Stephen King's It

GLaDOS

I'm a massive fan of the book (I'd probably rate it as my favourite horror novel) and I really enjoyed it. Felt it translated the spirit of camaraderie of the loser club perfectly. The kids who played Richie, Eddie and Bev in particular I thought were very good.

metaoblivia

I really enjoyed it. I'm a fan of the book but didn't really get into the mini series from the 90s.
I thought this movie captured the spirit of the book really well. They made some changes to what certain characters saw or how they died, but I thought those changes worked for the most part.
It did feel like a horror movie to me, but that was not only because of Pennywise, but also because of the adults in the town. One of the themes I took away from the book was that the kids had to come together and fight Pennywise because the adults in the town were happy to turn a blind eye to everything that was going on. That aspect of the book and the film added to both their isolation and comradery as a group. It's not like Stranger Things, where there were some adults who could help. These kids are on their own, and that's a really scary position for kids to be in.

And some of those kid actors were great. Richie, Bev, Eddie, Bill. Even Georgie was just so cute and genuine.

Lumpy_Custard

Just back from seeing this at Mahon Point, another thumbs up here.

The kid from Stranger Things seemed to have an endless supply of one-liners, and the adults - and chief bully - seemed to be equally as horrifying as the monster itself.

The only downside I found was that the relentless jump-scares lost a bit of their shock value by the end. The effects and camerawork, though, were top class. It was very good indeed.

I had a little run-in with a group of mouthy teens afterwards, which soured the night a bit. They were mocking a buddy of mine, who's a little on the heavy side. Apologies to anyone who saw that, there were a few horrified faces when the drama died down!

OwaynOTT

Lumpy_Custard wrote: »

Just back from seeing this at Mahon Point, another thumbs up here.

The kid from Stranger Things seemed to have an endless supply of one-liners, and the adults - and chief bully - seemed to be equally as horrifying as the monster itself.

The only downside I found was that the relentless jump-scares lost a bit of their shock value by the end. The effects and camerawork, though, were top class. It was very good indeed.

I had a little run-in with a group of mouthy teens afterwards, which soured the night a bit. They were mocking a buddy of mine, who's a little on the heavy side. Apologies to anyone who saw that, there were a few horrified faces when the drama died down!

It was like a kiddies disco at the screening I went to and it totally ****ing ruined it for me.

Liam McPoyle

OwaynOTT wrote: »

It was like a kiddies disco at the screening I went to and it totally ****ing ruined it for me.

I went at 10 this morning, there were maybe 5 other adults in the screening, none of them within 6 seats of me in any direction, it was glorious.

Onto the movie, I really enjoyed it.

It's not scary, nor did i expect it to be considering the last horror movie that actually scared me was Ringu on vhs at the tail end of the 90s, but what it is is creepy, the whole vibe, creepy.

From Bevs dad to Henry and his goons to things like Eddie's vision (wonderful, skin crawling make up here) to Pennywise himself, there was a palpable sense of foreboding throughout and that's what makes a horror movie for me.

The kids were all great (though I do feel having Richie played by the Stranger Things kid took away from it, the rest were all complete unknowns to me but he wasn't so it was kinda jarring as all I could think of was ST) as were the adults.

Special mention to Skarsgard who I felt was fantastic as Pennywise. He completely made the role his own. Considering Currys turn was a massive show stealer that's no mean feat. There were just little things that elevated him, when he checks himself while talking to Georgie and almost let's the mask slip, the little trickle of drool, small, subtle intricacies that pushed him beyond hammy and into a real, malevolent incarnation.

I went in with somewhat hopeful expectations and was not disappointed, cannot wait for chapter 2.

8/10

Liam McPoyle

The movie has topped $120,000,000 box office for its opening weekend in the US alone, heading for $200,000,000 worldwide, record numbers for a horror movie.

ILikeBoats

Kylo Ren wrote: »

Amy Adams is surely nailed on to play Beverly as an adult in the sequel?

Thought that too

ArthurG

Loved it and it has spurned me to revisit the book that I originally read, what, 25 years ago.

Went to see it in Liffey Valley at 10:30 on Saturday morning, not only was the place almost deserted (yay no 'youths'), but also cheapo ticket.

8/10, would re-watch.

venomousfrog

ILikeBoats wrote: »

Thought that too

Seen it yesterday, and as soon as I saw Beverly, I immediately thought she looked like a younger Amy Adams. However I read online that Jessica Chastain was rumoured for the part on chapter 2.

