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 10

post #451 of 818

That's why I like the Drafthouse's policy (even if I rarely go there these days). You don't even have to waste your breath on people like that. 

post #452 of 818
Depends on the Drafthouse... some are a little lax on the enforcement of the rules. Especially if the wait staff isn't exactly on top of their game.
post #453 of 818
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freeman View Post
 

Since they all have blessed and charmed adult lives thanks to Pennywise, not possible.  I get not wanting to eat children if they're not afraid, but being totally impotent in the face of kids not fearing you?  Makes him a toothless threat.  They Kylo Ren'd him too hard at the end of this movie.

 

It kind of mirrored the scene with Henry Bowers and his dick dad. This terrifying force can be a scared bitch against someone not afraid of them. 

post #454 of 818
Quote:
Originally Posted by HP Pufncraft View Post

Some idiot sitting in front of me started texting in the middle of the movie.

Me: Please put your phone away.
Him: But I-
Me: PUT YOUR PHONE AWAY.
Him: *Says something under his breath and then puts the phone away*

Seriously, every fucking time I go to the movies. Ugh.


​Better get used to it cause that's how the younger generation is today.. They can't sit still long enough to watch a movie without looking at their phone or texting.. Probably why I don't own a Smartphone nor care to is exactly this reason: People are simply over addicted to their cellphones and can't live without them and it's disturbing.. I often pose the question at work to some of my co-workers as to whether or not they could stay off their phone for the full 8-10 hours they work without sending a text or looking at their phone and you'd be surprised by some of the replies I get.. The mere thought of not being able to text or look at your phone while at work sends panic in some people's faces.. Amazing.. I find if you see a movie in IMAX, that you don't have to worry about that cause they make you turn them off or you're removed from the auditorium..

post #455 of 818

Yep. For the longest time I avoided owning a cell phone. Well, in the last several years payphones have truly and almost completely become a thing of the past, so if you're out and about, for certain things you truly do need one.

 

So I have the cheapest flip phone I could buy from SEARS.

post #456 of 818
Regardless of what theater or what movie....the phone stays in the truck. No exceptions. In all the years I've had a phone...the one thing I've found it absolutely indispensable for is buying and/or researching to buy movies. Texting is overrated. Don't send me a 7 page long text because it'll only result in me calling you. I ain't readin all that shit..
post #457 of 818

Just got back from this. Solid 6.5/10 movie. The weird sexualization of an underage girl (who is also probably a victim of sexual abuse) by the camera made me extremely uncomfortable in places, though. I don't think we needed a slow-mo shot of her arriving on her bike as the teenage boys gape at her, or a panning shot across her bikini-clad body, or for the camera to be positioned on her legs for when she rides into a scene. Also incredibly disappointed to see her get damseled at the end of the movie. 

 

I think the main problem with the movie is that it's scare after scare after scare, and there's little to no scenes where the audience or the characters simply get to breathe. If Pennywise isn't jumping out of projector screens, he's running through photographs in a book, or in a painting, or in a cellar, or playing on your x-box, or tying up your shoelaces, or handing you a bottle of coke. It's like watching Jaws and having the shark attack every five minutes. Eventually the shark stops becoming something that might strike and becomes more like a scheduled train arriving at its platform to deliver the requisite scares. 


Edited by MrSaxon - 9/13/17 at 7:20am
post #458 of 818

You disgusting pervert Sax.  

post #459 of 818
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrSaxon View Post
 

The weird sexualization of an underage girl (who is also probably a victim of sexual abuse) by the camera made me extremely uncomfortable in places, though. I don't think we needed a slow-mo shot of her arriving on her bike as the teenage boys gape at her, or a panning shot across her bikini-clad body, or for the camera to be positioned on her legs for when she rides into a scene. 

Agreed.

post #460 of 818

Uncomfortable or not, we're supposed to be seeing her through their eyes, so it makes sense. Also, the fact she was bullied and slut-shamed (by girls and boys) is part of the whole thing. I saw girls like Beverley get whispered about and harassed all the time when I was in school. The guys who do the harassing of girls like her have a barely sublimated sexual attraction to them and the girls who do it are deflecting based on their barely sublimated internalized misogyny.

