It (2017)

[don3663]

I enjoyed this a lot. Much better than other horror franchises that keep coming out every year or so.

The losers club stuff was great, with everyone doing their best. Mike could have had more to do though. But otherwise the script and dialogue was brilliant.

The scares were slightly by the numbers, but still engaging for a first time viewing. Georgies death was quite effective. Projector scene was also great.

Pennywise was solid, but the zooming towards the camera got cheap real quick. But he really shined in the rotten house.

Well deserved success.

[tdl797]

Originally Posted by Gamma_Winstead

[Show spoiler]Richie stole a horn from one of the marching band players, and refuses to give it back. They're struggling with it in the background. The band member gets it back at the end and says "the f**k's wrong with you?" To Richie. Or Richie says it to the band member.

That's it. I missed the first part of what he did, but caught the end. Thanks.

[Seymour]

This flick just seems wildly overrated. Not a bad movie by any means, but nothing special, either. It was too long and way too repetitive. I guess I expected something great, and I got something that's slightly above average.

Also, what's up with the scene where the kids are all hanging out in their friggin' underwear? That shit just seemed weird.

[trans8010]

Originally Posted by The Great Owl

I find it interesting that people are saying that this new adaptation of IT is not scary enough.

I mean, I get it, because I'm a seasoned horror fan who is never actually "scared" while watching a movie, but I still found IT to be quite eerie and tense.

1. The scene where Eddie sees Pennywise and the triangle of balloons by the house on Neibolt Street is awesome horror cinema through and through. Everything was spot-on perfect with that scene.

2. The later scene, with the whole gang in the house on Neibolt Street, was so effective as a haunted house scenario that it quickened my pulse in a big way. The filmmakers did not miss a beat here.

3. The real "scary" horror of IT, of course, is the human element. Beverly's dad, Henry Bowers's father, etc. The movie conveyed these things pretty nicely.

4. Since I myself was frequently bullied as an overweight kid during my childhood, I love the way that the movie captured that "oh sh*t" moment when Ben first sees Henry and the gang waiting for him after he leaves the library.

5. The most unrelenting horror moment in IT was the first bloody scene in Beverly's bathroom. Just the sheer amount of blood caught me off-guard. It was almost like a throwback to the prom scene in Carrie.

agree on all points... except for 5. To me the blood gushing out like a geyser seemed like overkill, I actually found myself laughing during that moment, all I could see was Johnny Depp being pulled into the bed, thats how much I was taken out of the moment. The mini pulled off the blood more effectively.

[trans8010]

Originally Posted by Seymour

This flick just seems wildly overrated. Not a bad movie by any means, but nothing special, either. It was too long and way too repetitive. I guess I expected something great, and I got something that's slightly above average.

Also, what's up with the scene where the kids are all hanging out in their friggin' underwear? That shit just seemed weird.

I grew up in a rural small town in the 1980's-1990's. Kids in their underwear would have been seen as common then. Not many could afford bathing suits, or when indoors not a lot of folks had working ACs, and the thick summer months were unbearable. A lot of people resulted to being in their underwear. It's only weird if you didn't experience it.

[Britbuffguy]

Originally Posted by collven

I really enjoyed this. Cast was excellent. The only very minor issue I had was Mike's limited role. The wait for Chapter 2 will be unbearable.

My same issue was with Mike, but also my same issue with him in the original. I have to wonder if he wasn't well written in the book too, as both movies kind of make him the weak link.

But I know he was more the main factor in the second half, so maybe he will get more flashbacks in the second part?

[Britbuffguy]

Originally Posted by trans8010

I grew up in a rural small town in the 1980's-1990's. Kids in their underwear would have been seen as common then. Not many could afford bathing suits, or when indoors not a lot of folks had working ACs, and the thick summer months were unbearable. A lot of people resulted to being in their underwear. It's only weird if you didn't experience it.

I agree, maybe this poster is only like 13 and doesn't understand 80s life?

[DustnBones001]

Originally Posted by Blu Myers

It's funny that you say that because as I was watching it I thought that this was NOT your typical horror film but something special. The characters were so rich, something we don't often see in today's fare. The villain wasn't "forced" but felt real and unique. This movie was a feast, full of great characters, tension filled moments, heart, comedy....everything.