Overall i thought it was a decent remake and with some good scares. Really enjoyed IT !

Business Cat

Business Cat wrote: »

The movie has topped $120,000,000 box office for its opening weekend in the US alone, heading for $200,000,000 worldwide, record numbers for a horror movie.

Terrible way to measure success. How many seats were sold is the only way.

kerplun k

venomousfrog wrote: »

Seen it yesterday, and as soon as I saw Beverly, I immediately thought she looked like a younger Amy Adams. However I read online that Jessica Chastain was rumoured for the part on chapter 2.

Overall i thought it was a decent remake and with some good scares. Really enjoyed IT !

Jessica Chastain, Amy Adams, Dallas Bryce Howard, Isla Fisher, Mireille Enos. I have a theory that these are all really just the same person.

FindersKeepers

Went to see it last weekend, didn't live up to the expectations I was hoping for. I think I was scared twice, only small reactions. I was disappointed overall

Tony EH

That pair on 'Half in the Bag' gave it a so so review and I find I'm usually in agreement with them. Said every scare is accompanied by a loud noise.

I hate that shit.

Thumbs up for the kids though. But, that's not enough for me to drag may arse into the cinema for.

I might leave this off as a small screen venture.

Potential-Monke

I haven't read the book, but i saw the original film, even though I couldn't quite remember it.

This, was not a horror. I jumped maybe twice in the whole film, and they were small jumps. It felt more like a comedy, and i don't think Pennywise was scary at all. He had the look, but it just didn't come across right imo.

A good comedy, a bad horror.

kerplun k

Tony EH wrote: »

That pair on 'Half in the Bag' gave it a so so review and I find I'm usually in agreement with them. Said every scare is accompanied by a loud noise.

I hate that shit.

Thumbs up for the kids though. But, that's not enough for me to drag may arse into the cinema for.

I might leave this off as a small screen venture.

It's more than just a horror film. If you go in expecting a horror flick, you'll run the risk of being disappointed. The clown is what sells it, but it's the losers' club that keep you interested and make this a great film.

I think one of the reasons this works so well is because you could take the clown out of the picture and it would still be an excellent movie.

One way I interpreted this, was that the monster wasn't even real, he was a manifestation of the evil within the town. The kids couldn't put a face on the malevolence they were experiencing, they didn't understand it, so they projected this onto a physical entity. There was a dark shadow of nefarious towering over the town, you definitely got the feeling that bad things were happening behind closed doors to all these kids, and any adult was either contributing to it, or cowardly turning a blind eye and choosing to ignore IT.

The kids friendship is what helps them survive and get through it.

Tony EH

kerplun k wrote: »

If you go in expecting a horror flick, you'll run the risk of being disappointed.

This is kind of the problem I'm having with this film, though, and what I've heard about it. Thing is, I AM expecting to see a horror film. It's based on a horror story.

On the whole it sounds very, very tame, with some good child performances.

The more I hear, the more it sounds like the usual Hollywood effort at optioning the film rights of a popular name and then just making something different anyway.

It's Hollywood cutting out an potential lawsuit, by buying the rights to film something and then making something that barely resembles it, because they didn't really want to film the real story anyway.

'WWZ' anyone?

Not that I am comparing this film to 'WWZ'. But I am just tired of Hollywood buying the rights to books I like and then not bothering to make the film that it promises.

'It' is sounding more and more like just another mangled Stephen King screen adaptation.

Penn

It's still a horror film, but it just doesn't rely on constant jump-scares. Its horror is in the creepiness and situations.

I generally dislike horror films because they rely on gore and jump-scares, but I quite enjoyed IT. I thought it all worked really well and was unsettling in the right places and creepy in the others.

My main two complaints were some scenes looked like they were only made for 3D with the way the camera moved, and it just generally dragged in some places.

kerplun k

Tony EH wrote: »

This is kind of the problem I'm having with this film, though, and what I've heard about it. Thing is, I AM expecting to see a horror film. It's based on a horror story.

On the whole it sounds very, very tame, with some good child performances.

The more I hear, the more it sounds like the usual Hollywood effort at optioning the film rights of a popular name and then just making something different anyway.

It's Hollywood cutting out an potential lawsuit, by buying the rights to film something and then making something that barely resembles it, because they didn't really want to film the real story anyway.

'WWZ' anyone?

