Movies IT Movie v.2 (Dragonlord's Review)

[Andersons Foot]

5/10

This is definitely one of those horror films that works better as a comedy than an horror. God bless that bespeckled kid, his jokes saved like half the movie. I do suppose this is a film that one would like a lot more as a kid though. There's also something to be said about a film that tells it's story earnestly, it just makes it more likable somehow.

But yeah... overall it's just baaaaad. It's attempts at appearing creepy or scary are just hilariously misfired.

 

[Bob Gray]

Tim Curry's performance is classic.

Its the only worthwhile thing in an otherwise forgettable adaptation. I give credit where its due, they were constrained by network censorship, time , etc. Still managed to get an iconic performance. Unfortunately, little else.

 

[Bobby Boulders]

I honestly canNOT compare the series to this. Truly and honestly, i have no reason to ever, ever revisit it. Cant believe a poster or 2 dont obviously enjoy this one more, especially after reading Bob Grays posts.

Oh, I will revisit, for nostalgia. But I imagine I will rematch this film many many many times as well.

I might even go read the book again.

 

[Bob Gray]

Oh, I will revisit, for nostalgia. But I imagine I will rematch this film many many many times as well.

I might even go read the book again.

Yes. I believe its about that time.

One of the great disappointments of the adaptations is that Henry Bowers never gets his due. He and his whole crew really. Bowers is honestly one of Kings best villains. He just happens to be in a novel like IT where he gets upstaged. You could literally have a novel just with the kids and the Bowers gang and it would be fantastic.

Wondering how the second one is going to go. They cant really make it in the same style and tone, since adults cant be put in perilous situations so easily. Id bet any amount of money chapter two opens with the Adrian Melon murder.

 

[5crew]

The librarian scene was one of the creepier scenes in the movie IMO, and I bet a ton of people totally overlooked it. When the pharmacist told Beverly she looked like Lois Lane after she said he looked like Clark Kent there were a few audible groans of cringe in the seats behind me lol.

There are definitely alot of vibe to the show.
The audiences for my viewing, cringed at this scene as well. Some late teens even said out loud, wtf, she's a kid.

 

[Bobby Boulders]

Yes. I believe its about that time.

One of the great disappointments of the adaptations is that Henry Bowers never gets his due. He and his whole crew really. Bowers is honestly one of Kings best villains. He just happens to be in a novel like IT where he gets upstaged. You could literally have a novel just with the kids and the Bowers gang and it would be fantastic.

Wondering how the second one is going to go. They cant really make it in the same style and tone, since adults cant be put in perilous situations so easily. Id bet any amount of money chapter two opens with the Adrian Melon murder.

I've read that part II will be much, much, much darker.

 

[Bob Gray]

There are definitely alot of vibe to the show.
The audiences for my viewing, cringed at this scene as well. Some late teens even said out loud, wtf, she's a kid.

I wonder if its left over from the original script from Fukawhatever. My understanding is he was going to take it into some pretty perverse territory with Beverly. Like, not only would she have been molested by her Dad, but she'd recount him having friends over and selling her out to them or something. My understanding is thats what the biggest contention between the Director and the Studio was about. While I'll always be disappointed we wont get to see his version, I wonder if it might be for the best. Having Bev sexually assaulted by her Dad is already a pretty dramatic change from the book, not sure if it would be improved by going so far into it.

 

[Bob Gray]

Directors cut incoming:

http://www.comingsoon.net/movies/ne...ith-15-minutes-of-additional-footage#/slide/1

Would have preferred more footage. I get the feeling somewhere along the line there was a reason to have Patrick Hockstetter in the movie. As it is he feels like a waste.

 

[dawnignited]

Finally got to see this last night. I enjoyed the film overall, though it's definitely flawed. I know the movie was two hours long but I would have been happy if the film was a bit longer. The kids just weren't as developed as I thought they would be. Mike in particular was a disappointment, and Stan wasn't much better. Ben's interactions with Bev were probably my favorite moments in the movie (all about that New Kids on the Block poster), even more so than the moments of horror. I was more amused throughout than I was scared, and I don't necessarily think that's a bad thing. IT is a coming of age story at heart so I appreciated that being the focus, and I thought it made the scenes with Pennywise have that much more weight to them because he actually isn't in the film all that much.

 

[lordsai]

what are some of your guys fav scenes from the move mine would have to be this or the projector scene

 

[Bob Gray]

what are some of your guys fav scenes from the move mine would have to be this or the projector scene

I'll be seeing it a second time. The scenes I'm looking forward to watching again are house on Neibolt street sequence. Specifically Pennyeise coming out of the fridge when Eddie has his broken arm and telling him "time to float".

Had to take a piss when after they dived off the cliff so looking forward to seeing what I missed.

Mostly I'll be looking in the background a bit more in the hopes that I missed a moment like the librarian. I feel like I caught everything though.

 

[TrueBias]

Its the only worthwhile thing in an otherwise forgettable adaptation. I give credit where its due, they were constrained by network censorship, time , etc. Still managed to get an iconic performance. Unfortunately, little else.

