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 2

post #51 of 827

Jonathan Brandis (Bill) killed himself several years back. I think Seth Green and Emily Perkins are the only ones still acting.

post #52 of 827

This was decent! Definitely the scariest part of the whole enterprise is Derry itself... all the adults are seriously fuck-y and unnerving. Like 4 different SVU subplots mixed in there that were pretty tough to watch.

 

Overall I could've used a little more atmosphere... Fukunaga does this on autopilot, and I was really missing him here. IT is creepy conceptually, but the actual confrontations with the kids feel a bit defanged since there's rarely (if ever) any consequences. The Losers don't seem all that intimidated by It, and to be fair, s/he doesn't harm a hair on their head. The pervasive sense of dread and foreboding that TRUE DETECTIVE was drenched in would've gone a long way towards making this more skin-crawlingly memorable.

 

Skarsgard was good. I'd have to watch it again to see what subtle nuances he brought to it. He gets a lot of glamor shots, and the camera loves him visually, but I didn't get a stomach-churning sensation like he was a truly unpredictable, menacing presence (don't get me wrong, I wouldn't want to find him in my basement, but...). I'm sure it's from the books, but I was actually quite disappointed to find how often he sent dull proxies in his stead (zombies, lepers, etc.)

post #53 of 827

In most of those cases, though, Pennywise is those things. He is the leper that chases Eddie. Which is based off of a real encounter Eddie has in the book.

post #54 of 827
Quote:
Originally Posted by t3cii View Post
 

In most of those cases, though, Pennywise is those things. He is the leper that chases Eddie. Which is based off of a real encounter Eddie has in the book.

 

And I sensed that it wasn't an invention of the movie. But... I've seen zombies. I don't need IT to have zombies. When It uses Georgie, there's some pathos there but the movie monster shtick is pretty dull. Stan's Picasso portrait lady has her It fangs fully engulfed over Stan's face, and yet doesn't even leave a scratch behind. If it's all the same, I'd rather see Pennywise

post #55 of 827
Quote:
Originally Posted by t3cii View Post

Jonathan Brandis (Bill) killed himself several years back. I think Seth Green and Emily Perkins are the only ones still acting.

I guess then we can still recast him as Stan, though, right?
post #56 of 827
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by SurpriseCentury View Post
 

 

And I sensed that it wasn't an invention of the movie. But... I've seen zombies. I don't need IT to have zombies. When It uses Georgie, there's some pathos there but the movie monster shtick is pretty dull. Stan's Picasso portrait lady has her It fangs fully engulfed over Stan's face, and yet doesn't even leave a scratch behind.

 

Yeah, this threw me a little, too.  I thought Stan was dead, and he barely has a scratch when they get the Pennywise-Lady off of him.

post #57 of 827

Should we put some of this in spoilers? Some of this stuff isn't in the book.

post #58 of 827
Mimicking what each kid fears the most is a large part of how the monster operates in the book, but I would be fine with a semi-permanent moratorium on zombies in movies. At this point they add nothing and there's nothing left to try adding to them.
post #59 of 827

Whether this becomes a criticism of the book or the film, I just would've liked to see something a bit more sophisticated. It can be a little more menacing because he's conversational. Eddie being a hypochondriac opens up some avenues for psychological terror, but a leper? I don't know, that just played to me like "oh, this monstrous thing that is coming at me"... a very generalized, non-specific survival instinct-type reaction you would have to anything that wants to kill you. 

 

Besides, there's a lot about how or why It operates that is left at once both vague and yet very rule obsessed. It can't kill you if you're together/not afraid, yet doesn't kill any of the kids when they're alone, and doesn't seem to strategize ways to separate them either.

post #60 of 827
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by t3cii View Post
 

Should we put some of this in spoilers? Some of this stuff isn't in the book.


We can, but it's the post-release thread?  I feel like this thread should be pretty free with that stuff, as long as it doesn't appear in the preview.  (Which my last post totally did and I was rushing back to fix it)

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by SurpriseCentury View Post
 

Besides, there's a lot about how or why It operates that is left at once both vague and yet very rule obsessed. It can't kill you if you're together/not afraid, yet doesn't kill any of the kids when they're alone, and doesn't seem to strategize ways to separate them either.

