Stephen King's "IT"

[Totenkindly]

TV Show -- Hour 2

Some of the viewing is sad and/or reflective. The kid who plays Eddie actually delivers his lines better than most, but I see he never really went on to do much in acting after this. The girl playing Bev actually I think starred in Gingersnaps (along with Katharine Isabelle, who also had a bit part in Nolan's "Insomnia" and apparently the Bev actress was also with her at the funeral sequence, lol). Meanwhile Jonathan Brandis (who played Bill) went on to do some bigger things (like SeaQuest TV series) but lost out for the Anakin Skywalker role to Hayden Christesen in 2002, and then committed suicide the following year. (He was very troubled and depressed about a lot of things.) He actually was a decent actor, and it showed here in his ability to emote and inspire as Bill even as a kid.

Location changes: It's kind of wild how locations were changed for the show. The rock throwing battle in the stream got changed to a quarry in the show. Also the house on Niebold isn't really used as a location at all -- and it looks like they had a "final battle" with IT in the mid-sewer, not the actual deep-sewer battle behind the arcane door which mirrors where the adults fight IT eventually. This actually meshes with the film version as well.

Book adapting: It's kind of incredible watching this, because there are location changes as noted above which are actually huge -- but then the script actually captures a lot of small scenes directly from the book. Like, pretty much all the scenes where each character shows up in Derry I *think* is pretty much right out of the book directly... which surprised me.

Also, a lot of shots of Silver (the bike), and Mike and Bill riding it as kids and as adults.

We finally get Stan's opening (and, uh, closing) scene here, with Richard Masur. Pretty much verbatim.

Scary parts: The director did a lot of indie/low-budget horror and I feel like it shows. Like now there's a lot of stuff I think is supposed to emulate the Deadlights, and first-person viewpoints from Pennywise's perspective. I'm more puzzled/unsure of it than I am scared, aside from the weird shot of Belch getting folded in half and pulled into a pipe by his waist/butt, so his head/hands/feet go into the tube last. I didn't particularly find it scary, although the finishing part where Pennywise is trying to kill Stan, Bev pegs him (she is firing silver earrings rather than melted down silver dollars), and then he does this crazy leap into a small hole and squeezes through it, and they try to pull him back out. I think only about 30% of this stuff is unsettling/scary at best.

Pennywise: Tim Curry continues to sell this film. Every time he's on screen I both cringe and laugh hysterically because he's so creepy weird. I mean, it's hilarious, he's milking this killer clown motif for everything it is worth. And they even used the "Prince Albert in a can" joke, and Curry delivers it so perfectly. He is funny AF -- definitely worth whatever they paid him for this role.

Music: The music actually fits better into the background here and didn't seem as annoying, and had a bit more variety. IOW, better than the first hour.

Overall impressions: It's really unfortunate they only have 3 hours because they actually devoted a lot of time doing each character's intro sequence as an adult, and then their individual returns to Derry -- but this does not leave a lot of time for the meat of the story. The book itself has been condensed to a smattering of incidents and isn't nearly as rich as the book. A lot of it seems shorthand, so if you read the book you can layer in a lot of stuff from memory (which helps), but on its own it's kind of the super-duper abridged version of the story and thus loses a lot of depth.

However, I really like that they tried to capture the magic of Lucky 7, the Losers Club. It's really evidence in the rock fight in the quarry, and you can really feel it when Mike shows up that the "circle is now complete." And they don't do Stan's intro until after this point, so you are seeing often how Stan is the last to agree and wants to run/avoid everything, so it's all setting up Stan's response as an adult to Mike's phone call -- and how bad this is for the Loser's club because their Circle now has been broken, leaving the adults at even MORE of a disadvantage than they had as kids.

I still think the direction for the emotional scenes isn't often great, although raw talent shines through from the cast, and some of the "horror" stuff is bewildering or a bit cheesy rather than scary. Meanwhile the script does the best it can to condense a 450,000 word / 1000+ page story into three hours. (For reference, a page of screenplay is a little more than minute of film typically, and is only 200 words.)

