It | Sept. 8, 2017 | Warner Brothers | Andy Muschietti directing. Trailer on Page 12 NO SPOILER DISCUSSION. Certified Fresh on Rotten Tomatoes

[75Live]

1 minute ago, cheesypoofs said:

They could cast Seth green as Richie just for shits and giggles haha

 

yeah that would be almost too meta, but also be a great touch  

[cheesypoofs]

1 minute ago, 75Live said:

 

yeah that would be almost too meta, but also be a great touch  

I'd honestly love if he had at least some sort of small role lol

[75Live]

1 minute ago, cheesypoofs said:

I'd honestly love if he had at least some sort of small role lol

 

it would be funny if he just walked by or something or yeah was in the background somewhere

[DAR]

I'd think it'd be interesting if they case a big name for Stan.   

[Rman823]

53 minutes ago, DAR said:

I'd think it'd be interesting if they case a big name for Stan.   That would really throw audiences not familiar with the book off.

I'm still pulling for Joseph Gordon Levitt. 

[JB33]

Just sitting down to watch this again. Didn't plan on it at all but just couldn't help It! I'm completely consumed by Pennywise, the Losers' Club, and the town of Derry.

 

Credit for my new obsession goes to the marketing of the movie, the movie itself but also @Stutterng baumer Denbrough's persistent stanning for the movie and endorsement of the novel. Thanks baumer!

[baumer]

3 hours ago, JB33 said:

Just sitting down to watch this again. Didn't plan on it at all but just couldn't help It! I'm completely consumed by Pennywise, the Losers' Club, and the town of Derry.

 

Credit for my new obsession goes to the marketing of the movie, the movie itself but also @Stutterng baumer Denbrough's persistent stanning for the movie and endorsement of the novel. Thanks baumer!

 

It makes me very happy to see people like yourself getting interested in the novel.  The film is fantastic but once you discover how detailed and beautiful the book is, it's not something you'll forget.

[Goffe]

One of my biggest problems with the movie is that it should have reduced the Losers club to just ~4 kids. Movie suffers for sticking with 7 kids because 1) most of them are underdeveloped 2) since every kid must have one big individual scare scene, the first act ends up being 60-70 mintes long, fucking up the act structure.

 

Also, it’s kind insulting how bad the adults and bullies are written.

Edited September 21, 2017 by Goffe

[The Futurist]

Yeah but nope.

I had the constant impression I was seeing the Disney/Bob Iger version of a way more nasty, vicious, unpleasant book : would it be a fair assessment ?

Kids were just too cute & perfect for their own good, score was everywhere and overpowering.

Despite some nice creativity, most of the clown stuff was just NOT working for me, it looked more goofy & grotesque than scary and creepy.

And I kept thinking about

Spoiler

Freddie Krueger

the whole time, which came first historically by the way ?

Spoiler

 

The blood sink scene looked way too much like Nightmare Elm Street for me, even if the scene was probably in the original book.

 

 

 

 

So I guess this movie works more with GA as a nice little story with heart & cute kids, a  coming of age, Stand By Me/Goonies kinda adventure  than as a living nightmare.

It was definitely  The feel good movie of 2017, if there ever was one.

Say NO to

Spoiler

childhood's fears,

YAY !

 

When it comes to horror, I lean towards visionary directors like Wan, Sanberg & Shyamalan.

 

Oh, and this 80's nostalgia porn can die now I think.

Edited September 22, 2017 by The Futurist

[MinaTakla]

 

[NoobSaibot]

This would have been unthinkable before the first trailer came out. Funny how things change.

[Water Bottle]

I watched it again today and while I still very much enjoyed it, the way the film was structured to me seems weak. It's like "here's two scary scenes, now a character development scene, now a plot development scene, now two more scary scenes, rinse and repeat."

 

Also it's weird. I feel like most films are too long for the most part. I feel like It could have been longer. Could have been a horror epic film (while keeping it to just the kids). There's a lot of material that I feel (despite never having read the book) wasn't there that could have really added to the movie.

