??Carrie? is exactly the film you would expect, as the re-remaking of an adaptation of Stephen King?s first published novel of the same name: money on the screen.Okay ? let?s get the good things out of the way: this film stars a stellar cast. Chlo? Grace Moretz is fantastic as Carrie, and proves that she is well on her way to being more than just Hit-Girl from ?Kick-Ass.? Julianne Moore brilliantly plays Carrie?s crazed pseudo-Christian mother, and Gabriella Wilde plays a Sue Snell that, in this reviewer?s opinion, is better than the original?s Amy Irving.However, where ?Carrie? falls flat is in the script. As I said earlier, it is exactly what you would expect. Way too much of what you would expect.The screenplay of this film, at times, just sounds like a slightly-edited version of the original 1978 adaptation?s script. This would not be a major fault, except that it eliminated any possibilities of this being much of a ?reimagining? at all. Compare this to the reworking of 1981?s ?The Evil Dead,? released earlier this year. Despite this film being quite similar in plot to the original film, this re-boot added new elements and tactics to keep the audience engaged.Characters in ?Carrie? are given more backstory and dialogue than the original, which, in most cases, would help its cause, but these additions have mixed results.The antagonist, the bitchy-rich-teenage-girl-clich? Chris Hargensen (Portia Doubleday), is just given more situations to look bitchy and rich. Does this make her any more relatable, or multi-dimensional? Not really, no.The problem with taking a script from 40 years ago and pretty much reusing it for a modern teen supernatural film is that it takes a story that feels somewhat timeless and makes it dated.How does it make it dated? Well, for Hollywood, to make a teen supernatural film in the 21st century, there needs to be a script coated in product placement.Characters use smartphones and check their texts often in close-up camera shots ? just so we, the viewer, can read the logo. People upload videos to YouTube, and talk about the features of the site in barely-related dialogue.The changes made to the shape of ?Carrie? for this ?modern reimagining? have been, almost entirely, to make accessible a new teen ?scary? movie released around Halloween with hip, cool, teen things in it.Which makes the special-effects in this film all the more baffling; the green-screen sets and shoddy digital blood-splatter really make one who has seen the original cringe. Why does it look less real? This is supposed to be ?modern,? right?The original ?Carrie? is not a legendary piece of cinema ? it?s a good supernatural thriller. It?s a film that, given an actual reimagining, could have been something great. The lack of imagination, however, makes this remake a bloody dud. ?Carrie? is now playing at Palace 9 and Majestic 10 cinemas.