Not that I am comparing this film to 'WWZ'. But I am just tired of Hollywood buying the rights to books I like and then not bothering to make the film that it promises.

'It' is sounding more and more like just another mangled Stephen King screen adaptation.

100% agree with WWZ. It was hilariously different to Max Brooks novel.
But I think IT is pretty on the nose, its a true adaptation, Obviously the timeline doesn't jump around like the book, and some of the more zany bits are omitted, but first and foremost, It is a horror film, I mean what's more horrifying that a bunch of abused kids in a corrupt town, running from a creepy killer clown. I think the problem is that most horror fans are desensitized to horror films. Think about it, when was the last time you were genuinely frightened by a film? Horror has gone somewhat, the same way as comedy, whereas, its just harder and harder to make people laugh or genuinely scare them.

The reasons you mention for not going to see, is not the fault of this particular movie, but just movies in general.

WWZ was a decent flick BTW

PhiloCypher

Tony EH wrote: »

This is kind of the problem I'm having with this film, though, and what I've heard about it. Thing is, I AM expecting to see a horror film. It's based on a horror story.

On the whole it sounds very, very tame, with some good child performances.

The more I hear, the more it sounds like the usual Hollywood effort at optioning the film rights of a popular name and then just making something different anyway.

It's Hollywood cutting out an potential lawsuit, by buying the rights to film something and then making something that barely resembles it, because they didn't really want to film the real story anyway.

'WWZ' anyone?

Not that I am comparing this film to 'WWZ'. But I am just tired of Hollywood buying the rights to books I like and then not bothering to make the film that it promises.

'It' is sounding more and more like just another mangled Stephen King screen adaptation.

Do you actually plan on going to the film an judging for yourself or are you just gonna pick the minority views on here that confirms your bias not to like the film. Some adaptions hew too closely to their source material to their detriment, some stray too far. I havent read IT since i was a teen so I couldn't tell you which 'IT' is guilty of, but its certainly not guilty of being a bad film. Give it a chance and you never know you might enjoy it , or failing that, at least you will have a solid basis on which to critique it.

Tony EH

I was. But, the more I hear, the more I'm thinking of leaving it for the small screen.

Plus, I never said it was "bad" film. I'm merely explaining why I'm thinking of leaving it for TV.

Also, I have no "bias" for or against it. I don't feel the need to be either protectionist over it, or the need to "critique" it either, which I haven't done.

BUT, going on what I've heard on here and elsewhere (and it's not a "minority" opinion), it doesn't sound like it'll float ny boat, as it were. That opinion says that it's short on scares, very tame, but has good performances from the kids.

Insect Overlord

It's a quality movie. I was expecting an expensive flop, but I absolutely loved it. Planning to go again tomorrow to watch it a second time.

kerplun k

Tony EH wrote: »

BUT, going on what I've heard on here and elsewhere (and it's not a "minority" opinion), it doesn't sound like it'll float ny boat, as it were. That opinion says that it's short on scares, very tame, but has good performances from the kids.

They all float, you'll float too... and you'll enjoy it.

Agent Coulson

I thought that was fantastic as a whole and the kid actors were great.


I kept going throughout she looks like she looks like and when he said we don't need lookalike I burst out laughing so hard.


Maybe if you didn't grow up in the 80's that joke may have gone over your head but it made the movie for me.


I didn't think Bill Skarsgard was actually that great to be honest as I felt Pennywise was more

CGI than anything else

.


Oh and the soundtrack was great actually the whole sound editing was fantastic.

Kunkka

Seen this last night and LOVED it. King being my favorite novelist with IT as one of my favorite books meant this had high expectations for me and it delivered. Isn't a horror per se, more of a disturbing thriller. My partner who hadn't read the book also loved it but thought one thing it lacked was the background of Pennywise which is probably a valid point, they could have added this in properly in 30 seconds which always adds to a story.

Go watch IT!

Boo Radley

I really enjoyed this. There were a few issues such as a couple of underdeveloped characters but the look and feel of the film was just right. Pennywise was excellent. The voice work for him was great too and his left eye...nice little touch.

I've not read the source material, or watched the original small screen adaptation but have picked up the guts of the story over the years from popular culture and indeed from King referencing IT in other books of his.

I think this film will speak to an entire generation of teens. It's something different from what has been pumped out in recent years and does a good job of capturing the 80's Spielberg atmosphere that 'Stranger Things' went to lengths to replicate also.

