It (2017)

[MassiveMovieBuff]

Originally Posted by format916

N word not okay. Pre teens in panties and being hit on by older men, okay.

Wow, it's all mixed up and makes no sense when you think about it

[chinhead]

Originally Posted by trans8010

This film had to appease a wide audience given its blockbuster marketing and placement

Yeah, I get it, I really do. And I really enjoyed IT when I adjusted my headspace and took it for what it was. I guess I was hoping for something dirtier, nastier and more grounded because:

1. (Boringly, Predictably and, yes, like many posters here) The book affected me very deeply when I read it as a kid. Stephen King wrote a very uncomfortable kind of horror. Human. Nothing twee about it. MANY say this captures the spirit of the book which I don't see at all, (except the camaraderie between The Losers, maybe) but if it did it wouldn't have that mass appeal and it wouldn't be breaking the box office records it is. So, I do get it.

2. I wanted to believe that it was still possible for a Big Studio to just finance a Horror film and leave the creative decisions to a Director. And of course the answer is no. Whether or not you think Granddaddies like The Exorcist, The Thing and The Shining still deserve their "Top 10 Scariest" status, you have to admit that they avoid going the easy route (Jump Scares, of which IT has many) and instead put in the work to create a feeling of creeping dread which gets under your skin. Far less crowd-pleasing, Far less Blockbuster earning, (short-term anyway) but much richer, touching and enduring movies.

I should probably now admit that I was surprised at some of the things IT DID touch on. Bullying, Unhappy home-lives, the indifference of adults. While I wanted much, much more of this stuff, I have to give the filmmakers props for scratching the surface, at least.

trans8010, I really enjoyed your great post. Thanks.

Originally Posted by MassiveMovieBuff

I was just discussing this with my dad yesterday about how strange it was not having Bowers say the N word to Mike in the new film at all when he's obviously racist and even more hateful in the new film than he was in the miniseries. Times have definitely changed.

Yeah, Man. I'm guessing that you, like me, didn't NEED to hear that word or any racial slur, its just that where they were skirting the issue it made for a really awkward scene. Like, if the writers felt uncomfortable demonstrating Bowers hating on Mike because he's Black, then DON'T make it because he's Black. Like maybe Bowers had Mike's old job delivering meat, which he was fired from for stealing. I dunno.

Originally Posted by format916

N word not okay. Pre teens in panties and being hit on by older men, okay.

I'm not 100% following what you're saying here, Bud. That IT (2017) is teaching us that these things aren't ok? Because it DID have 'Pre-teens in panties' where the old TV ministries did not. But also, no one here said the N-Word is ok. Of course it isn't. Which is why you put it in the mouth of the most despicable, hateful character in the film. If the writers hate the word, then I would argue that its WAY more effective getting the character no one in the audience wants to relate to using it, rather than trying to sweep it under the rug. Unless you think the reason it wasn't said is that Henry Bowers was too nice to say it?

EDIT: Aaaaand I have just this second realized that you're not saying that at all. Idiot.

[Bradsdadg]

Originally Posted by chinhead

Yeah, Man. I'm guessing that you, like me, didn't NEED to hear that word or any racial slur, its just that where they were skirting the issue it made for a really awkward scene. Like, if the writers felt uncomfortable demonstrating Bowers hating on Mike because he's Black, then DON'T make it because he's Black. Like maybe Bowers had Mike's old job delivering meat, which he was fired from for stealing. I dunno.

Agreed. It was pretty obvious that they were beating around the bush and just didn't want to use that word, or even another one similar. I like the idea you had with the job and all. A wise one once said...

[Show spoiler]

Do or Do not There is no try Yoda - YouTube

[MassiveMovieBuff]

Originally Posted by chinhead

Yeah, I get it, I really do. And I really enjoyed IT when I adjusted my headspace and took it for what it was. I guess I was hoping for something dirtier, nastier and more grounded because:

1. (Boringly, Predictably and, yes, like many posters here) The book affected me very deeply when I read it as a kid. Stephen King wrote a very uncomfortable kind of horror. Human. Nothing twee about it. MANY say this captures the spirit of the book which I don't see at all, (except the camaraderie between The Losers, maybe) but if it did it wouldn't have that mass appeal and it wouldn't be breaking the box office records it is. So, I do get it.