 

By the by, though I am not a huge fan of audio books, I looked up the IT audio book on YouTube to give it a shot. It looks like a few posts have been removed over copyright, but I happened upon one side of it and you'll never guess what side it just so happened to be...

 

I guess that was kind of fortuitous because now I finally heard what people were so freaked about. Turns out I was right about IT representing parents fear of the children's burgeoning adulthood because King is nowhere near subtle about it. "They called sex IT...did you do IT..." or something like that. I can't claim that it totally works within the context of the story because I didn't get through the entire thing from front to back, but yeah, the idea is fairly broad. You don't have to like it, but you have to be kind of dumb to not get it. 

post #461 of 818

I don't know. This week I listened to an interview with the co-creator of The Deuce where he explained how carefully they ensured the sex scenes  in that show weren't arousing and how everyone aimed to create a show which was able to portray characters being exploited by others without feeling exploitative in itself.  It's weird to go from a project with so much thought behind its visual language to this movie, where Muschietti is happy for the camera to become one of the horny teenage boys whenever Beverley arrives on the scene, and doubly-perplexing given her backstory. There are many ways to film one scene and to get a point across. I'm pretty sure a director like Jenkins or Bigelow would have found those ways. 

post #462 of 818

I get you. I noticed this but had a different subjective experience because in the scene following the swim, there's the pretty hilarious bit where they are gawking at her as if they'd never seen a girl in their life (they'd certainly never been in close proximity with a girl in her underwear). 

 

I don't know, man, I remember what I was like back then (I was roughly 4-5 years younger at that exact time) and I was not that different than any other boy my age. I can live on the two sides of my brain where I can be taken back to that time and laugh about it, and today, where I'm a grown man who doesn't cruise junior high schools and is not terribly concerned about a cinematic depiction of who we are at that age. It's a thing that exists and so long as no one is being legitimately victimized or taken advantage of, then it's okay by me (I don't know how old that actress is, but I imagine her parents had to okay that stuff).

post #463 of 818
Quote:
Originally Posted by JacknifeJohnny View Post

I guess that was kind of fortuitous because now I finally heard what people were so freaked about. Turns out I was right about IT representing parents fear of the children's burgeoning adulthood because King is nowhere near subtle about it. "They called sex IT...did you do IT..." or something like that. I can't claim that it totally works within the context of the story because I didn't get through the entire thing from front to back, but yeah, the idea is fairly broad. You don't have to like it, but you have to be kind of dumb to not get it. 

I always appreciated that line in the book.
post #464 of 818
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrSaxon View Post

Just got back from this. Solid 6.5/10 movie. The weird sexualization of an underage girl (who is also probably a victim of sexual abuse) by the camera made me extremely uncomfortable in places, though. I don't think we needed a slow-mo shot of her arriving on her bike as the teenage boys gape at her, or a panning shot across her bikini-clad body, or for the camera to be positioned on her legs for when she rides into a scene. Also incredibly disappointed to see her get damseled at the end of the movie.

Would you say you worried about Bev? Worried about her a lot?
post #465 of 818

Sophia Lillis is most definitely the find of the movie, in my opinion. It's been quite some time since I've been this impressed with a child actor's work and I'm expecting great things from her in the future. Fingers crossed that she doesn't do a Lohan.

post #466 of 818
Quote:
Originally Posted by Turingmachine75 View Post


Would you say you worried about Bev? Worried about her a lot?

 

post #467 of 818

Yippee. Can't wait to see a bunch of middle-aged creeps counting down her 18th birthday.

post #468 of 818

I was getting some serious The Thing vibes during Pennywise's shape shifting meltdown during the big fight. Love it.  


Edited by bigbrother - 9/13/17 at 9:01am
post #469 of 818
I wrote a couple pages back that I do think Muschietti handles the Bev stuff with a degree of subtlety. And generally, I don't mind saying, I'm pretty conservative about this kind of thing.

