanted to put all the pieces together to help Rachel, but she was unceremoniously killed off *** major spoilers ends*** What started out as a suspenseful and dramatic movie came to a mishmash of loose-ends.Grade D

The first film was a classic. How it remained 'stand-alone' for so long is a mystery to me. I can't believe so bright Hollywood money-man didn't think of doing a sequel waaay sooner than twenty-three years later. And, as we all know, how many times are sequels even nearly as good as the original? Not many. But Carrie 2 doesn't totally disgrace itself.Carrie 2 felt a bit like a 'part remake/part sequel.' It was certainly good to see the one of the main actresses come back for the sequel - it helped bridge the gap quite nicely. The 'new' plot basically recycles the old one. If you don't know what happens - basically, bullied girl gets revenge on her tormentors through her uncontrollable telekinetic powers.Anyway, the film is actually pretty good. No, it'll never recapture the 'shock value' of the original as you basically know what's coming, but it's an enjoyable horror-yarn nonetheless. If you liked the original, you shouldn't feel too aggrieved at someone cashing in on the Carrie-name after two decades. And, if you haven't seen the first one, you should get what's going on without feeling you've missed out.http://thewrongtreemoviereviews.blogspot.co.uk/