Unless I missed it, we didn't get Bill yelling, "You killed my brother, you fucker!"
For some reason that line always stuck with me and I was hoping to hear it.
It's such bull too, in the novel/mini seriesBev does not realize that Ben wrote that poem, she thinks Bill wrote it and has a thing for him. When they come back as adults that's when her and Ben reconnect and she realizes it was him, not Bill, that wrote it.
The movie completely messes up that entire point and how it set Ben and Bev up. By having her already know and STILL choosing Bill over Ben it is going to make it look like Ben loses his weight and Bev is like "Hey oh!"
Poor Eddie was the other direction...Ben also had thewhen they have sex. Maybe... something about that when they're adults? Lolbiggest cock
I'm reading IT right now and I'm finding a lot of interest in the "origins" of the creature. I heard that you get more of it if you read the Dark Tower, but knowing how huge that thing is, does it really go deep into the whole lore of IT and the turtle? Or is it just a little hint, much like the hints in this book?
did Batman and Lethal Weapon 2 really come out in the same summer? what a fire lineup. .
also Bryce Dallas Howard or Jessica Chastain for Bev? I imagine they gotta be under consideration.
Speaking of, a ton of people in my theater didn't realize there was going to be a part two. Lots of "wait what" when chapter 1 popped up.I think the studio were hedging their bets to an extent with this one. I know it was talked about in the trade press as being a two-film adaptation during production, but I think the post-release talk about not having anything ready to go for Chapter II is telling.
As it is, for anyone who hasn't read the book, the film pretty much stands on its own and if it had flopped, I think the studio could have cut bait pretty simply.
Speaking of, a ton of people in my theater didn't realize there was going to be a part two. Lots of "wait what" when chapter 1 popped up.
Speaking of, a ton of people in my theater didn't realize there was going to be a part two. Lots of "wait what" when chapter 1 popped up.
Had that a lot in my screening, my friends included.
Haha. I had a few disapproving scoffs, even. Lady behind me went: "Ugh! What?!? Come on!"
I'm reading IT right now and I'm finding a lot of interest in the "origins" of the creature. I heard that you get more of it if you read the Dark Tower, but knowing how huge that thing is, does it really go deep into the whole lore of IT and the turtle? Or is it just a little hint, much like the hints in this book?
What's funny is that if you don't realize there is a part 2, then the whole love poem thing with Ben looks completely pointless except as a total 100% fuck you fat boy the script writer put in for some reason.
The Turtle is one of several deity-like figures in The Dark Tower that are mentioned but never actually seen, with one exception. There's not much detail about it, just occasional references. IIRC there's no indication at all that(IT book/movie 2 spoilers) from reading the Dark Tower alone.the Turtle is Dead
.
or...?Shardik
The Turtle is one of several deity-like figures in The Dark Tower that are mentioned but never actually seen, with one exception. There's not much detail about it, just occasional references. IIRC there's no indication at all that(IT book/movie 2 spoilers) from reading the Dark Tower alone.the Turtle is Dead
IT is never mentioned at all from what I recall, although there is a character in the 7th book that some people think is related to Pennywise (i.e., the same species). And there's also a robot named Stuttering Bill. So it's mostly winks and nods rather than in-depth lore.
Well I guess the poem establishes his affection for Bev, which makes the kiss that wakes her up feel more significant than random.
I think the studio were hedging their bets to an extent with this one. I know it was talked about in the trade press as being a two-film adaptation during production, but I think the post-release talk about not having anything ready to go for Chapter II is telling.
As it is, for anyone who hasn't read the book, the film pretty much stands on its own and if it had flopped, I think the studio could have cut bait pretty simply.
I think what amazes me about it is, where did the time go?
I mean look at the old film. So much characterization.
We see the group come together, have fun as kids, as individuals, 2-3 together, and as a whole group and form that glue. We see them have their run ins with IT and Bowers. And finally stand tall and take on IT.
This film lacks most of that togetherness and individual moments it's like scary moment scary moment ending.
You can't tell me any of the kids aside from Bev and Bill got the same amount of characterization as the kids in the old film. Especially Ben and Mike. Even Richy, which IMO is tragic.
Was anyone else surprised by the level of violence shown in that first scene with the 7-year old kid? It really shocked me. Usually, movies are reluctant to show graphic violence against children. It's always either subdued or off-screen. But that little kid had his fuckin' arm ripped off and we saw all of it. Fuck.
I got to say, while I told my brother I'd give it a 9/10 after we left the theater, my impressions have diminished since then. Such is the fate of the book reader when watching film adaptations. As a movie, I think it's overall pretty effective, but as an adaptation, it nails Pennywise and Bev IMO, but other aspects, critical aspects that make IT the beloved story that it is, are so lacking to the point of not even existing in the film. And it's hard not to think of the movie from the context of the book
It's like World War Z; as a movie, I found that to be a pretty decent zombie movie, but it is also one of the worse adaptations ever and I dislike it as much as I enjoy it.