 

It can kill them, it just doesn't want to because they don't taste good unless they're afraid.

post #61 of 827
Quote:
Originally Posted by t3cii View Post
 

Jonathan Brandis (Bill) killed himself several years back. I think Seth Green and Emily Perkins are the only ones still acting.

Ohh that's right I forgot about Brandis. I used to love Seaquest when I was young. Still, Seth Green and Emily Perkins would work.

post #62 of 827

 

I just noticed when Pennywise is offering the boat to Georgie one of his eyes is... Off.

post #63 of 827
Quote:
Originally Posted by Waaaaaaaalt View Post

Ohh that's right I forgot about Brandis. I used to love Seaquest when I was young. Still, Seth Green and Emily Perkins would work.
Off topic a bit but...I searched import blu rays on Amazon and the first season of Seaquest is on blu ray. Dafuq?
post #64 of 827
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fraid uh noman View Post


Off topic a bit but...I searched import blu rays on Amazon and the first season of Seaquest is on blu ray. Dafuq?

All 3 seasons in Germany. http://www.blu-ray.com/movies/SeaQuest-DSV--Die-komplette-Serie-Blu-ray/183332/

post #65 of 827

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/movie-causing-legit-clowns-lose-work-1033435

Quote:

 Count Moody as one of those irked clowns King references in his tweet. "It all started with the original It," she notes. "That introduced the concept of this character. It's a science-fiction character. It's not a clown and has nothing to do with pro clowning."

 

My fear of clowns actually started one year earlier! Can't blame IT for the concept of scary clown!

 

post #66 of 827
Quote:
Originally Posted by User_32 View Post
 

 

My fear of clowns actually started one year earlier! Can't blame IT for the concept of scary clown!

 

 

I fucking HATE clowns.  It's an irrational hatred, but I can't help it.  I've always hated them, even when I was really, really young.  That hatred is part of the reason why I enjoyed the original mini series so much, and it's part of the reason why I'm drawn to seeing this movie as well.  Glad to hear that it's a winner by all accounts.

post #67 of 827
I do think it'd be kinda cool (if a little gimmicky perhaps) if the kids from the old IT played their adult selves in the second half. But when your main one is deceased, that kinda throws that outta whack. Still be cool to see the rest of them though..
post #68 of 827
Quote:
Originally Posted by Judas Booth View Post

I fucking HATE clowns.  It's an irrational hatred, but I can't help it.  I've always hated them, even when I was really, really young.  

Even Puddles?

post #69 of 827
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freeman View Post
 

 

I just noticed when Pennywise is offering the boat to Georgie one of his eyes is... Off.

 

That's not CGI, either. The actor has a lazy eye. 

post #70 of 827
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freeman View Post
 

 

I just noticed when Pennywise is offering the boat to Georgie one of his eyes is... Off.

 

He also has a little bit of drool running down his chin. 

post #71 of 827
Thread Starter 
The original kids now playing the adults is a cute gimmick, but it doesn't work with these versions of the characters. Emily Perkins is nothing like 1989 Bev, Seth Green is nothing like 1989 Eddie, etc.
post #72 of 827
Quote:
Originally Posted by Codename View Post

He also has a little bit of drool running down his chin. 

Nice catch.
post #73 of 827
The real question Dark Shape is, did the LEGO thing bother you? Take you out of the movie?
post #74 of 827
Thread Starter 

You mean Georgie's turtle?  No.  I know 'the Turtle' is a big part of the book, but in the movie it just plays as a nice scene of Bill being sad that Georgie is gone.

post #75 of 827

Seth Green was Richie!! RICHIEEE!!!!

post #76 of 827

post #77 of 827
post #78 of 827

Yo, this is shot by Chan-wook's DP from Stoker and The Handmaiden?