Please tell me what was so great about the characters? They certainly weren't terrible but there is nothing about them that stands out. I'm sorry but I don't get the overt praise for this flick. Was it a decent horror flick? Yes it was but that's all there is to it.

The plot, the characters, the scares everything about it was cliche nothing amazing or "rich" and deep about it. It was also too long I found myself checking my phone to see how long it had been.

[Seymour]

Originally Posted by Britbuffguy

I agree, maybe this poster is only like 13 and doesn't understand 80s life?

Dude, I was a kid in the '80s. If I was gonna go swimming, I'd wear some swim trunks. I can understand that maybe rural life is a bit different, but I didn't get the impression that these kids were on poverty row.

[GasmaskAvenger]

Originally Posted by creed123

I know Jaedan from Midnight Special.

He was also in "The Book of Henry".

[AreaUnderTheCurve]

Originally Posted by Vlad Draculi

Did you miss like the entire movie? Like the scene with the leper zombie chasing after the sickly kid? Or the bit when Patrick was being attacked by the zombies in the sewer? Or the scene when Pennywise jumped out of the coffin in the clown room? How about the scene in the library? Or when he has the deformed creature attack Jack?

The scenes were horribly done. Too much CGI. There was no tension whatsoever to me. What it needed was another half hour into the run time to space out the interactions with Pennywise. More character development or world building would have worked.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Bueller]

Maybe nobody had a pool, maybe Derry doesn't have a pool so they didn't have trunks. Do you think Eddie is allowed to swim? Or maybe just Ben didn't have any and they all decided to not let him feel left out.

In any case, you can see it as a connection to Stand By Me and our only link to any leeches in the movie.

[SarahS]

Originally Posted by trans8010

I grew up in a rural small town in the 1980's-1990's. Kids in their underwear would have been seen as common then. Not many could afford bathing suits, or when indoors not a lot of folks had working ACs, and the thick summer months were unbearable. A lot of people resulted to being in their underwear. It's only weird if you didn't experience it.

WTF? How old are you? Just about everyone had bathing suits in rual America in the 70s and 80s. Yall act like 1989 was that long ago.....if nothing else they would have been in cut off shorts.

[Head bugs]

The Truth About It: The Movie - YouTube

[javy]

Originally Posted by SarahS

WTF? How old are you? Just about everyone had bathing suits in rual America in the 70s and 80s. Yall act like 1989 was that long ago.....if nothing else they would have been in cut off shorts.

1989 was 28 years ago. That was a long time ago, especially to someone who is in their thirties. How old are you?

Why are you in this thread if you despise the movie?

[SarahS]

Originally Posted by javy

1989 was 28 years ago. That was a long time ago, especially to someone who is in their thirties. How old are you?

Why are you in this thread if you despise the movie?

I'm 52 and 1989 was not that long ago....not to me.

[CrazyBlu-RayFan]

Originally Posted by DjMethod

I was bummed when I discovered that Cary Fukunaga was originally set to write, produce, and direct the film before exiting three weeks before the start of production due to creative differences (he wanted deeper and darker while WB wanted "archetypes and scares"), but he is still credited as one of the producers, and it looks like it would have been a wildly different film had he stayed on.

Don't be too disappointed, his scripts were awful. Way less character development than the final film (besides Mike), any attempt to be scary came off weak and it was a complete insult to keeping true to the source material. It adapted the book worse than Kubrick's Shinning. Plus considering the kids weren't archetypes in the final film, his claims appear to be somewhat bulls#!t. It's clear New Line wanted the actual book adapted and not what crap Fukunaga wanted to do. If he wanted to do a horror film based about his childhood, then he should've done an original film, not screw up adapting It.

[dallywhitty]

Originally Posted by SarahS

I'm 52 and 1989 was not that long ago....not to me.

You're fifty-two? Holy shit.

[Cocey2002]

Originally Posted by SarahS

WTF? How old are you? Just about everyone had bathing suits in rual America in the 70s and 80s. Yall act like 1989 was that long ago.....if nothing else they would have been in cut off shorts.

Yeah I grew up in the 70s and 80s. In rural america. We wore clothes. I walk around in my undies much more now than I did back then.

[tob]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0iID-OpwZ4E