 

[Lexicon]

Okay. Since it had been decades since I'd see the TV miniseries, I figured I'd give it another chance and then later watch the films and see how those measure up.

The miniseries is around 3 hours.
The films total about 5 hours.


Let's go!

---- TV MINISERIES

I'll be as fair as I can, also as someone who read the book in 1986 while I was at college. (I think it took me maybe a week to get through 1000+ pages -- needless to say, I was engrossed and I should have been studying or something....) But it's been some years since I last read the book. That being said.

HOUR #1

Pennywise: There's no one quite like Tim Curry. He's appeared 4-5 times in the first hour and each time is creepy and hilarious. He knew what the assignment was, and I think no one can look at that version of a clown anymore without freaking out.

Casting, Casting, Casting: Here, I realize is where some of my problems are. Some casting matches what I experienced in the books, others is shit.

Losers - Kids

• Good casting: Richie (Seth freaking Green, lol), Eddie (looks/acts perfect),
• Adequate casting: Beverly (just kinda average), Ben (he's the wrong kind of fat/personality-- the kind who will grow up to the easy-going blocker on the high school football team, they needed a pudgier and smaller overweight kid who is also more geeky/sensitive -- I couldn't believe the bullies would fixate on this version of Ben, as he was too physically intimidating, and they are looking for victims), Stan (hasn't done much yet),

Losers - Adults

• Good casting: Eddie (aside from the blonde locks), but he definitely emotes correctly, I can believe he's the smallest and weakest physically of the bunch
• Adequate casting: Ben (John Ritter), I'm not yet convinced he is a good Ben + physical description and manner is nothing like the book; Bill (Richard Thomas), again not really sure on him, and he's got all his hair! Those are big departures visually; Richie (Harry Anderson) is adequate to maybe good although I'm still not sure on Anderson's natural softness properly emoting Richie's fixation on being naturally offensive; Stanly hasn't yet shown up as an adult.
• Bad casting: Beverly (Annette O' Toole), she's just terrible and doesn't really stand out at all, yes, true viewers, this was the state of TV actresses in the 80's where someone like Annette O' Toole could get plumb TV roles, she's really a stock actress for pseudo-soap operas. I just don't see any of Bevvie's strength in her, just the weak/mousy parts.

Others

• Adequate casting: The bullies (including Bowers); Bev's dad (although he's kind of a caricature); Audra (English actress, checkbox filled);
• Bad casting: Bev's "partner" Tom, he's a different character in the book, this seems like the more femme pretty boy jock we're familiar with from teen 80's romps with his skinnier build. Tom should have been a little more dull-witted, less pretty, more believably resorting to beating her to keep in her place; Eddie's mom (not the right type of caricature)

Music: I about keeled over when I saw this won the Emmy that year for TV music composition. Like WTF. I mostly HATE the music, it's either thin, or melodramatic, or conventional. However, maybe 20% of the time, there was an unexpected musical response that I thought was kinda cool. (I think once there was an unexpected electric guitar, for example. Jarring, at the right moment.)

Directing: I still haven't decided how I feel about framing. Some of it is okay; other times the blocking is really cheesy (like when Bill's parents rush into the room as he's looking at George's photo album). Everything is very 50's in those moments, but of course the setting is the 50's. In fact, Georgie's delivery is very "50's kid delivery" as well. Emotionally, I hate the directing. The first hour is very melodramatic, there is no nuance, it's all either quiet/common language or screaming at the camera; and some of this is the fault of the screenplay, but a better director could have given his cast more nuance direction. Basically, the best scenes so far have been the ones with Curry in them, overall, and I think the director has more experience in that genre; but he can't direct real emotional content worth shit. My view is that based on which scenes are better, ANYTHING good emotionally in the first hour is a result of cast talent, not directing.

