CHUD.com Community › Forums › THE MAIN SEWER › Focused Film Discussion › IT (Chapter One) Post-Release Discussion
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

IT (Chapter One) Post-Release Discussion - Page 3

post #101 of 827
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike J View Post
 


One tepid review versus the overwhelming amount of positive ones and the "hype dies down"? Really?

 

Yep, it's all over for me.

 

Fukunaga come back!

post #102 of 827
So Erik, better or worse than that awful shitty Get Out movie we all hated?
post #103 of 827
post #104 of 827
Strangely, I don't recall calling either movie "awful" or "shitty."
post #105 of 827
Quote:
Originally Posted by ryoken View Post
 

Guess who loved it because it reminded him of his own life?

 

Come on, guess.

 

Should have known. 

post #106 of 827
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carnotaur3 View Post
 

 

Should have known. 

Just be thankful we didnt get some weird, creepy comments on or related to the main female character of this movie.

post #107 of 827
Germain Lussier, writing for iO9: IT is a strong standalone movie, it has a lot of heart for a horror movie, it's a little disjointed because it's trying to divide its time equitably among a ensemble cast, but it's ultimately a great movie and worth the long wait to see it made.
post #108 of 827
Got my ticket for the 7pm show tomorrow. 24 hours to go...
post #109 of 827
Quote:
Originally Posted by ryoken View Post
 

Guess who loved it because it reminded him of his own life?

 

Come on, guess.

 

Him suggestion that Chris Pine should play Eddie might be the most baffling thing I've ever read. 

post #110 of 827
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bartleby_Scriven View Post
 

A problem I have with the film is what Scott Mendelson mentioned in his Forbes review, that Mike's subplot of

Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)

being a town historian is given to Ben. 

 

That's crap right there. 

 

But I'm still excited about the movie and will approach it on its own terms. 


It makes sense in the film, because Ben is so isolated it'd make sense for him to spend his time that way.  But Mike is given the shortest shrift of all the Losers because of how long it takes him to join the group, and he's the one we spend the least amount of "home time" with.

 

Mendelson's review is terrible, by the way.  Not because it's negative, but because he keeps weighing it against the imaginary version of the miniseries that exists in his head.  The idea that the 135 minute film is the cliff notes version of the 1990 kids material (which amounts to what, 90 minutes?) is laughable.

post #111 of 827
Scott Mendelson actually auditioned for Pennywise, and was turned down for looking too frightening.
Edited by Bradito - 9/6/17 at 5:16pm
post #112 of 827
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Dark Shape View Post
 


It makes sense in the film, because Ben is so isolated it'd make sense for him to spend his time that way.  But Mike is given the shortest shrift of all the Losers because of how long it takes him to join the group, and he's the one we spend the least amount of "home time" with.

 

 

I'm hoping that doesn't mean Ben becomes the Derry librarian in the sequel, because that would make Mike kind of redundant if that's the case.

post #113 of 827
Quote:
Originally Posted by t3cii View Post
 

 

I'm hoping that doesn't mean Ben becomes the Derry librarian in the sequel, because that would make Mike kind of redundant if that's the case.

 

I always found it odd in the book that Mike had all the Derry research when Ben was heading to the Library all the fucking time. It's a change that feels rather appropriate, however, I always liked Mike's dad having the skinny on the tall tales. And of course, The Blackspot being the highlight of all that. These were the type of stories that wouldn't get much traction in Derry Historian circles because Pennywise had quite a hold on the town and turning them away from a dark past. 

post #114 of 827
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bradito View Post

Scott Mendelson actually auditioned for Pennywise, and was turned down for looking too frightening.

I like how you came back to this and thought "...  I can do better than that."

post #115 of 827
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carnotaur3 View Post
 

 

I always found it odd in the book that Mike had all the Derry research when Ben was heading to the Library all the fucking time. It's a change that feels rather appropriate, however, I always liked Mike's dad having the skinny on the tall tales. And of course, The Blackspot being the highlight of all that. These were the type of stories that wouldn't get much traction in Derry Historian circles because Pennywise had quite a hold on the town and turning them away from a dark past. 