[dashrendar44]

My only issue is that the repetitive aspect in presenting each kid (7 is a lot), their respective fear and ensuing encounters, feels like self-contained vignettes of heterogen nature pasted in between an Amblin's Coming-Of-Age comedy that have almost no bearing on the children's behaviour and following interactions until all of them have their scary trip (except for Beverley I guess since she's the only one that opens up to the boys and reaches out to certify she's not seeing imaginary things), so only then they might feel the need to share their mutual scary encounters with each other almost an hour in (Richie is the only one that get his personal encounter with Pennywise occuring in act 2 during the Neibolt haunted house trip after the projection scene sequence which was supposed to be the moment that ties all their personal fears into one). It's like one scene the kid gets almost killed by a psycho clown and the next that kid acts like nothing happened and resume their holidays instead of being in a state of shock and telling his friends about it.

 

Also the fact that *book spoilers*

 

they remove the Losers building a dam on the river during their holidays giving them a cementing purpose beyond fighting IT (And foreshadowing Ben becoming an architect which is all lost in the movie where he's given Mike's history librarian role)

, so there's nothing really tying them at any given moment so Beverly acts as a plot device to give them motivation and a sense of fraternity bond that having a summer project independent from the events did provide in the book and series.

Edited September 22, 2017 by dashrendar44

[Noctis]

1 hour ago, dashrendar44 said:

My only issue is that the repetitive aspect in presenting each kid (7 is a lot), their respective fear and ensuing encounters, feels like self-contained vignettes of heterogen nature pasted in between an Amblin's Coming-Of-Age comedy that have almost no bearing on the children's behaviour and following interactions until all of them have their scary trip (except for Beverley I guess since she's the only one that opens up to the boys and reaches out to certify she's not seeing imaginary things), so only then they might feel the need to share their mutual scary encounters with each other almost an hour in (Ritchie is the only one that get his personal encounter with Pennywise occuring in act 2 during the Neibolt haunted house trip after the projection scene sequence which was supposed to be the moment that ties all their personal fears into one). It's like one scene the kid gets almost killed by a psycho clown and the next that kid acts like nothing happened and resume their holidays instead of being in a state of shock and telling his friends about it.

 

Also the fact that they remove the Losers building a dam on the river during their holidays giving them a cementing purpose beyond fighting IT (And foreshadowing Ben becoming an architect which is all lost in the movie where he's given Mike's history librarian role), so there's nothing really tying them at any given moment so Beverly acts as a plot device to give them motivation and a sense of fraternity bond that having a summer project independent from the events did provide in the book and series.

[dashrendar44]

1 hour ago, Noctis said:

[Spidey Freak]

3 hours ago, dashrendar44 said:

It's like one scene the kid gets almost killed by a psycho clown and the next that kid acts like nothing happened and resume their holidays instead of being in a state of shock and telling his friends about it.

Children have an uncanny ability to put up a facade and not share their experiences no matter how traumatic, in fear of not being believed and then ridiculed of. Least of all share them with their peers. Even Beverly didn't initially tell the boys what happened and just showed them her bathroom, waiting for their reaction. 

 

I liked it because it is realistic and shows how lonely and vulnerable children can be even when they were in a group. When they finally opened up to each other about their experiences, it was a therapeutic process and the first strike against It and all of their respective personal demons.

[dashrendar44]

4 hours ago, Spidey Freak said:

Children have an uncanny ability to put up a facade and not share their experiences no matter how traumatic, in fear of not being believed and then ridiculed of. Least of all share them with their peers. Even Beverly didn't initially tell the boys what happened and just showed them her bathroom, waiting for their reaction. 

 

Because they would be afraid of what? Mockery from their only friends if they share their feelings? They're already the "Losers" club, they wouldn't have to fear their breathren like he'd bully them for expressing themselves (except foulmouth Richie) that's why they're friends in the first place, they know that they won't be judged and bullied for being what they are when they hang out together like Henry and his gang are putting them through. 

 

That's why I didn't feel their bound on a spiritual level beyond the obligatory surface "This fucking clown has it for all of us so we better just have to be together to get through this shit because well we're fucked if we mind our own business otherwise."

 

After the bathroom cleaning, they kinda did confide to each other but the editing seem to gloss over the immediate aftermath of each Pennywise attack to resume normal activities like nothing happen. I don't blame the kids actors but the directing kinda hops and jumps through beats without connective tissue character wise.