Was anyone else surprised by the level of violence shown in that first scene with the 7-year old kid? It really shocked me. Usually, movies are reluctant to show graphic violence against children. It's always either subdued or off-screen. But that little kid had his fuckin' arm ripped off and we saw all of it. Fuck.
I got to say, while I told my brother I'd give it a 9/10 after we left the theater, my impressions have diminished since then. Such is the fate of the book reader when watching film adaptations. As a movie, I think it's overall pretty effective, but as an adaptation, it nails Pennywise and Bev IMO, but other aspects, critical aspects that make IT the beloved story that it is, are so lacking to the point of not even existing in the film. And it's hard not to think of the movie from the context of the book
It's like World War Z; as a movie, I found that to be a pretty decent zombie movie, but it is also one of the worse adaptations ever and I dislike it as much as I enjoy it.
I missed they creepy librarian in the library scene, are there any clips from that scene?
Some of it is unavoidable unless it was a TV series, but still. Like I originally felt the movie nailed the Loser's Club, but thinking back, it all rested solely on the chemistry and the great kid actors and not on how the movie portrays the group. They feel like friends due to how good the actors are with eachother, but it never felt like friendship forged through their shared nightmarish experience or their everyday struggles. We never get that sense. The pact at the end feels particularly toothless, like a formality because of the story, not something earned through their bond.This is a problem I have, too. If I've read a book and plan to see the film adaptation, I try to seriously lower my expectations so that I don't leave disappointed. It doesn't always work that way, though, because deep down you really want the film to leave the same lasting impression on you.
Was anyone else surprised by the level of violence shown in that first scene with the 7-year old kid? It really shocked me. Usually, movies are reluctant to show graphic violence against children. It's always either subdued or off-screen. But that little kid had his fuckin' arm ripped off and we saw all of it. Fuck.
I dont' believe you actually see his arm come off. This got talked about earlier in the thread, but Muschietti does some pretty nifty work in that scene to make you feel like you saw way more than you did.
You see the mouth distend, you see the bite come down - but I don't know that you actually see the teeth go in, and the rip isn't onscreen either. I think it's a cut to Georgie crawling away almost immediately, and even then, you don't really see the stump. I think it's just a shock of red on the side of his coat for maybe a second - and then Pennywise grabs him and pulls him down.
So basically, all you saw was a kid screaming and a puddle of blood. But you would SWEAR you saw Pennywise physically pull the whole arm off while blood was gouting everywhere.
After letting it sink in for a few days, I'd go with the initial storm drain encounter as my favorite scene overall.
The back and forth between hunter and prey essentially was really well done on Skarsgard's part, great performance.
They never called Ben by his nickname Haystack and no beep beep Richie from the kids. Small things, but I missed them. Only Pennywise actually said beep beep Richie which seemed out of place without the kids using it beforehand.
Yea sort of sucks because it's probably the best scene in the movie. I found that seen creepy and interesting although I knew what was going to happen.
However the movie overall felt extremely rushed and none of the other scares worked at all. They didn't have time to build up any tension it was felt like it just cut from set piece to set piece.
I am most disappointed how they handled the bullies. I was hoping they would be a bigger focus because they are such a big part of the book and would have been a more interesting way to build tension. One of my favorite moments in the book is when Richie breaks his arm and I wasn't a fan of the way they did it in the book. I was happy to see the creepiness of Bevs father maintained though.
It certainly devolved into a haunted house attraction ride without much of a sense of time and place in my opinion. It felt entirely too short even at its quite ample running time somehow.
Then again, if you've ever read King and then see the film version, that comes with the territory I suppose. The guy really knows/knew how to put you into that world meticulously.
Yea, I had just read the book before the movie and was really trying to lower my expectations for this movie, but I after seeing the 4 min clip of Georgie and Pennywise, knowing there will be 2 movies and knowing the run time I had more hope they would be able to do it justice.
That said I didn't hate it, I just thought it was ok. I sort of wonder how Part 2 will do since the most charming part of the movie was the children.
I dont' believe you actually see his arm come off. This got talked about earlier in the thread, but Muschietti does some pretty nifty work in that scene to make you feel like you saw way more than you did.
You see the mouth distend, you see the bite come down - but I don't know that you actually see the teeth go in, and the rip isn't onscreen either. I think it's a cut to Georgie crawling away almost immediately, and even then, you don't really see the stump. I think it's just a shock of red on the side of his coat for maybe a second - and then Pennywise grabs him and pulls him down.
So basically, all you saw was a kid screaming and a puddle of blood. But you would SWEAR you saw Pennywise physically pull the whole arm off while blood was gouting everywhere.
Oh you see his arms gone. Goriest thing in the film
Stuff like this makes me wonder if some scenes were cut that established the "Beep beep" routine with Richie. I really hope there are some unused scenes that get added in eventually.
You see the absence of an arm. I don't think you actually see it come off. You don't see the disembodied arm. And you don't really see much but a shock of red and the hint of a stump on his coat.
Seriously, I don't think Muschietti actually shows you much of much there.
It's kinda like how everyone swore they saw some crazy shit in the napkin during that one shot in Blair Witch Project.
This is probably been talked to death, but did they just leave all those children to rot down there?