 

I AM IN.

post #79 of 827
I remember when passing on Fukanaga was the death of this adaptation. There was so little hope.
post #80 of 827
Quote:
Originally Posted by wasp View Post

Yo, this is shot by Chan-wook's DP from Stoker and The Handmaiden?

I AM IN.

oh yo yo yo!

PEDIGREE!!!
post #81 of 827

?

post #82 of 827
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freeman View Post

I remember when passing on Fukanaga was the death of this adaptation. There was so little hope.

Yep. And now it seems Fukanaga's version wouldn't have been exactly what we wanted anyway.
post #83 of 827
According to him, Fukanaga wanted to make, y'know, a good movie. But the producers decided to go another way.
post #84 of 827
Except they did make a good movie anyway?
post #85 of 827

They appear to be making EXACTLY the movie I, and most fans of the book, wanted...  So...

post #86 of 827
It's sure looking that way. I was just poking a little fun at Fukanaga's statement about why he moved on.
post #87 of 827
Eh
post #88 of 827

The first "eh" I've heard!

Care to elaborate?  

post #89 of 827

And who do you think should play Adult Bev?

post #90 of 827
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arjen Rudd View Post
 

And who do you think should play Adult Bev?

 

Dwayne Johnson if his schedule can allow it.

post #91 of 827
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freeman View Post

The first "eh" I've heard!


Care to elaborate?  
Can't get into spoilers till Friday (embargo), but it's aggressively mediocre, and completely misunderstands the power of the Losers -- their perceived weaknesses are their collective strength, and the film's like, "And then they hit Pennywise with a shovel!"
post #92 of 827

Oh great.

 

Hype dies down.

post #93 of 827
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by erik myers View Post


Can't get into spoilers till Friday (embargo), but it's aggressively mediocre, and completely misunderstands the power of the Losers -- their perceived weaknesses are their collective strength, and the film's like, "And then they hit Pennywise with a shovel!"


It's more like, "And then Pennywise uses what scares Stan, but his friends are there for him!"  But hey, whatever.

 

Also, what kind of embargo runs until after the movie has opened?

post #94 of 827
I've been dying to see this ever since it was made clear that the kids weren't going to be Baby Boomers. That single decision takes out one of the book's core themes (we falsely attribute the end of the Vietnam War to our peaceful protests, but now it's the mid-Eighties and Reagan's threatening to destroy the world anyways, do we have enough magic left in us to save the world the way we thought we did when we were kids), and I'm curious to see if anything is inserted to replace it. I'm afraid that the decision to move the kid's story arc to the Eighties was made just to move their adulthood arc to this year, without any massaging of the movie's story to provide commentary on the times or the generation depicted. I hope I'll have a lot to chew on when I see this tomorrow or the day after.
post #95 of 827
I think that's interesting as analysis, but a bit of a stretch to say it's a core theme, maybe? King always had a little extra gas in his tank when writing about the Boomers, no denying that. But the universal thing I believe he's tapping into is that everything disappoints as you grow up, and surely that's a theme for the sequel rather than this one. In fact, I'd imagine for all that to work, this one would play up the idyllic nature of youth, where the magic of friendship and goodness is tangible stuff.
post #96 of 827
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carnotaur3 View Post
 

Oh great.

 

Hype dies down.


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

post #97 of 827
Thread Starter 
It's going to be tedious if this whole thread is just comparing the film to the book and not looking at the film's strengths and weaknesses in their own right.
post #98 of 827
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Dark Shape View Post


It's more like, "And then Pennywise uses what scares Stan, but his friends are there for him!"  But hey, whatever.

Also, what kind of embargo runs until after the movie has opened?
If you'd rather see Pennywise get hit in the head with a shovel than see Bev use a silver-dollar missle or Eddie use his aspirator, etc, then cool.

The movie opens Friday. Reviews aren't able to go online until then. But if you'd like to take it up with the company, I'd be happy to run the piece sooner.
post #99 of 827
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Dark Shape View Post

Almost as tedious as breathless hyperbole overriding the failure to grasp the basic nature of the characters.

Like taking Bev and removing her strength, agency, and maternal aspect and making her a passive damsal in distress.
post #100 of 827

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. 

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