It's a matter of perception for sure, which is what Simon and Pelecanos have gotten into with regard to "The Deuce"-- that sometimes it comes down to a difference of number of frames, whether you've tipped over into exploition or not. We can't say for sure that Muschietti didn't put the same level of consideration into his sequences as the filmmakers behind "The Deuce" have, or that he didn't have relevant female input-- he appears to be pretty tight with his producing partner, who is his sister...

So I don't know what a Jenkins or a Bigelow would have handled differently or better, although I can easily imagine a lot of working directors who would have handled things way, way worse.

Johnny and I are of a mind on this. There ought to be a way for adult (meaning age here, not smut) writers and artists to look back on a common human experience like becoming sexually aware without being prurient about it, and I feel this movie threads the needle fairly well. That said, I'm not going to dismiss the contrary take, because it is a sensitive subject. But I've seen surprisingly few complaints along the lines of Saxon's, so maybe the audience at large agrees that the material comes off more innocently than anything else in this movie.
post #470 of 818
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fraid uh noman View Post

Regardless of what theater or what movie....the phone stays in the truck. No exceptions. In all the years I've had a phone...the one thing I've found it absolutely indispensable for is buying and/or researching to buy movies. Texting is overrated. Don't send me a 7 page long text because it'll only result in me calling you. I ain't readin all that shit..


​Hell, I thought I was the only one in 2017 that hates texting.. No one wants to talk on the phone anymore and if you're asking someone out in this day and age, it's always through texting.. Shit like: "Would you like to go out tonight??" Check the box for yes or no.. LOL!! Amazing.. But back to the topic at hand, I thought this was definitely one of the better horror adaptations from Stephen King in a long time.. I thought "CHRISTINE" was damn good and surprised they haven't tried remaking this yet?? They remade SALEMS LOT and was worse than the 70's version which was clearly superior.. I totally dig Barlow from SALEMS LOT..

 

Image result for barlow from salem's lot

post #471 of 818
Carrie, The Shining, The Dead Zone and Christine....I absolutely outright reject the notion of remakes of those films. And all but one of those actually have been remade into much weaker adaptations already.

Ok...I'm just assuming about The Dead Zone series because I haven't seen any of that show whatsoever..
post #472 of 818

I give The Shining remake credit for three things:

 

-The hedges!

-Having a scene in the hallway where Jack was looking for Danny and he was so terrifying I had nightmares. I never have nightmares because of movies.

-Actually filming at the Stanley Hotel. Fun story: I got to see the set! I saw the mini-hedges and hotel. I even walked onto the set while they were filming -- poor security!

post #473 of 818

The thing with Beverly was that while the adults, from her father to the town in general, thought she was a trashy whore, the boys accepted her as just one of them. Yeah, Ben had the crush on her, but for the most part, she was there to help with the dam, be better than them with the slingshot, and be right there with them when they went to confront IT. She didn't feel as fully integrated with the group here, which was just highlighted by her being taken in the final climax.

 

I understand things like the dam, the slingshot, probably being dropped due to feeling too hokey for the 80s, but I do think the lack of is a big reason why some of the characters got short shrift. Ben was accepted into the group by helping them rebuild the dam and he made the silver slugs, which would've left the archival exposition dump for Mike. 

post #474 of 818

Yeah, that's the thing. Book Bev has a lot more to offer the group because she's the best shot amongst the Losers which makes a difference in their final fight, and it's the dam-building which brings the Losers together. Here, she has none of the special skills which made her more than just a girl everyone wants to kiss and the group comes together by oggling Bev whilst she's reclining by the river. The more I think about how she is treated by both the camera and the script, the more I find myself starting to realise how the character was done a great disservice in this adaptation. 


Edited by MrSaxon - 9/13/17 at 12:16pm
post #475 of 818
The scene that presents the creepy pharmacist character as a mirror image of the creepy middle aged guys in the audience hasn't received nearly enough praise, here or elsewhere around the Web. The movie all but has the guy look dead at the camera and say, "stop embarrassing yourself."
post #476 of 818
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reasor View Post

The scene that presents the creepy pharmacist character as a mirror image of the creepy middle aged guys in the audience hasn't received nearly enough praise, here or elsewhere around the Web. The movie all but has the guy look dead at the camera and say, "stop embarrassing yourself."