Storytelling: This is mostly a script thing, and it's actually a nice blend of 50's/80's and flashbacks. It's really too bad about the time constraints because it's causing the intro's to the adult versions of the characters to be truncated emotionally. But it's actually a nice balance so far. I also think it was a good thing to do Mike calling each one of them in turn and watching them each react to his call. This is the book approach and it's effective in the show because you wonder what would scare them THAT much.

... surprisingly, even after those criticisms, so far the miniseries has actually been better than my memory. So there is that.



EDIT: Random gripe. Ben (Ritter) -- "you bet your fern"??? Wtf is that? The line is "you bet your fur." (which is like saying "You bet your life / you bet your hiney / etc). YOU BET YOUR FERN IS NOT THE LINE. BUT IT IS SAID MULTIPLE TIMES AND EVEN IN THE SUBTITLES. "You bet your fern" makes no fucking sense whatsoever, even when you are just making up things for "You bet your [thing]". Like, that is just another leap beyond dumb, for nouns to pick.

Your assessment totally tracks. I'll add to this more later, but my first kneejerk response was to say THANK YOU I FUCKING HATED "YOU BET YOUR FERN"!

That pissed 12 year-old me off to no end. I'd even pulled out my hardcover after watching, just to verify. FUR, dammit. FUR!!!

 

[Totenkindly]

Your assessment totally tracks. I'll add to this more later, but my first kneejerk response was to say THANK YOU I FUCKING HATED "YOU BET YOUR FERN"!

That pissed 12 year-old me off to no end. I'd even pulled out my hardcover after watching, just to verify. FUR, dammit. FUR!!!

Yeah.... and why the hell would they change it? Like, it's not necessarily a great line from the book to start with, but they randomly changed it to something REALLY dumb for... no reason whatsoever??

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

Your assessment totally tracks. I'll add to this more later, but my first kneejerk response was to say THANK YOU I FUCKING HATED "YOU BET YOUR FERN"!

That pissed 12 year-old me off to no end. I'd even pulled out my hardcover after watching, just to verify. FUR, dammit. FUR!!!

I don't remember this at all. I need context.

 

[Totenkindly]

I don't remember this at all. I need context.

In the TV version, Ben brings a girl home to his fancy modern apartment. He's drunk. He's rambling about stuff from his childhood and says, "You bet your fern," then explains it's a cool phrase he used to use when he was a kid. Even the subtitles says "Fern" and I've seen people complaining about it online a decent amount.

The phrase in the book is, "You bet your FUR," and is used in the book a decent amount by the kids.

As a side note, this is very different from the opening book scene for Ben. I think he goes to a bar, orders shots, talks to the bartender -- and I can't quite remember whether he just would always order them but never drink them including in the scene this time, or whether this time he does drink the shots which makes it clear how rattled he is. I think it's hinted that he used to drink but has been sober for a long time?

 

[Lexicon]

I don't remember this at all. I need context.

No you DID NOT, John Ritter!


(don't mind Cricket meowing while i recorded this; he wants dinner)

 

[Lexicon]

Yeah.... and why the hell would they change it? Like, it's not necessarily a great line from the book to start with, but they randomly changed it to something REALLY dumb for... no reason whatsoever??

Yeah, it's not like it was somehow too offensive for TV. That's the only 'reason' I could come up with, but it still makes NO sense.

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

View attachment 29281

No you DID NOT, John Ritter!


(don't mind Cricket meowing while i recorded this; he wants dinner)

Oh! I was listening to a podcast where they discussed Dreamcatcher, and they were discussing how King seems fond of inventing new bits of slang for his characters to share. In the case of Dreamcatcher, it's fuckaroo and fuckaree. I think they found it a little off-putting.

I can't figure out why they would make such a small change instead of leaving it out entirely.