2. I wanted to believe that it was still possible for a Big Studio to just finance a Horror film and leave the creative decisions to a Director. And of course the answer is no. Whether or not you think Granddaddies like The Exorcist, The Thing and The Shining still deserve their "Top 10 Scariest" status, you have to admit that they avoid going the easy route (Jump Scares, of which IT has many) and instead put in the work to create a feeling of creeping dread which gets under your skin. Far less crowd-pleasing, Far less Blockbuster earning, (short-term anyway) but much richer, touching and enduring movies.

I should probably now admit that I was surprised at some of the things IT DID touch on. Bullying, Unhappy home-lives, the indifference of adults. While I wanted much, much more of this stuff, I have to give the filmmakers props for scratching the surface, at least.

trans8010, I really enjoyed your great post. Thanks.



Yeah, Man. I'm guessing that you, like me, didn't NEED to hear that word or any racial slur, its just that where they were skirting the issue it made for a really awkward scene. Like, if the writers felt uncomfortable demonstrating Bowers hating on Mike because he's Black, then DON'T make it because he's Black. Like maybe Bowers had Mike's old job delivering meat, which he was fired from for stealing. I dunno.

I agree with you a lot on what you said. While I thought the final product was very good the bottom line is that, like you, I was hoping for something darker and more psychologically haunting due to the human evils of the story. That's where most of the disturbing material comes from in the book for me anyways.

Yeah I didn't need to hear the N word necessarily but it's exclusion from this version but not in the miniseries was strange especially for those familiar with the book.

[RalphoR]

I can't recall seeing an R rated movie where 90% of the main characters are kids under 14 yrs of age. If it weren't for the ridiculous amount of

[Show spoiler]profanity from a bunch of kids

I'd have given this a higher rating. Still it was a really good movie.

[sandman slim]

Originally Posted by RalphoR

I can't recall seeing an R rated movie where 90% of the main characters are kids under 14 yrs of age. If it weren't for the ridiculous amount of

[Show spoiler]profanity from a bunch of kids

I'd have given this a higher rating. Still it was a really good movie.

That is exactly how teenage boys talk. I mean, f***** exactly.

[BallistikBluray]

Originally Posted by RalphoR

I can't recall seeing an R rated movie where 90% of the main characters are kids under 14 yrs of age. If it weren't for the ridiculous amount of

[Show spoiler]profanity from a bunch of kids

I'd have given this a higher rating. Still it was a really good movie.

Interestingly, Finn Wolfhard who plays Richie in this film said most of his lines with profanity were improvised. He says it in this

interview

at 18:40. So in all fairness, it was coming from the mind of a kid.

[Spike M.]

Originally Posted by chinhead

Yeah, I get it, I really do. And I really enjoyed IT when I adjusted my headspace and took it for what it was. I guess I was hoping for something dirtier, nastier and more grounded because:

1. (Boringly, Predictably and, yes, like many posters here) The book affected me very deeply when I read it as a kid. Stephen King wrote a very uncomfortable kind of horror. Human. Nothing twee about it. MANY say this captures the spirit of the book which I don't see at all, (except the camaraderie between The Losers, maybe) but if it did it wouldn't have that mass appeal and it wouldn't be breaking the box office records it is. So, I do get it.

The novel was the best selling book in the US the year it came out. IT ain't some cult thing.

[javy]

It wasn't like every character was dropping the f- bomb like Joe Pesci. It was mainly the one kid. And this is realistic.

[cheez avenger]

Someone mentioned

the indifference of adults.

and that's touched upon explicitly in the book (from what I've been told) as opposed to implicitly like the film. I'm surprised more folks didn't noticed that in this version of IT all of the adults are either creepy, f'd up, apathetic, etc. It's no coincidence.

[Show spoiler]Pennywise is doing that, because it makes it easier for him to acquire his prey.

[trans8010]

Originally Posted by Spike M.

The novel was the best selling book in the US the year it came out. IT ain't some cult thing.

Halloween was the highest grossing independent film of its day, and one of the most profitable horror films that was ever made, yet 40 years later it is a cult film.

IT may be a landmark of horror fiction, and in 1986 Stephen King was at the zenith of his career, with best seller after best seller, the mini series beloved by the fans but before the movie, the popularity of that novel was in the barrens. It was successful because of three factors:

1.) Box office shows that horror films can still pack in audiences.

2.) IT relies heavily on nostalgia.

3.) No competition

One of the best things about watching horror is the communal allure. The film could suck balls, and at home in the dark by your lonesome you are more susceptible to its flaws, but in a movie house, if the audience is into it, so are you. Comedies work the same way. My mother says to this day, every home watching of that classic comedy film Animal House, is nothing like watching with an audience. The communal atmosphere can make any lame joke or obvious jump scare into a laugh riot or screaming fits.