Heh, I was struck more by the implications.  In other words the fact that the leering pharmacist's daughter, who is the same age as Bev, was also (apparently) her chief bully.

 

Or the fact that Beverly had the guy pegged from the jump, putting on her airhead/flirty act (and basically banking on her false reputation).  Which says some altogether unsurprising (and in this case accurate) things about her views on adult men.

 

God the adults in this really do suck.  But then again that's largely the point.

post #477 of 818

Hmm. I did not clock that the pharmacist's daughter was the same girl who was tormenting Bev at the beginning of the film. 

post #478 of 818
I have no doubt that the girls who bully Bev do so because they're jealous of the attention she gets.

All of this is primordial emotional nitroglycerin, as Slim and Johnny have pointed out above. It's daring that the movie touches on these themes at all, and astonishing that the result works as well as it does.

Another example: The silent "your secret is safe with me" scene with the New Kids On The Block poster is lighthearted and funny and innocent, but at the same time it's Beverly getting her hooks into Ben. She's maturing a little faster than the boys are, a kid who's beginning to trade in the power of childhood for a different kind of power altogether.
post #479 of 818

Apparently the rumor is that Warner Bros doesn't want to spend any money on the sequel's cast, and that the first movie's success without any name actors has strengthened their stance. So put away your lists of big name movie actors for Chapter 2. You're more likely to get Christina Hendricks than Amy Adams.

post #480 of 818

Honestly, even Christina Hendricks is a bigger name than I'd prefer. (Even though I personally think she looks more like Kristen Wiig than Amy Adams.)

 

I hope this means that WB's cheapness will allow for some unknowns to break out because it doesn't matter who gets cast in IToo; it's going to be big.

post #481 of 818

I suspect it won't take too long for them to start announcing cast members. They're going to want to keep momentum for the first movie going. 

post #482 of 818
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrSaxon View Post

Apparently the rumor is that Warner Bros doesn't want to spend any money on the sequel's cast, and that the first movie's success without any name actors has strengthened their stance. So put away your lists of big name movie actors for Chapter 2. You're more likely to get Christina Hendricks than Amy Adams.

That's crazy.
post #483 of 818

If you're a big name and you don't expect your career to take a hit when you sign onto a sequel to a movie you weren't in, you kind of have to be Dwayne Johnson.

post #484 of 818
I'll pay to see Dwayne Johnson play Beverly. In fact, can I buy the ticket this far in advance?
post #485 of 818

He could pull it off!

post #486 of 818
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrSaxon View Post

I suspect it won't take too long for them to start announcing cast members. They're going to want to keep momentum for the first movie going. 

It: Chapter 2 & The 7 Who?
post #487 of 818
Just caught a matinee of this and really enjoyed it. I didn't find it as scary as I thought I would, but it was still a well-constructed flick.

One thing though - did anyone else feel like the kiss at the end between Bev and Bill was a bit ...unearned? When did he express any more interest in her than the rest of the boys? Why not have that moment with Ben?
post #488 of 818
Bill, in the school play, was Bev's first (and, until the house on Neiboldt street, only) kiss. A couple of conversations lead up to the kiss at the end; they're just short, because this movie has so many balls in the air. This is why she assumed Bill had written the poem. She was hoping it was him.

It's remarkable that the fact that Ben's crush is unrequited never comes between him and Bill, in any of this story's three separate media incarnations. Ben's just that sweet and respectful.
post #489 of 818
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amos Orange View Post

Just caught a matinee of this and really enjoyed it. I didn't find it as scary as I thought I would, but it was still a well-constructed flick.

One thing though - did anyone else feel like the kiss at the end between Bev and Bill was a bit ...unearned? When did he express any more interest in her than the rest of the boys? Why not have that moment with Ben?

 

Bev and Bill had the talk at her place when she thought he wrote the poem, so there had specifically been a connection brewing since at least that point. 

 

Why not, Ben? He's not going to make that move at that point, he doesn't have it in him, and also, Bill is a handsome kid. 

post #490 of 818
"Hey did you do that nice thing?"