 

[The Cat]

Oh! I was listening to a podcast where they discussed Dreamcatcher, and they were discussing how King seems fond of inventing new bits of slang for his characters to share. In the case of Dreamcatcher, it's fuckaroo and fuckaree. I think they found it a little off-putting.

I can't figure out why they would make such a small change instead of leaving it out entirely.

Steven King likes to write like human beings talk. Television mini series writers...aren't.

 

[Totenkindly]

TV Series -- Last Hour Part 1

I still have 30 mins to go so I'll edit that in later.

Chinese Restaurant -- again, here's the issue with the short run time, there's a lot of stuff they tried to put in the show in way too short a space so it makes no sense. Like Bev walks in, makes a comment, and ... passes out? There's no indication why unless you have read the book and then also she explains it a minute or two after she wakes up -- " a flood of memories overwhelmed her." This is the kind of thing an indie film would handle from first-person perspective to put you in her head, so you can understand why she wiped out. But the show has a lot of stuff that is laughable or bizarre if you haven't read the book and know the subtext for everything.

(It's also bizarre how they have Bev kissing everyone, it can't help but suggest the scene that is probably always unfilmable, later in the sewers.)

They do make an attempt to do the chinese fortune cookie moment, most of it's funny rather than scary although the baby bird is cringey and the hairy leg popping out of Bill's is terrible. But case in point is that the owner doesn't see the mess of a room, only they can see these things.

Henry Bowers -- The casting makes him look ridiculous. Pretty much accurate, but the director decides to randomly throw in some bizarre hallucinations for kicks, when you just in the show expect Henry to stab him. The whole Henry/Mike fight is pretty silly... and then it's hilarious that they just run Mike out to the car to take him for medical treatment and leave Henry bleeding out on the floor without another mention.

Additional Scenes -- At the hotel/overnight B&B, they actually try to slide in a few other scenes as flashbacks now from the adults, including Stan and Bill escaping from the random Mummy on Silver, and Bev and the gang cleaning her bathroom. But it's kind of confusing because we already saw them "beat IT" as kids so these flashbacks don't have as much power and it's hard to place them in time. (This was more effective in the book where both narratives are moving ahead at the same pace, so they haven't beaten IT yet -- the narrative tension is building. ) Also, we get Ben's story about how/why he lost all his weight. It's a great story in the book and is decent enough in the show, although it's undermined by Ritter being a bit overweight in the show; in the book, Ben is thin as a rail (I think?) because he's kept that weight off for years and has been fastidious bout it.

He Thrusts His Fists... -- Bill finds the sheet of paper but it feels pretty late in the game for this phrase to come up if they want it to have some power.

Anyway, dare I say it again that the Curry scenes are the best?

It's worth looking at all the posters and wall hangings. In the library for example are posters for Bill's published books.

-- Be back soon -- you bet your furp!

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

They do make an attempt to do the chinese fortune cookie moment, most of it's funny rather than scary although the baby bird is cringey and the hairy leg popping out of Bill's is terrible. But case in point is that the owner doesn't see the mess of a room, only they can see these things.

This I always remembered as being really scary. Who isn't scared of finding weird shit in their food, like little weevils and things? It tied into primal fears like that one scene in Poltergeist. There is also the sense that when you are in Derry, you're never safe from IT.

The same podcast I mentioned earlier described it as really goofy when seen by adults, so I'm curious to know what I would think of it now.

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

I just watched the clip of the Chinese restaurant scene. Some of it is goofy. Some of it is still pretty gross. That crab thing is the most disgusting.

 

[Totenkindly]

I just watched the clip of the Chinese restaurant scene. Some of it is goofy. Some of it is still pretty gross. That crab thing is the most disgusting.

Yeah, some of it was silly. Some of it was a bit gross. I dunno about the crab that was chattering, it looked like a windup toy rather than real monster.

This scene happens in the film too, so I want to compare it when I watch that later.