 

To be fair, Mike's research really was just him flipping through his dad's photo album. While the change sort of makes sense, I'm not sure I like the idea of making Ben "town historian", especially if that means they might be setting him up to take Mike's place as being the one who stayed behind. Mike is a much more interesting character as an adult than he is as a kid, so where would that leave him as a character if he's not the one to keep the lighthouse? I think you'd end up diminishing the one black character in a major horror movie.

 

I guess Mike's family history could be his gateway to becoming a librarian later on in life. 

post #116 of 827
Of course you can hand wave that all away with Ben commenting that, "It really should have been me stuck in that Library until the end." In which Mike smiles and pats him on the shoulder, "Someone had to keep the lights on. My father taught me that."
post #117 of 827
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freeman View Post

I like how you came back to this and thought "...  I can do better than that."

Life is all about finding ways to improve your posts.
post #118 of 827
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carnotaur3 View Post

Of course you can hand wave that all away with Ben commenting that, "It really should have been me stuck in that Library until the end." In which Mike smiles and pats him on the shoulder, "Someone had to keep the lights on. My father taught me that."

 

Heh...that's not bad.

post #119 of 827

Never read the book, never saw the miniseries. From the comments here, seems that drops me out of the target audience.

 

I thought it was well-produced, well-shot, and mostly well-acted, with some good gooseflesh moments but a whole lot of 'wait for the jump scare.' As noted in the review quoted above, it loses a lot of tension bouncing between all the characters' separate stories, and it's comical how absolutely everyone besides the main kids is a psychotic creep.

 

Also, that spooky house looks like they just went to Universal Studios and shot the Psycho set. Or maybe the Munsters set.

post #120 of 827

skarsgard's It sounds like Scooby Doo, no?

post #121 of 827

I'm looking forward to seeing this tonight. I haven't read the book in years, so I'm not going in with too much baggage.

 

I've read some reviews that have criticized the film for its unsubtle depiction of racism, misogyny, and similar issues, but I think that's sort of the point. It is the rot at the heart of Derry, having slowly corrupted it through generations of Its influence. (I think it's also easy to forgive the film for these "flaws" when we're seeing real-life parallels that are distinctly unsubtle. In that sense, the film benefits from being released in a post-Trump environment.)

post #122 of 827
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hammerhead View Post
 

Also, that spooky house looks like they just went to Universal Studios and shot the Psycho set. Or maybe the Munsters set.

 

I have to admit, when I saw that house in the trailers, I had to laugh. It's a cartoonishly evil "haunted house".

 

Not planning on seeing the movie, but I'm rooting for its success for some reason.

post #123 of 827

Seeing this tonight at 9

 

going in pretty blind beyond some imagery and the horror clown premise

 

I've never seen or read any past material

post #124 of 827
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcnooj82 View Post

Seeing this tonight at 9

going in pretty blind beyond some imagery and the horror clown premise

I've never seen or read any past material

You've got a couple of hours still, if you're a faster reader than Bradito. The Kindle version is only 1,489 pages long.
post #125 of 827

I don't know how to read

 

I'll have to look into playing the audiobook at super-speed

post #126 of 827
I'm on page 425. They just cleaned Bev's bathroom. It was covered in magic bludd.
post #127 of 827
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcnooj82 View Post
 

I don't know how to read

 

I'll have to look into playing the audiobook at super-speed


Steven Weber reads it!

 

Dulcet at any speed.

post #128 of 827
Audio books are for dullards.
post #129 of 827
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcnooj82 View Post

I don't know how to read

I'll have to look into playing the audiobook at super-speed

There's still time. I believe in you!
post #130 of 827
I'm seeing this in 2 hours
post #131 of 827
Quote:
Originally Posted by DMonkeyDeluxeS View Post

I'm seeing this in 2 hours

Same. Normally my cheap ass will wait for the matinee, but I feel like I've waited long enough for this picture.
post #132 of 827
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reasor View Post

Same. Normally my cheap ass will wait for the matinee, but I feel like I've waited long enough for this picture.

Exactly, following the pre release thread since the beginning has made it feel like an eternity.
post #133 of 827
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bradito View Post

Audio books are for dullards.