"Uh, no?"

*swoon*

I don't get it.
post #491 of 818
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amos Orange View Post

"Hey did you do that nice thing?"

"Uh, no?"

*swoon*

I don't get it.


Even though Bill didn't write it, he was the one that insisted they clean up Bev's bathroom, and was the kid she had kissed in the 3rd grade school play or somesuch.

 

He was also genuinely nice, a reasonably handsome kid, charismatic despite his stutter, and principled.  It's not surprising at all that Bev might crush on him a bit, and Bill's attraction to her is evident from the first moment he lays eyes on her (and she shifts into "Soft focus vision.")

post #492 of 818

I had forgotten that detail about Bill being the kisser in the play. Still feels a little cheap. Team Ben 4 lyfe. I saw how it was down to him and Bill and at the end with Bev. Know that feel, bro.

 

Anyway, how does the bathroom cleanup scene square with the whole "this isn't real" thing? Maybe that hadn't been established yet?

 

The more I think about this the more it kinda falls apart.

post #493 of 818

I brought that up a page or two back and it's apparently an issue with the source material as well. Apply PHANTASM rules (i.e., this doesn't make sense, but the filmmakers clearly aren't worried about that) and go with it, I guess.

 

Ultimately it's a movie about kids who deal with a monster that functions according to kid logic. What would be good for Chapter 2 is if Pennywise's tactics change and he behaves more deliberately according to the ages of his victims. He would still be Pennywise, but there would be a clearer throughline with what he does or doesn't do.

post #494 of 818

Can't it be real for the kids and not real (or perceptible) for anyone else? It's possible they weren't cleaning actual blood in the bathroom. Pennywise didn't suspend the illusion and thought to himself, "Well, wouldn't it be fun if the rest of the kids could see this too?", possibly because he thought it might unsettle them even more.

 

YMMV, but I think the ideas that 1) Pennywise is having fun with the Losers and taking his time "salting the meat" and 2) Pennywise is some alien creature beyond understanding are sufficient to resolve most of these issues. I do understand why someone might want more concrete rules, but it doesn't really come across as lazy or inconsistent, just intentionally vague. I wouldn't be surprised if the sequel delves a bit more into Pennywise's backstory, but I doubt we're ever going to get a 100% revealing lesson in how he operates.

post #495 of 818

 I do wonder how Chapter 2 will address Eddie and Bev character regressions. In the book Eddie is still a hypochondriac and married to a woman that reminds him of his mother and Bev is in a abusive relationship. In the movie they both stood up to their parents and got past their fears. I'm assuming that since as adults they don't remember fighting Pennywise, they won't remember standing up to their parents either.

post #496 of 818

I can't remember if this was in the book or just the mini-series, but from what I remember, Bev initially cleaned up the blood herself and it immediately came back. Only after they cleaned it together did it stay gone. 

 

The Bill/Bev stuff felt pretty pointless to me. We know it's going nowhere in Part 2, so it just sort of felt like "obligatory romance resolution" because they obviously have to save Ben/Bev for Chapter 2. 

post #497 of 818
I want to say that she wasn't able to clean it at all without the others helping.

Assuming Ben wrote that poem and there was no dam (right? I should see the movie, huh?), would it make sense to switch him to be the writer and make Bill the architect?
post #498 of 818

Why Bill has still be a writer in Chapter 2

Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
 Bill meets his wife when she is starring in a movie based on one of his books. I want to see Chapter 2 end with Bill and Audra on Silver. After all the horrible events in the book, I liked that the story ended with a moment of pure joy. I still want to see that scene scored to the Ramones Rock n Roll Radio.

Edited by Chaz - 9/13/17 at 8:54pm
post #499 of 818

I haven't really been paying attention, so that's my fault, but now is a good time to remind people that not everyone has read the book or seen the miniseries, so tread lightly on details from either that could lead to spoilers. 

 

I don't particularly care for myself, even though I don't remember much of anything that happened in the miniseries so I'm susceptible to spoilers, but be mindful of other chewers.

post #500 of 818

I just fixed that.

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