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

Yeah, some of it was silly. Some of it was a bit gross. I dunno about the crab that was chattering, it looked like a windup toy rather than real monster.

This scene happens in the film too, so I want to compare it when I watch that later.

I don't know, man, that crab thing just bothers me. I think it might be related to the way it mostly hides inside the cookie. You'd reach for it and then it would pinch you and it would pull off a finger or something.

 

[Totenkindly]

I don't know, man, that crab thing just bothers me. I think it might be related to the way it mostly hides inside the cookie. You'd reach for it and then it would pinch you and it would pull off a finger or something.

I think the only crabs that bother me are the 4' giant spider crabs. Those things are creepy AF.

Needless to say, if one of those popped out of a little fortune cookie, I'd scream and run.

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

I think the only crabs that bother me are the 4' giant spider crabs. Those things are creepy AF.

Needless to say, if one of those popped out of a little fortune cookie, I'd scream and run.

They actually look like IT at the end of this.

 

[Totenkindly]

TV Series -- Last Hour Part 2

Weirdly, there's some actually good stuff in the last half hour before the final silliness.

Sure, the Ben and Bev stuff gets super-melodramatic, so... eh, no.

But then Bill comes out and everyone is about to leave Derry, and he tells them he's not going to leave (basically even if he has to do things alone). And it cuts back to a memory of young Bill (a really great Jonathan Brandis) begging his friends, "Help me. Please help me," as they all remember Bill pleading for their help when they were kids. And it melts their hearts (heck, it moved me) and they all agree to go despite Richie being kind of begrudging.

Then there is the boat, which floats straight to Bill in the sewer, as a ploy of IT to torment him -- but he puts it back in the water after that scene to have it lead the group to The Door.

And there Eddie also basically tells them all then that he was never really with anyone in his life because he could never be with anyone he didn't love... and frankly the only people he loved in his life was his friends.

So they go through the door together... and then everything kinda gets silly. IT *does* look like a giant spider crab! And it's stop motion, clumsy at times. And not really that scary. The whole confrontation is rather silly -- and it's not clear what exactly kills Eddie. (In the book, it's REALLY clear.... and horrific ... and I really like how King ties it all together with Eddie's fear of germs, it's so beautifully written, because now he is being purged of that fear) but his final words I think are accurate.

What works in the book looks really terrible with the crappy fake spider crab thing, as they beat it to death and tear out its heart. This is like watching the middle-school play version of the book.

The end feels very truncated. And the whole Bill/Audra bit which is again just so beautifully written by King (it helps in the story that the entire Derry downtown was wrecked in the storm that accompanied the final battle with it, so there's ruptures and holes in the street, it's really clear that Bill is regaining his lost childhood magic by doing things that are extremely dangerous ,reclaiming his faith of youth, and it basically awakens Audra) doesn't work nearly as well in the show, esp with him stopping int he middle of traffic and them hugging, lol. I also distinctly think he had Audra behind him on the bike, in the book, with her arms wrapped around his waist? And then he feels her wake up?

Summary: There's actually a few real emotional moments in the last half hour of the TV Show, although it then gets really silly with the fake spider who doesn't feel dangerous at all + the superfast resolution to everything.

All in all, the series was actually BETTER than I had recalled. I think it could have done more with a few recasts + an actual director who could shape the emotional arcs. And of course with an extra hour of screen time. With prestige TV series actually possible nowadays and some really wonderful shows that have been made (King's "The Outsider" wasn't perfect for example, but it was really nice for a 10-episode story), I still am feeling like IT would have always been better as a season-long series on cable/streaming now. You could actually do the story justice with ten hours.

So stay tuned as I eventually rewatch the films -- which I thought were decent at times and other times missed the mark.

 

[Totenkindly]

Film: "IT: Chapter One" -- First 40 minutes

The first 40 minutes or so of the film are pretty stellar.

