|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A4PuQCWDcM4 Based on what is possibly Stephen King's most famous novel (close race between IT, The Stand, and The Shining I'd say), IT is the story of seven kids in the town of Derry, Maine who realize that there is a monster stalking the streets, killing children. A monster who masquerades as a clown named Pennywise. This creature, what they simply refer to as It, emerges in cycles of 20-30 years, starting a cycle with some horrific murder, and ending it in a virtual holocaust of deaths. For It feeds on fear. Also children. But fear makes them so tasty. IT was first adapted as a TV movie back in 1990, and, well...while it certainly taught a lot of kids back then what "coulrophobia" was back in the day...that adaptation doesn't hold up so well anymore. Despite the presence of the always awesome Tim Curry as Pennywise. I mean, for every instance of Pennywise being loving creepy as hell... We have...um... To be honest, I'm not sure what's happening here. Twenty seven years later. Look, I'm not saying that the original version of IT is terrible, it's highly entertaining. But it suffers from being made-for-TV. This year though, we get the hard R version of IT. And the results are promising at least. We've secretly replaced Tim Curry with Bill Skarsgård....let's see if anyone notices! A few other changes have been made to make the film more relevant: instead of being set in the mid-1950's, the first part of IT will be set in 1989. Yep, first part. This is part one of two, the second part detailing how the seven kids, "The Loser's Club", reunite to defeat Pennywise -and by extension, the town of Derry iteself - once and for all. The second film will likely see release in either 2018 or 2019. Basically, the above trailer hits the right tone for this adaptation, being big on atmosphere. A great deal of the novel ran on the threat of Pennywise, although his appearances were just as intense. The few shots we get of Pennywise in the trailer reinforce that nicely. Also, I'm just gonna say this, this version has already succeeded in one major point: While not scary, balloons are goddamned eerie in this version. Just that shot of the balloon moving across the room behind the character of Ben is creepy as gently caress. But let's not forget the most important thing... Do we float?
|
# ? Mar 30, 2017 05:51 |
|
|
# ? Jun 3, 2024 21:37 |
|
The trailer sold me because it didn't have many color filters and everythin looked really crisp so I am totally down with whatever. GILL MAN FOR LYFE
|
# ? Mar 30, 2017 06:41 |
|
It's a shame that Cary Fukanaga left over creative differences that don't bode well for the direction that this movie is taking.
|
# ? Mar 30, 2017 07:06 |
|
Anonymous John posted:It's a shame that Cary Fukanaga left over creative differences that don't bode well for the direction that this movie is taking. Apparently one of those "creative differences" was his insistence on keeping...that scene. You know. That scene.
|
# ? Mar 30, 2017 07:27 |
|
The movie could still work without that scene, I was more concerned by these quotes: http://variety.com/2015/film/news/cary-fukunaga-it-exit-1201584416/ quote:Fukunaga had planned on making “It” into two films. Although early reports indicated that the director left over budgetary concerns, Fukunaga maintained that wasn’t the case. Both sides had agreed on making the two films for $32 million, according to the director. But Fukunaga said he had bigger disagreements with New Line over the direction of the story. A rep from New Line didn’t respond to a request for a comment. Here’s Fukunaga’s explanation:
|
# ? Mar 30, 2017 07:36 |
|
It's hard to know if the studio made the right call or not but it sounds like what Fukunaga wanted to do would make more sense as a series rather than a two hour movie.
|
# ? Mar 30, 2017 10:34 |
|
They really can't keep *that scene* in the movie without the MPAA slapping it with an NC17 and effectively shutting that poo poo down...right?
|
# ? Mar 30, 2017 16:55 |
|
"That scene" is not going to be in the movie. There is no reason to assume will be in the movie. It is a fundamentally widely-mocked and rarely-liked scene in a film adaptation that is already taking plenty of more-controversial liberties with the concept anyway. There is no logical reason to even mention that scene except to make sure everyone knows you don't want in it because, no, the scene is not going to be in.
|
# ? Mar 30, 2017 17:20 |
|
I wonder how many times that scene will come up in this thread between now and the release of the movie. I said this in another thread, but the scene serves a very simple purpose in the book, so its no problem to just swap it out with something else that accomplishes the same thing. Of course, the ease of doing that only makes you wonder even more why King put it in the book in the first place but hey the dude was rarely sober so who knows what was going on in his head.
|
# ? Mar 30, 2017 17:23 |
|
Basebf555 posted:I wonder how many times that scene will come up in this thread between now and the release of the movie. What I've never understood is that there's "that scene" but don't they either right before or right after slice their palms to become blood brothers/sister? It seems like that fills the same purpose which like you said makes it even more ridiculous why the other part is even in there.