I loved the visuals in this. I've seen some complain that some shots were clearly for 3D screenings but I thought they were disconcerting and jarring in a good way. It gave the relevant scenes an almost uncanny valley feel to them while not pulling you from the moment: i.e. it still seemed real.

Lots to enjoy in this film, even if it's not a horror film in the traditional sense. I'm very much looking forward to the sequel anyway.

Ash.J.Williams

Tony EH wrote: »

This is kind of the problem I'm having with this film, though, and what I've heard about it. Thing is, I AM expecting to see a horror film. It's based on a horror story.

On the whole it sounds very, very tame, with some good child performances.

The more I hear, the more it sounds like the usual Hollywood effort at optioning the film rights of a popular name and then just making something different anyway.

It's Hollywood cutting out an potential lawsuit, by buying the rights to film something and then making something that barely resembles it, because they didn't really want to film the real story anyway.

'WWZ' anyone?

Not that I am comparing this film to 'WWZ'. But I am just tired of Hollywood buying the rights to books I like and then not bothering to make the film that it promises.

'It' is sounding more and more like just another mangled Stephen King screen adaptation.

Just about everything you said here is wrong

Agent Coulson

Kylo Ren wrote: »

Amy Adams is surely nailed on to play Beverly as an adult in the sequel?

They played a younger and older version of a character before in a HBO show.

PhiloCypher

Tony EH wrote: »

I was. But, the more I hear, the more I'm thinking of leaving it for the small screen.

That's you're own prerogative of course.

Tony EH wrote: »

Plus, I never said it was "bad" film. I'm merely explaining why I'm thinking of leaving it for TV.

Also, I have no "bias" for or against it. I don't feel the need to be either protectionist over it, or the need to "critique" it either, which I haven't done.

Would you not say you were somewhat biased against book adaptions and how Hollywood has handled them in the past ? Or do you judge each one on its merits ?

Also I'm not being protectionist, I'm just of the opinion that unless a film is being utterly panned, better to go to see it in cinema and be mildly disappointed then wait , watch it on tv , really enjoy it,and have missed the opportunity to see it on the big screen.

Tony EH wrote: »

BUT, going on what I've heard on here and elsewhere (and it's not a "minority" opinion), it doesn't sound like it'll float ny boat, as it were. That opinion says that it's short on scares, very tame, but has good performances from the kids.

I'll have to reread the thread and beyond so as I've only seen good reviews. Anyways to each their own. Let us know what you think of it when you eventually see 'It' :P

skylight1987

Kunkka wrote: »

Seen this last night and LOVED it. King being my favorite novelist with IT as one of my favorite books meant this had high expectations for me and it delivered. Isn't a horror per se, more of a disturbing thriller. My partner who hadn't read the book also loved it but thought one thing it lacked was the background of Pennywise which is probably a valid point, they could have added this in properly in 30 seconds which always adds to a story.

Go watch IT!

I haven't read the book what is the back round of pennywise ?

Tony EH

PhiloCypher wrote: »

Would you not say you were somewhat biased against book adaptions and how Hollywood has handled them in the past ? Or do you judge each one on its merits ?

It's certainly a problem with a some film adaptations. Wouldn't you agree?

However, that doesn't mean that I'm biased against this film, either way.

As for judging...all I'm judging here is whether I'll go to see this in the cinema or wait and watch it at home. I haven't made any judgement on the quality of the film itself.

PhiloCypher wrote: »

Also I'm not being protectionist, I'm just of the opinion that unless a film is being utterly panned, better to go to see it in cinema and be mildly disappointed then wait , watch it on tv , really enjoy it,and have missed the opportunity to see it on the big screen.

I've never really been that put out by missing things in the cinema. Quite often, these days, it's an unpleasant experience to be honest. I go less and less, but when I do go, I tend to go early, to avoid other people and their mobile phones, eating, chatting and general arsing about.

However, I find if a film is good, then cinema or televison screen does me. Certain films are better on the big screen. But most, I can take or leave. If a film is good, I can get just as much from it on a 50 inch screen at home.

PhiloCypher wrote: »

I'll have to reread the thread and beyond so as I've only seen good reviews. Anyways to each their own. Let us know what you think of it when you eventually see 'It' :P

Again, I haven't said anything about whether the film is "good" or "bad". Or whether people have been giving good or bad reviews.

I've simply said the the consensus seems to be that it's short on scares and the kids are decent in it and based on what I've seen and heard so far, it might be a pass for me.