Nostalgia was also a big factor. Moviegoers fondly remembered being scared witless by Tim Curry, as children, take a look at all the articles posted in the years before the movie was announced, compare it to after the announcement of the film. They tripled. Then we have the those who read the novel, reading something that scared them senseless, and now a new version is on the screen. That would immediately pique interest. "Haven't read the book/seen this in years, I wonder if this will be like I remembered." I saw this with a big group of friends, and I was the only one who owns the book (a coveted first edition/first printing) or saw the mini. Nostalgia was a huge draw, and given that Stranger Things was a huge success for Netflix, and the constant attempts at bringing 80's-90's properties like Transformers, TMNT, and Power Rangers to the screen the endless reboots that pack in audiences, nostalgia sells, and IT uses nostalgia as leverage. The jump from 1958 to 1989 was no coincidence, they were banking on Gen Xers and early millennials like myself to see this based on the time frame.

Of course there was no competition at the box office either, and take those two factors together, add the third and you have a recipe for blockbuster status.

[dallywhitty]

The Muschietti siblings confirmed that there'll be a director's cut on the Blu-ray, running about fifteen minutes longer. Barbara says in the interview that they only found out about it this morning, so I'm guessing Warners proposed it to them.

Ooooooooooh yeah. We already know about Stan's speech, as well as additional scenes with Henry and his father. I wonder what else will be included. Tempted to go through the 2016 script again and highlight anything that's a possibility.

[rooboy78]

Originally Posted by dallywhitty

The Muschietti siblings confirmed that there'll be a director's cut on the Blu-ray, running about fifteen minutes longer. Barbara says in the interview that they only found out about it this morning, so I'm guessing Warners proposed it to them.

Ooooooooooh yeah. We already know about Stan's speech, as well as additional scenes with Henry and his father. I wonder what else will be included. Tempted to go through the 2016 script again and highlight anything that's a possibility.

Do you have a link to this interview? I absolutely loved the theatrical cut but I will still be unbelievably excited if this turns out to be true.

[Gamma_Winstead]

Originally Posted by dallywhitty

The Muschietti siblings confirmed that there'll be a director's cut on the Blu-ray, running about fifteen minutes longer. Barbara says in the interview that they only found out about it this morning, so I'm guessing Warners proposed it to them.

Ooooooooooh yeah. We already know about Stan's speech, as well as additional scenes with Henry and his father. I wonder what else will be included. Tempted to go through the 2016 script again and highlight anything that's a possibility.

Oh hell yeah! That's awesome news! Very excited to hear that. Gonna see it in IMAX Saturday. My second viewing. Can't wait!

[Chaotic]

I will finally be seeing this tomorrow.

[Show spoiler]I hope so

[dallywhitty]

Originally Posted by rooboy78

Do you have a link to this interview? I absolutely loved the theatrical cut but I will still be unbelievably excited if this turns out to be true.

Here you go.

It's twenty-five minutes long, but they speak about it within the first five. The interviewer asks about deleted scenes.

Originally Posted by Gamma_Winstead

Oh hell yeah! That's awesome news! Very excited to hear that. Gonna see it in IMAX Saturday. My second viewing. Can't wait!

I had my fifth viewing yesterday. Thank God I see films for free.

[sandman slim]

Originally Posted by dallywhitty

The Muschietti siblings confirmed that there'll be a director's cut on the Blu-ray, running about fifteen minutes longer.

Are you... moist?

('Cause I am... )

[Jennifer Lawrence Fan]

Originally Posted by Chaotic

I will finally be seeing this tomorrow.

[Show spoiler]I hope so

At this point you'll see it on Blu Ray.

[dallywhitty]

Originally Posted by sandman slim

Are you... moist?

('Cause I am... )

I think the entire forum has caught on to my moistness!

[imsounoriginal]

Originally Posted by dallywhitty

The Muschietti siblings confirmed that there'll be a director's cut on the Blu-ray, running about fifteen minutes longer. Barbara says in the interview that they only found out about it this morning, so I'm guessing Warners proposed it to them.

Ooooooooooh yeah. We already know about Stan's speech, as well as additional scenes with Henry and his father. I wonder what else will be included. Tempted to go through the 2016 script again and highlight anything that's a possibility.

Can't say I'm thrilled, frankly as much as I liked the movie, it already felt too long.