Thats exactly how i look at it.
It seems strange to me that i have to remind fucking everyone that curry is the only good thing in the series and his screen time is a fraction of the total run time, yet its a "classic."

 

[Bob Gray]

Wow. Dominates the box office for another weekend. 217 mill total in 2 weeks. Insane.

http://www.comingsoon.net/movies/ne...nd-weekend-of-120-3-million-globally#/slide/1

Hopefully this can open the door to a few things. First of fall, studios can realize you don't need a horror flick to be 91 minutes long. People wont get bored if you dont make a boring movie.

Also, since this movie absolutely obliterated PG-13 horror flicks of the last few years, hopefully IT can, like Deadpool, show that an R horror rated movie isn't a risk as long as you put the talent and effort into making it. If there was any movie that was scrapped due to fears like this that IT could potentially get warmed up again, It's Del Toros At the mountains of Madness. A long shot, for sure, but that's a movie I'd love to see eventually get made.

Seems pretty logical we'll see a run of old and new King adaptations. Tommyknockers could potentially be up for grabs. If I had to wager a guess, Salems Lot will be put on the fast track since that was another highly regarded King novel that was turned into a mini series several decades ago that is generally looked at rather fondly. If I remember correctly, Muschietti had said he would be interested in doing a Pet Semetary adaptation.

Maybe now Darabont will finally get his Long Walk adaptation going. Would be perfect timing for an auteur director to handle a low budget King adaptation.

The biggest disappointment for all this success, at least for me, is that the Dark Tower adaptation just got put into production almost literally one damn year too early. After so many decades of stalls and restarts, one more would have probably been the best thing that could have happened. After seeing the overwhelming success of one of Kings epics, seems more likely they would have put the time, effort and budget into his magnum opus. Fucking 88 minutes.

 

[Dragonlordxxxxx]

Update: September 17, 2017

IT Devours Darren Aronofsky's MOTHER!, Wins 2nd Weekend with $60 Million

Darren Aronofsky's mother! stalled in its domestic box office debut, grossing an estimated $7.5 million from 2,368 theaters after receiving a rare F CinemaScore and facing competition from blockbuster It.

mother!, an elevated psychological horror-thriller, supplants The House at the End of the Street ($12.3 million) to mark the lowest nationwide launch of Jennifer Lawrence's career. The Paramount title, costing $30 million to produce, came in No. 3 for the weekend behind It and new offering American Assassin. (In a sign that summer is over, all three titles are rated R.)

Warner Bros. and New Line's It continued to make history in its second weekend, declining a scant 51 percent to $60 million from 4,103 theaters, the biggest sophomore outing ever for a horror title.

That's just one of many milestones. In its first 10 days, the film adaptation of Stephen King's novel has earned $218.7 million domestically, passing up Get Out ($175.5 million) to become the No. 2 R-rated horror film of all time behind The Exorcist, not accounting for inflation. And it's already the top-grossing September release in history. At this pace, It will finish its North American run with north of $300 million.

It is also scaring up big numbers overseas, grossing $60.3 million in its second weekend from 56 markets for a foreign tally of $152.6 million and a stunning $371.3 million worldwide against a $35 million budget. Highlights included a record-breaking horror opening of $13.8 million in Mexico.

Weekend Box Office: 'It' Devours Darren Aronofsky's 'mother!' With $60M

 

[Bob Gray]

Probably a pretty safe bet that Muschiettis stock is skyrocketing. Even watching the movie, its pretty amazing what it did with such a small amount of money. While I havent seen Mother, the apparent disparity between the two is incredible in terms of what they got out of a similar budget. I suppose a big part of it is that IT doesnt have a big star that commands a weighty price tag.

 

[pinkybrief]

When the pharmacist told Beverly she looked like Lois Lane after she said he looked like Clark Kent there were a few audible groans of cringe in the seats behind me lol.

Scariest part of the movie

 

[youandme]

So this week. I rewetted the wretched 1990 It with Tim Curry.

Last night I went to a showing of the new one.

It's obviously a massive improvement on the TV Movie, but it also felt kinda disjointed.

As a pretty knowledgable guy on the novel (have read it a few times and dissected it in parts to get a better understanding of the overall world)... I think it's impossible to adapt if it isn't going to be an 8-10 hour miniseries.

Too much to cover, and if you leave certain things out, it kinda loses a lot of it's punch.

That aside...

Great acting/chemistry.
Great cinematography
Some of the creative changes worked. Ben/Beverly's banter about new kids on the block, for example.
The first 70 minutes or so had me. I was on board...

Then it just goes off the rails at the end.

Belch and Victor's deaths getting omitted was a weird choice.

Once again a total neglect of Silver outrunning Pennywise the Werewolf. One of the absolute best sequences in the novel.

IT taking Beverly (The absolute worst creative change from the book. She would be DOA based on the Pennywise that King wrote.) Seemed like a Hollywood "save the girl" sequence.

It also relied too heavily on Jump scares and CGI that looked cheesy.

People in the theatre were scared, but I guess I knew what to expect so it didn't really do much for me.

Overall I'd say it's a solid 5.5/10, but it was a solid 7 or better before that.