Pennywise: I like both performances (Curry and Skarsgard). They are not the same performance. Curry definitely comes off as a demented clown. Skarsgard feels like a monster who lives in the sewer who happens to look like a clown sometimes. I think Curry is more on the nose, but that fits the actor -- more outrageous, more direct. Skarsgard has a kind of dangerous playfulness. An adult can watch how he builds a rapport with kids while immediately knowing he's not to be trusted, but you can TOTALLY see why a kid might be taken in. Even the art design is good for this, his eyes look friendly sometimes and the buck teeth make him seem less threatening, except somehow Skarsgard is able to change how dangerous his eyes look while talking -- he feels good, then suddenly his expression makes him feel horribly wrong.

Georgie: This whole sequence is very well-done as well, and I feel in this version there's this beautiful multi-layered effect of understanding why George is warming up to Pennywise while at the same time Pennywise feels very dangerous underneath. There's also a sweetness to his interactions with Bill early on, and his misgivings of the basement and what might lurk in the dark sets the tone for the later sewer grate encounter.

Directing: As much as I might criticize him later, one thing Muschetti is good at is directing the kids. The framing and pacing and camera angles and presentation of the film are also great. It actually feels like one seamless emotional story through the first 40 minutes, everything flows nicely. The scene where Henry cuts Ben is just like the book and flows perfectly, and it even weaves in (without having to use words) how Derry itself is the problem, there's a pall of dark acceptance and mutual disregard that Pennywise has laid over the entire city. Also, I have to say that some of the language in the TV show sounded silly (probably in part due to the censors), but here an R-rated version of the film uses actual pretty appropriate language, like the bullies' nicknames for Ben and others.

Cinematography: This is great film framing/shooting in general. It looks great, the sets look real, the special effects look real, it also gives a sense of Derry as a town with all the pull-back shots of both the barrens and Derry itself.

Music: Music is emotionally supportive of the film plotting and scenework.

The kids: Honestly, this is a great ensemble. I think Mike and Stan might be the least memorable of the bunch but are still within ballpark of the characters. Hilariously the 80's was a time where it was acceptable for boys to get perms. (At least, it looks like a perm to me.) As adolescents/teens, Sophia Lillis and Jaeden Martell were at the top of their cinema child talent list. Finn Wolfhard I think was overrated (due to the publicity around Stranger Things), but he's perfectly fine as Richie. I like that Eddie is also fast to talk and retort (it kind of fits with his adult persona in the book of a limo service owner/driver in NYC), but he has a sense of what is appropriate while Richie's verbal diarrhea seems to be more whimsical in its content + he seems very unaware of what is appropriate to say vs not say. He always takes things too far. This version of Ben is actually far more appropriate -- the smarter, softer, and more appropriately overweight Ben -- and yeah, those nicknames were used in the 80's. Sophia Lillis actually is great at catching both the vulnerability and the strength of Bev, although I think she's a little more self-aware than book Bev. it's both great and sad how she is able to play the pharmacist -- she's aware of her own power as a female, even young, and uses it to manipulate a cringy older man to her advantage -- but boy that's a dangerous game to play and also causes rumors to spread. Finally, when the kids hang out together, it all FEELS right -- like, this is stuff kids said, its stuff kids did, and the pacing all feels very real and natural... AND ALL THE KIDS FEEL DIFFERENT. This last part is important, they really feel like they are separate individuals responding differently to the same dialogue.

Other cast: The bullies feel pretty typical for bullies I remember in the 80's growing up. I like how it's suggested Bowers is a bully because he hates being the kid of a town cop + his dad might also be a bully. My town still had an old-style pharmacy as well; typical small-town stuff. Oh, here's a biggie -- Eddie's mother is actually much more like her book version, than the TV show version. I really like this. She also seems like she wants to slap Richie repeatedly but she has too much trouble moving from in front of her soap operas.