Hey!!!
post #134 of 827
Audio books are for road trips.
post #135 of 827
Or any other time!
post #136 of 827
or while swimming!
post #137 of 827

We've discussed this, waterproof earbuds don't exist, stop acting a fool!

post #138 of 827
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcnooj82 View Post

Seeing this tonight at 9

going in pretty blind beyond some imagery and the horror clown premise

I've never seen or read any past material

Please . . . please, don't make me hate it before I've seen it.redface.gif
post #139 of 827
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bradito View Post

Audio books are for dullards.

 

First it's watching stand-up acts on Netflix, now it's audio books. Bradito hates everything about me!

post #140 of 827
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freeman View Post

We've discussed this, waterproof earbuds don't exist, stop acting a fool!

they are frustratingly tricky to get to work right, I admit
post #141 of 827
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jacob Singer View Post

First it's watching stand-up acts on Netflix, now it's audio books. Bradito hates everything about me!

Just those two things.
post #142 of 827
Just got back.

I'm a major, major, major King apologist. For this novel especially, I reread it every year. I know the story and characters backwards and forwards.

As an adaptation I'd give it a B-. As a film, an A-. It gets most of the important parts right, and the kids are great (Finn Wolfhard and the kid that plays Eddie especially). The house on Nieboldt street is the high point and legit frightening.

My two biggest complaints: Mike's character feels shorted and it's hard to not feel like this is incomplete, if you're familiar with the book you really miss the other half.

All in all, outstanding, a very worthy addition to King's film cannon.
post #143 of 827
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anakin's Dad View Post

As an adaptation I'd give it a B-. As a film, an A-.

I agree with those grades entirely. The movie feels like it works on its own terms.


Spoilery bits follow:

Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
Having Beverly fall into the Deadlights, instead of Bill, turns the Ritual into a terribly gendered "rescue the damsel" mission and I can already see the thinkpieces coming over the weekend. However, it sets up Ben waking Beverly, not with a kiss, but with the power of his belief that True Love's Kiss is the way to wake up a sleeping princess. Just as Pennywise manifested an injury in the forehead when Bill fired the air gun because Bill didn't know it wasn't loaded - the magic of Its mind reading and shapeshifting can be used for the good. If you don't fear It, you can exploit the way that reality warps around It to fight it. The movie found a much, much simpler and more visually satisfying way to defeat the monster than the book did, and we're all better off for it. Anyway, I assume that this kiss between Ben and Beverly was done either to set up Bill's restoration of the comatose Audrey at the end of the next installment, or to fill in as this adaptation's version of that scene.
post #144 of 827

I'm seeing this tonight.  Seems to be a "can't miss it" sort of movie.  

post #145 of 827
Yes, do see it in a crowded theater.
post #146 of 827

Seeing it Saturday night at the downtown Brooklyn Alamo.

post #147 of 827

Just got back.  Thoroughly enjoyed IT!  The kids are all fantastic - I'd have happily watched a movie about these characters just having a normal summer.  Skarsgard nails Pennywise in a way that feels totally distinct from Curry's take.  It is quite episodic, but I think that's pretty much something that can't be changed from the source material, and the episodes themselves are all strong.

 

I was truly surprised by the intensity of the violence.  What happens to Georgie really sets the tone right from the jump, and I think the movie benefits from depicting it graphically because it heightens the visceral nature of the threat facing the Losers.

 

I do think the script makes some unnecessary changes in the third act with respect to Bev; clearly it was done to provide some extra immediacy and motivation for the rest of the Losers, but maybe they also did it with the intention of setting up something for CHAPTER TWO.  I also found it curious that...

 

Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
Henry Bowers' fate

... has either been totally changed or was kind of dropped.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anakin's Dad View Post

As an adaptation I'd give it a B-. As a film, an A-.

I would probably agree with this.

post #148 of 827
I thought this was pretty good. Oodles better than THE DARK TOWER. I was shocked by how much I liked the kids, and there are lots of nice character moments.

But it's a frustrating movie too, because it feels like there's something way more interesting well within its grasp that it does not even attempt. Maybe my expectations were too high, but I think any great version of this story would generate a thick, permeating sense of dread, and that really never happens here. Basically, the movie feels like a collection of sequences. And they're good sequences, but I felt somehow that there ought to have been more to it.

