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

[aabattery]

Boycott? 

Edited August 9, 2017 by aabattery

[4815162342]

26 minutes ago, aabattery said:

Boycott? 

 

WB!

 

[TalismanRing]

23 hours ago, Boxofficerules said:

The thing about the book is that there is so much in it that you just couldn't film. It works on page but would be very hard (and expensive) to do on film. Let's just hope they do something a little better than what the mini series did.

There's a scene in the book they shouldn't put on film - and I wish wasn't in the book.

[baumer]

6 minutes ago, TalismanRing said:

There's a scene in the book they shouldn't put on film - and I wish wasn't in the book.

 

We've already discussed this for the past three months. It's not in the movie and it's basically something that cannot be filmed.

[Boxofficerules]

7 minutes ago, TalismanRing said:

There's a scene in the book they shouldn't put on film - and I wish wasn't in the book.

I'm getting fed up with that coming up. It's not in the movie so stop using it to try cause controversy, the amount of click baitey articles about it.

[TalismanRing]

9 minutes ago, Stutterng baumer Denbrough said:

 

We've already discussed this for the past three months. It's not in the movie and it's basically something that cannot be filmed.

I haven't been reading about the film but it not being in the film is a no brainer.  No studio would allow it.

[robertman2]

2 hours ago, aabattery said:

Boycott? 

Absolutely. Boycott the shit outta this trash

[KJsooner]

Can someone send me the spoilers through pm too?

[filmlover]

3 hours ago, aabattery said:

Boycott? 

What hath WB's deal with LEGO wrought.

[SLAM!]

4 hours ago, aabattery said:

Boycott? 

 

Well, I was already planning on avoiding this anyways, so now I have another reason.

Edited August 9, 2017 by slambros

[nomyth]

If you guys don't mind hearing spoilers, you should look up this YouTube blog I've been following. Just look up Emma G Grace YouTube channel and it should be the first thing that pops up. I've been obsessed with her videos for the past month. She's a big lover of the book, doesn't care for the 90's TV miniseries and is very objective and intelligent in her critiques. She just did a video on plot changes from the book.

[75Live]

is this Lego controversy just an elaborate setup for The Lego IT movie?   

 

 

[robertman2]

3 minutes ago, 75livesinDerry said:

is this Lego controversy just an elaborate setup for The Lego IT movie?   

 

 

You know, they could have used Pennywise as one of the Phantom Zone villains in Lego Batman

[baumer]

4 hours ago, nomyth said:

If you guys don't mind hearing spoilers, you should look up this YouTube blog I've been following. Just look up Emma G Grace YouTube channel and it should be the first thing that pops up. I've been obsessed with her videos for the past month. She's a big lover of the book, doesn't care for the 90's TV miniseries and is very objective and intelligent in her critiques. She just did a video on plot changes from the book.

 

Thanks for the  tip.

 

Personally, I'm in the same boat as her......love love love the book, lukewarm to the 90's version and can't wait to see the movie.  But I want to go in blind.  I don't want to know much about the movie.  I think it will be better that way.

 

And really, the changes from the book are still going to have to be prevalent.  Sure, they are giving it a 2.5 hour movie, but that's not nearly enough to cover all the kids stuff in the book, so if you're looking for a word for word adaptation, you're going to be disappointed.

[75Live]

2 minutes ago, Stutterng baumer Denbrough said:

 

Thanks for the  tip.

 

Personally, I'm in the same boat as her......love love love the book, lukewarm to the 90's version and can't wait to see the movie.  But I want to go in blind.  I don't want to know much about the movie.  I think it will be better that way.

 

And really, the changes from the book are still going to have to be prevalent.  Sure, they are giving it a 2.5 hour movie, but that's not nearly enough to cover all the kids stuff in the book, so if you're looking for a word for word adaptation, you're going to be disappointed.

 

Yeah I don't need a word for work adaptation either.  I love both mediums but yes a movie can only do so much plus not everything translates from the written word to the screen.

 

For instance, Watchmen is about a faithful adaptation that could have been made and that had to make some changes, as well.  The changes worked for the movie so it happens.

[baumer]

I'm so glad I wasn't familiar with the source material for Watchmen because that is one of my top ten super hero movies.

[The Panda]

When you have a massive book like IT, the only way you could get a word for word adaption is with a mini-series.

 

2 1/2 hours is enough for an effective movie that captures the highlights, tone and spirit of the novel though.  Especially if they're just following the kids in this movie.

[75Live]

1 minute ago, Stutterng baumer Denbrough said:

I'm so glad I wasn't familiar with the source material for Watchmen because that is one of my top ten super hero movies.

 

I was very familiar with it and it is still that high for  me too.

 

V for Vendetta was another one they did well even with some semi-big changes.  Still would probably be in my top 10 as well

[The Panda]

Also, with film/tv adaptions, I think people in general have to learn that they're just that, adaptions.

 

Ive never seen a TV/Film adaption where fans of the novel didn't complain that a scene was omitted, or something was added, and how they ruined the novel because they weren't 100% faithful to the material.

 

I personally think it's next to impossible to create a 100% faithful adaption of a book and still have a film that's just as effective, because they're different mediums.  There's things you can do on film that you can't do in a book, and there's things you can do in a book that can't translate into film.

 

When it comes to adapting novels, I do think it's almost always best to try to capture the same story, spirit and tone that the original author was going for.  There's a few exceptions (such as when you're adapting a rather weak work with a strong high concept idea like Jurassic Park), but most of the time when film/tv adaptors try something completely different it tends to fall on its face.

[Jonwo]

11 minutes ago, Stutterng baumer Denbrough said:

I'm so glad I wasn't familiar with the source material for Watchmen because that is one of my top ten super hero movies.

I actually prefer the film ending of Watchmen compared to the comic book version, I don't think the comic book ending would have worked on screen. 

 

2 minutes ago, El Panda Machos said:

Also, with film/tv adaptions, I think people in general have to learn that they're just that, adaptions.

 

Ive never seen a TV/Film adaption where fans of the novel didn't complain that a scene was omitted, or something was added, and how they ruined the novel because they weren't 100% faithful to the material.

 

I personally think it's next to impossible to create a 100% faithful adaption of a book and still have a film that's just as effective, because they're different mediums.  There's things you can do on film that you can't do in a book, and there's things you can do in a book that can't translate into film.

 

When it comes to adapting novels, I do think it's almost always best to try to capture the same story, spirit and tone that the original author was going for.  There's a few exceptions (such as when you're adapting a rather weak work with a strong high concept idea like Jurassic Park), but most of the time when film/tv adaptors try something completely different it tends to fall on its face.

Some of the best adaptations actually do make changes or cuts even if the fans don't like it, The Mist for example has a more morbid ending, Lord of the Rings even though the films are long had to cut a lot to make it less unwieldy.