The framework: I understand why the two films decided to do kids for the first and adults for the second, although it is losing one of the coolest things about the book -- in that the reader/audience only knows as much as the protagonists do, and King controls our memory of the both time plotlines by revealing them semi-simultaneously in the book. Here, the audience knows what happens to the kids first, even if they do not remember. (e.g., Memento as another film that makes great use of controlled revelation of past events). This is a big difference from the book.

Initial events: This film has to introduce the kids since we don't get the book introductions to the adults when Stan calls each. I think the film is pretty strong in this regard, even with some scenes that don't appear in the book -- for example, Stan's encounter with the "woman from the painting." Ben has the actual encounter in the library. Bill, we see up front with George and then how his parents have responded to his brother's death. The writers also seem to better slip in historical events naturally to inform the viewer, versus the typical "infodumps" of Derry history appearing in the TV show script.

I know this is pretty glowing for the films so far, but I remember it's how I felt when I saw them in the theater.
The first part of the first film was actually pretty on the mark, even with its changes.

--- Next 50 minutes

Really great moments in this part, some of them original.

The few minutes where they jump in the quarry and swim emotionally captures the entire Loser's Club feel. It's perhaps the sweetest moment in the film, and it ties to the sweetest / bittersweetest moments of the books.

The slide projector moment in the garage is maybe the best new addition to the story that actually feels like it might have been in the original book aside from the slide projector itself. Just brilliant, using a speeding up projector to slowly shift into a film style visual, with Pennywise inserting itself into reality. And the kids' responses all feel organic.

Another great moment from the book, with Bev's bathroom, the tape measure, the blood gouts, and the cleaning of the bathroom by the Losers. This is handled so perfectly. Again, you also see Muschetti using visual language to describe character and story points -- we have Ben seeing the postcard he sent Bev with his poem (so he's happy) but then sees her again with Bill alone in the bathroom (sad) and the dialogue between Bev and Bill revealing to her that Bill did not write it. But nothing is said directly. It's all visuals and subtext. This is the power of film vs info dump and/or book text. Also, the camerawork as Bev runs down the fire escape on the back of her building is so well-done.

Bill encounters a ghost of Georgie: (was this in the book? Man, it's been a long time.) Really well handled, though, and Pennywise is more interested in scaring Bill than necessarily eating him right now. Also -- two mentions of the Turtle in the space of a few minutes.

The House on Neiboldt Street: Classic location from the book, updated to reflect the 80's. The scenes in the house are stellar and unsettling, and the house itself was dressed really nice by the production crew. It's becoming clear that this version of Pennywise almost feeds more on fear than flesh (although flesh comes during or later), and it seems to have been physically hurt by Bev since it retreats almost as if to reconsider its strategy. I don't think IT's ever been rebuffed/refused before.

The Classic Rock Fight: I like how the film feels brutal. Like, these are big rocks, and they could have easily hurt/killed anyone involved. It's not surprising the bullies ran once they realized they might actually get hurt. But it's filmed in a way that it does feel no-holds-barred.

Again, great casting with Jaeden Martell and the writing for Bill -- he naturally ends up showing leadership in various scenes, because he is the one with either the obsession or the vision to destroy IT, and the others naturally give him heed even when they disagree. It's a show, not tell, thing.

I don't recall now if there was ever a falling out in the book between the kids that ends this part of the film, but it's reinforcing how when they stand together, IT feels at a disadvantage, and when they separate, they are vulnerable.

I think the only thing I don't much like is Bev's father. He actually is a bit more nuanced than I remember, but he feels like a stock character thrown into King films. it's easy to focus on the lewd aspect of a character versus making them more well-rounded. He's better when it focused on how he's a single dad raising a daughter and feeling some bitterness towards her mom who left (died? I can't recall now), and he realizes she's becoming a woman which he is happy that she's growing up but then it makes him feel bitterness because of how he felt abandoned and shunned, so Bev also becomes "Every Woman" to him... and note that that is just subtext I'm reading in because I know the book. The lechery locus is less interesting than what I just described.