Edited September 22, 2017 by dashrendar44

[Spidey Freak]

13 minutes ago, dashrendar44 said:

Because they would be afraid of what? Mockery from their only friends if they share their feelings? They're already the "Losers" club, they wouldn't have to fear their breathren like he'd bully them for expressing themselves (except foulmouth Ritchie) that's why they're friends in the first place, they know that they won't be judged and bullied for being what they are when they hang out together like Henry and his gang are putting them through. That's why I didn't feel their bound on a spiritual level beyond the obligatory surface "This fucking clown has it for all of us so we better just have to be together to get through this shit because well we're fucked if we mind our own business otherwise."

Children below the age of 15 do not share personal experiences of that depth irrespective of the social standing of their pack (and Pennywise appeared in a clown form to just 3 kids if I'm remembering correctly, while for the rest the appearances were representations of their personal fears which led them to believe they were hallucinating). The lower rung packs are not necessarily formed out of choice but necessity due to a harsh pecking order. In a town like Derry which discouraged its residents from speaking of its evils, the children would be the most vulnerable and have an inability to share their feelings. Even the adults were manipulating the children to keep silent. "Do those boys know you are my little girl?" wasn't just a declaration of dominion over Beverly by her father but him also trying to ensure she didn't reveal his abuse to her friends. 

 

The Losers were the ones to finally reject the silencing due to their experiences and perceptions, but that didn't mean they were invulnerable from the start. It was believable that an external factor like Beverly could finally get them to talk. And she too needed something tangible like a bloodied bathroom to prove herself.

[dashrendar44]

4 hours ago, Spidey Freak said:

Children below the age of 15 do not share personal experiences of that depth irrespective of the social standing of their pack (and Pennywise appeared in a clown form to just 3 kids if I'm remembering correctly, while for the rest the appearances were representations of their personal fears which led them to believe they were hallucinating). The lower rung packs are not necessarily formed out of choice but necessity due to a harsh pecking order. In a town like Derry which discouraged its residents from speaking of its evils, the children would be the most vulnerable and have an inability to share their feelings. Even the adults were manipulating the children to keep silent. "Do those boys know you are my little girl?" wasn't just a declaration of dominion over Beverly by her father but him also trying to ensure she didn't reveal his abuse to her friends. 

 

The Losers were the ones to finally reject the silencing due to their experiences and perceptions, but that didn't mean they were invulnerable from the start. It was believable that an external factor like Beverly could finally get them to talk. And she too needed something tangible like a bloodied bathroom to prove herself.

 

Sure about the silencing being ingrained but tieing back to my original point, in the movie their friendship seems to be only driven by circumstances when they speak up about their common plight when movie script dictates they have to speak it up to move the plot forward mechanically. Up to this point, the kids just act disconnected and casual together from their immediate emotional turmoil caused by Pennywise in their behavior and manners.(Your point is valid but I'd like to see the angst simmering, contrasting before and after for each kid). Maybe it's the editing cutting away leaving portions out or the kids acting being spliced out but their respective encounters with Pennywise don't seem to add up or be an influence in their subsequent interactions with their friends. Hence, the roller coaster feeling of constant relief set pieces after set pieces, kids characters go from 0 to 11 level of hysteria then back to 0 when it has to be a crescendo adding up psychologically and building up tension between the kids. Immediate consequences are not felt nor conveyed by the kids. Jump Scare. Pennywise attack. Ok. Next.Ritchie makes a dick joke *rinse/repeat x 7.

 

At least, I would have liked to see one boy being troubled enough after his Pennywise's encounter for the other to pick it up before Beverley comes forward to them verbally*, underlying that there is a special and empathetic friendship connection beyond words that existed before we meet The Losers at the beginning of the movie. I don't ask for one kid to be overly depressed to spark discussions among his friends but a subtle cue that he is affected and bothered afterwards.

 

*Of course, the only girl of the group got to be THE GIRL, their triggering factor for their actions, the love interest crush, the damsel in distress, their counselor to speak their feelings up, the plot device to motivate the boys friendship rekindling in the 3rd act, etc. That's why I prefer Beverley in the series, she was not that horny boys idealization and slut-shamed outsider when everything seems to revolve around her menstruation, she was a full member of the Losers club soldiering on alongside her friends to defeat IT, not that fearless Pixie chick trope rocking their world turned damsel in distress giving them a sense of purpose.

 

 

Edited September 22, 2017 by dashrendar44

[Gumby]

Did the kids drop as many F bombs in the book?