It doesn't help that the movie cannot resist indulging in every available cliche. The aforementioned spooky house that looks like it came from the Universal backlot tour, the newspaper clipping slideshow of the town's creepy past, the girl who runs away from her assailant not out the door but into the dead-end bathroom, the kids constantly getting split up after vowing not to, the moment where the hero has to kill the teary hoax of their dead loved one, the constant jack-in-the box moments...you name it, it's all there.

That last issue is a big one because it ultimately creates a funhouse horror movie that is enjoyable but never frightening*. I'll tell you what it felt like: an R-rated Amblin movie. Which is actually pretty cool, but not really a fulfillment of the premise's potential. I just think there was a more sophisticated movie under the surface, one where Derry truly feels like a character, one where the parents aren't cardboard (where they exist at all) and one where the concept of a being that preys on kids' fears is taken to less obvious and more disturbing conclusions. And I think they had the cast to do it with, too.

Oh, and I've never read the book.

*The big exception being the poster of A NIGHTMARE ON ELM STREET 5: THE DREAM CHILD. I mean, can you imagine if the kids had plunked down good money to see that? Gives me the willies just thinking about it.
post #149 of 827
Quote:
Originally Posted by FatherDude View Post

I thought this was pretty good. Oodles better than THE DARK TOWER. I was shocked by how much I liked the kids, and there are lots of nice character moments.

But it's a frustrating movie too, because it feels like there's something way more interesting well within its grasp that it does not even attempt. Maybe my expectations were too high, but I think any great version of this story would generate a thick, permeating sense of dread, and that really never happens here. Basically, the movie feels like a collection of sequences. And they're good sequences, but I felt somehow that there ought to have been more to it.

It doesn't help that the movie cannot resist indulging in every available cliche. The aforementioned spooky house that looks like it came from the Universal backlot tour, the newspaper clipping slideshow of the town's creepy past, the girl who runs away from her assailant not out the door but into the dead-end bathroom, the kids constantly getting split up after vowing not to, the moment where the hero has to kill the teary hoax of their dead loved one, the constant jack-in-the box moments...you name it, it's all there.

That last issue is a big one because it ultimately creates a funhouse horror movie that is enjoyable but never frightening*. I'll tell you what it felt like: an R-rated Amblin movie. Which is actually pretty cool, but not really a fulfillment of the premise's potential. I just think there was a more sophisticated movie under the surface, one where Derry truly feels like a character, one where the parents aren't cardboard (where they exist at all) and one where the concept of a being that preys on kids' fears is taken to less obvious and more disturbing conclusions. And I think they had the cast to do it with, too.

Oh, and I've never read the book.

*The big exception being the poster of A NIGHTMARE ON ELM STREET 5: THE DREAM CHILD. I mean, can you imagine if the kids had plunked down good money to see that? Gives me the willies just thinking about it.


I don't think these are unreasonable qualms.  I don't necessarily share them, because that "funhouse" feeling and the character work were strong enough for me to forgive the movie not feeling a bit more sophisticated, as you say.

 

I will say that I think the movie makes the kids' fears even less "obvious" than the novel, where things like the goddamn Frankenstein Monster and the Creature from the Black Lagoon show up.  The woman that It presents itself to Stan as was quite an effective design, I thought, and the moment when it was, let's say, in the closest proximity possible to him was genuinely unnerving.

post #150 of 827
Quote:
Originally Posted by Belloq87 View Post

The woman that It presents itself to Stan as was quite an effective design, I thought, and the moment when it was, let's say, in the closest proximity possible to him was genuinely unnerving.

Having seen that scene, one would completely understand it if the Stan of the movies meets the same fate as the Stan of the book.

The movie definitely makes use of jump scares and cliches, but I don't see why a monster that feeds on fear wouldn't rely on stock horror movie tricks to frighten kids who are less jaded than us old bastards. In any event, the onslaught of jump scares in the movie's first half trained me to expect more, so I spent the sequences in the house and in the well on edge in anticipation.

Another thing that worked really well with the rest of the audience at my local cinema: waiting until the closing credits to disclose the movie's full title. In the ad, on the poster and marquee, and in the opening credits, the title is just "IT." When the audience saw "IT, Chapter One," applause broke out. The crowd left looking forward to Chapter Two.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Focused Film Discussion
CHUD.com Community › Forums › THE MAIN SEWER › Focused Film Discussion › IT (Chapter One) Post-Release Discussion