--- Last Third of Film

You know, they always seem to have an issue knowing how to draw this all together and end the story, when it comes to the adaptations.

Not keen on using Beverly as bait/plot device to be rescued. They're also not sure how to handle the deadlights in any adaptation.

The bit with Bill and Georgie was actually really great (and horrific, when he ends it -- and then Pennywise takes over the body). This was all pretty good up to about the point Richie seems like he's gonna bail and then utters his memorable line that wasn't in the book, through the curb stomping of poor Pennywise.

Where it drops the ball is Pennywise saying Bill's phrase (like, why?) and then saying "Fear" before disappearing. Like, it just makes no sense and has no power -- they didn't really know what to do here to end it.

However, it then cuts over to Georgie's coat (stellar) and then outside to the Blood Vow sequence (which is great) and then into the last minute when Bill and Bev say goodbye -- and then you can see what I really mean by the two best teen performers of their generation in serious film -- Sophia Lillis and Jaeden Martell have such nuance here for kids their age (she was 15, he was 14), down to minute timing of facial expressions. I love this so much.

This last scene also highlights some of the beauty of the cinematography. It's just so beautiful. I would say the music and the visuals in this film are perfect in how both accentuate the mood without really drawing attention to themselves directly.

I think most of my issues on first viewing were the deviations from the book (esp the end + the narrative structure), but I'm really happy they captured some of the best scenes from the book. The film is better than I recall, on its own merits.

Some things I wish would have changed:
- The final moments with Pennywise
- The deadlights (not sure what, though)
- Make Bev's dad a bit less of a caricature
- Give Mike a little more definition
- Patrick Hockstetter -- his true arc will probably never be done unless the show becomes a prestige cable TV seasonal show. You would devote an entire episode to the "wonderful" Patrick there. he's one of the most interesting side characters in the book.

As far as the infamous sex sequence, I think some of the endgame stuff is typically changed to prevent the need for it.

When the kids are coming back after the first defeat of IT, they all get lost. That's their way to recover themselves and it also is a rite of passage that jumps them from children into the knowledge of adulthood. I think King says he was also coked out when he wrote it. Regardless, he's such a talented writer he pulls it off -- it's uncomfortable + yet kind of mind-blowing to read, while fitting narratively -- but I'm not sure how it could ever work in the visual version + of course you aren't going to get sequences like that with real kids in a film/show because it's illegal.

I think basically the film(s) rise and fall on the competence of IT: Chapter Two. Chapter One has a few disappointments (including the last moments of Pennywise), but considering the time limitation, it actually is shot, directed, scored, and performed professionally and with a lot of great emotional payoffs. But no story is great without a decent ending, so.... Chapter Two is next.

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

Snip

The scene with Georgie at the very beginning and the blood oath at the end with Stan are the best scenes.you mentioned why for Georgie. With Stan I liked that this sets up what happens later really well. He doesn't want to agree to this but feels compelled to do so anyway, and that definitely comes across.

I didn't like how they changed Mike.

 

[Totenkindly]

The scene with Georgie at the very beginning and the blood oath at the end with Stan are the best scenes.you mentioned why for Georgie. With Stan I liked that this sets up what happens later really well. He doesn't want to agree to this but feels compelled to do so anyway, and that definitely comes across.

I didn't like how they changed Mike.

Yeah, I didn't explicitly say that about Stan but it was definitely in my mind -- they really set up how the adult version of the story goes. It's not just with the coke bottle scene but also earlier -- Stan is typically the one who has the most reservations and/or wants to avoid doing anything, he suggests that someone should stand watch outside Neiboldt house, and he also finally is the one most brutally attacked when they go into the sewer at the end.

Stan is basically a person who needs things to make sense and to feel secure and he hates ambiguity or dealing with things outside the realm of the norm.