Carrie as a Warning: When Society Fails the Individual

Carrie 2013

 I’ve already written that I like Chloë Moretz because in her films she often portrays what she herself feels, or she chooses roles that have a clear purpose. One of the strongest examples of Chloë Moretz being true to herself, for me, is The Miseducation of Cameron Post. During the U.S. elections, Chloë Moretz also spoke about her identity and expressed concern about the possibility of Donald Trump being elected.

Recently, I rewatched Carrie (2013). This remake of the classic story by Stephen King depicts a teenage girl who is systematically humiliated by her classmates and psychologically suffocated by a fanatical religious upbringing at home.

After watching the film, I was left with questions. For a moment, I was even uneasy about whether the film could be seen as inspirational or as justifying mass murders, which sometimes happen for reasons similar to those the film portrays. Mass shootings are more frequent in the U.S., but such social phenomena are not limited to one country.

The film ultimately feels more like a warning, I think — that when a person is mocked, ignored, or oppressed over a long period of time, something accumulates inside them. Carrie releases this accumulated pain in a destructive way, killing everyone — maybe in distrust of everyone, including those who stood by her. 

Once again, I see in Chloë Moretz someone who accepts a role because of its deeper intention.

And this is where the film asks an uncomfortable question: What happens when a collective systematically destroys an individual — and can later even pretend it knew nothing about it? In Carrie, this is very clear: collective bullying is not just about a few “bad individuals.” It is a group dynamic. And groups have a strong tendency to protect their own image.

It is true that the bullying, humiliation, and rejection of Carrie are carried out by society in the film, yet in the end almost all of them are massacred — except for one person, who later testifies in court about the unbelievable events.

The climax at the prom is not a triumph. It is a tragedy. Carrie does not kill only those who hurt her. In a state of emotional overwhelm, she destroys everything. The film makes it clear that violence is not justice — it is collapse.

In my view, the film does not say that revenge is the solution. Rather, it points to the possible consequences of the systematic oppression of an individual.

Carrie also has supernatural abilities in the film, specifically telekinesis. When I think about the reasons why I like Chloë Moretz, I wonder whether there is also intention in this aspect. In a way, oppressed individuals may become more aware of systems of oppression for the sake of their own survival; they may learn to read people more accurately and develop an understanding of reality that is inaccessible to anyone except the oppressed themselves. In the film, however, there is something deeper about controlling reality. At the very beginning of the film, Carrie saves herself precisely through this power.

In the context of various societies where systematic oppression, bullying, and isolation exist, Carrie functions as a warning. Chloë Moretz portrays a character who is not a symbol of evil, but a symbol of society’s failure. And perhaps that is why the film provokes such strong emotions — it forces to reflect on where individual responsibility ends and where societal responsibility begins.