I don't think part 2 is going to work very well, they will leave out too many good Interludes like "The Bradley Gang".

 

[PolishHeadlock]

Can't believe they cut out the gang bang.

 

[Capt Lunatic]

So this week. I rewetted the wretched 1990 It with Tim Curry.

Last night I went to a showing of the new one.

It's obviously a massive improvement on the TV Movie, but it also felt kinda disjointed.

As a pretty knowledgable guy on the novel (have read it a few times and dissected it in parts to get a better understanding of the overall world)... I think it's impossible to adapt if it isn't going to be an 8-10 hour miniseries.

Too much to cover, and if you leave certain things out, it kinda loses a lot of it's punch.

That aside...

Great acting/chemistry.
Great cinematography
Some of the creative changes worked. Ben/Beverly's banter about new kids on the block, for example.
The first 70 minutes or so had me. I was on board...

Then it just goes off the rails at the end.

Belch and Victor's deaths getting omitted was a weird choice.

Once again a total neglect of Silver outrunning Pennywise the Werewolf. One of the absolute best sequences in the novel.

IT taking Beverly (The absolute worst creative change from the book. She would be DOA based on the Pennywise that King wrote.) Seemed like a Hollywood "save the girl" sequence.

It also relied too heavily on Jump scares and CGI that looked cheesy.

People in the theatre were scared, but I guess I knew what to expect so it didn't really do much for me.

Overall I'd say it's a solid 5.5/10, but it was a solid 7 or better before that.

I don't think part 2 is going to work very well, they will leave out too many good Interludes like "The Bradley Gang".

Can't believe they cut out the gang bang.

That's a wrap!

 

[dawnignited]

So this week. I rewetted the wretched 1990 It with Tim Curry.

Last night I went to a showing of the new one.

It's obviously a massive improvement on the TV Movie, but it also felt kinda disjointed.

As a pretty knowledgable guy on the novel (have read it a few times and dissected it in parts to get a better understanding of the overall world)... I think it's impossible to adapt if it isn't going to be an 8-10 hour miniseries.

Too much to cover, and if you leave certain things out, it kinda loses a lot of it's punch.

That aside...

Great acting/chemistry.
Great cinematography
Some of the creative changes worked. Ben/Beverly's banter about new kids on the block, for example.
The first 70 minutes or so had me. I was on board...

Then it just goes off the rails at the end.

Belch and Victor's deaths getting omitted was a weird choice.

Once again a total neglect of Silver outrunning Pennywise the Werewolf. One of the absolute best sequences in the novel.

IT taking Beverly (The absolute worst creative change from the book. She would be DOA based on the Pennywise that King wrote.) Seemed like a Hollywood "save the girl" sequence.

It also relied too heavily on Jump scares and CGI that looked cheesy.

People in the theatre were scared, but I guess I knew what to expect so it didn't really do much for me.

Overall I'd say it's a solid 5.5/10, but it was a solid 7 or better before that.

I don't think part 2 is going to work very well, they will leave out too many good Interludes like "The Bradley Gang".

I think you hit the nail on the head by mentioning that this would be better served as a miniseries. I could see HBO or Netflix doing wonders with the source material.

I did enjoy the film overall, but a lot of what you mentioned bothered me, too.

Spoiler

The lack of clarity on the fate of Belch and Victor did annoy me and I wouldn't be surprised if it's a deleted scene that gets added into the director's cut. The leaked version of the script that I read included their deaths and it felt like a curious choice to omit that from the film. Another thing missing in the film that was in the script, and kinda goes along with you mentioning the interludes, was a flashback scene detailing what happened to The Black Spot. I wish they would have stuck with that, as it also led to a scene where Mike got some much needed development. Mike's presence in the script in general was much more prominent. Beverly being kidnapped in the movie also kind of cheapened Pennywise for me, as it made him seem less of a threat. Again, reading the book and knowing the fate of the kids probably didn't help, but I would have liked to see Pennywise cause a little more damage.

The werewolf attack at the Neibolt St. house was definitely a key moment in the book and I really wish they included it, but I can see how it just wouldn't have made sense in this version of the film just because of the 80's setting. The fact that they included The Leper was a nice touch, at least. An interesting article I read the other day also mentioned that there was a time where the filmmakers discussed having Pennywise become Freddy Kreuger at one point. Obviously they ended up balking at the idea, but it's at least interesting to think about the kind of notable monstrous characters of the eighties that Pennywise could have turned into for the updated setting.

I honestly didn't mind the CGI that much. From what I'd been hearing I went in expecting the worst and really, if I had to choose between this or the dumb fucking spider from the 1990 version, I'll stick with this version's CGI. If anything, I thought the climactic battle at the end was handled with a bit too much shaky cam, but it didn't bother me too much.

I gave it an 8/10. It didn't frighten me all that much outside of a couple of key moments, but the kid actors really shined and helped me forgive the movie for its shortcomings. As you mentioned, doing the book justice in movie format has got to be a really tall task and after that steaming pile of shit the Dark Tower adaptation turned out to be, I'm just glad this wasn't a monumental fuck-up as well. I'll wait to see how casting pans out for part 2 before I pass any sort of judgment on it.