|
# ? Mar 30, 2017 17:27 |
|
Ty1990 posted:They really can't keep *that scene* in the movie without the MPAA slapping it with an NC17 and effectively shutting that poo poo down...right? There's no way that scene will be in the movie but I don't think it would be NC-17 if it was depending on how they film it. The War Zone came out in the US with an R rating and IIRC Lara Belmont was 19 at the time but still she's playing a 14 year old character and that movie.
|
# ? Mar 30, 2017 17:47 |
|
You can never really take too much from trailers these days, but I sure did like the look of this one. This is probably nitpicking, but Georgie's last day in the 1990 series always looked a little too nonthreatening to me, not ominous enough. When he goes out of the house with the paper boat it's raining, but it also looks like the sun is peeking out somewhere nearby, and the street just kind of looks "friendly" to me, for want of a better term. In the new trailer, whether they got it with natural light or more likely through post-shooting effects, the sky is gray, it's pretty dark, the large running currents of water in the road and the way the neighborhood looks is just more sinister. I also like the shot of the kids in the house on Neibolt street, where they are framed in the background looking in the direction of the camera, with the hand in the foreground... you see the claws poking out the fingers of the white clown gloves! Whether IT is a werewolf or something picked from more modern fears in that scene is something I'm eager to see. I am cautiously optimistic. And overjoyed that this is being done as an R film, it's the only way to do justice to the source material.
|
# ? Mar 30, 2017 21:28 |
|
MrMojok posted:Whether IT is a werewolf or something picked from more modern fears in that scene is something I'm eager to see. IT is Salad Fingers.
|
# ? Mar 30, 2017 21:39 |
|
Really digging that slide projector bit, mostly hoping they realize that the best part of any Stephen King book is the downtime between scares and don't just generalize it into a shallow Nightmare on Elm Street ripoff.
|
# ? Mar 30, 2017 21:45 |
|
Magic Hate Ball posted:Really digging that slide projector bit, mostly hoping they realize that the best part of any Stephen King book is the downtime between scares and don't just generalize it into a shallow Nightmare on Elm Street ripoff. Like I said, I think a good portion of IT is dedicated just purely to the atmosphere and history of Derry. Of course, you can't do too much with that in the film, but my favorite parts of the book were Mike's history lessons about all the bad poo poo Pennywise had done beforehand with the Ironworks, the mob guys, the Black Spot...
|
# ? Mar 30, 2017 21:49 |
|
I always liked the interactions the kids had with other kids and other townsfolk, and all the weird, discomforting ways Derry is inhospitable.
|
# ? Mar 30, 2017 21:52 |
|
Hey, something that I just noticed, and feel free to correct me if I'm wrong. In the trailer, Bill writes "SS GEORGIE" on the boat, and in the original miniseries, George calls it the same thing. But It doesn't look like it's referred to that way in the book at all. So that makes it a neat little callback/easter egg to the miniseries.
|
# ? Mar 30, 2017 21:55 |
|
Ensign_Ricky posted:Apparently one of those "creative differences" was his insistence on keeping...that scene. He didn't. His script made it out there but that scene doesn't happen. There's a variation of 'Bev brings the group together' but definitely not like that. It is incredibly violent though (I don't remember if it's in the original book, but he portrays a series of gruesome axe murders across Derry in the 1800s).
|
# ? Mar 30, 2017 21:58 |
|
In the book, there was the one story about a guy who went into a bar and killed several people with an axe, while many of the patrons just stood about watching.
|
# ? Mar 30, 2017 22:17 |
|
All the instances of people being completely inactive during a visible crisis are really chilling, like the bit where he's running down the street pounding on doors and screaming for help, and everyone just quietly closes their blinds.
|
# ? Mar 30, 2017 22:17 |
|
They want something bigger, louder, with more teeth. And that’s what they get.
|
# ? Mar 30, 2017 22:23 |
|
Yeah, the scariest part of It isn't the clown or the monsters. It's the sense of subtle passive hostility that radiates from Derry. Be it the fake asthma medicine to the people who ignore violence and death to the just genuine sense of malicious ignorance that fills the town. It's scary not just because of how awful it is but because at its core it is a lot more plausible than the evil space spider.
|
# ? Mar 30, 2017 22:36 |
|
Think they will add the part where all the kids have an orgy in the sewers like Steven King envisioned? http://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/1640007-sex-scene-toward-the-end-of-it-warning-spoilers (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
# ? Mar 31, 2017 01:50 |
|
None of Stephen King's books are ever about the monsters, which is why making adaptations of them is often done so poorly. It's a little worrisome to me that we don't hear Pennywise speak in the trailer. I'm hoping it's to build up suspense for it and not because they're hiding a meh performance. Tim Curry was always going to be tough to follow but Pennywise is going to make or break the movie regardless.
|
# ? Mar 31, 2017 02:27 |
|
Just going to quote my thoughts from the horror thread. The It trailer is pretty good and I'm looking forward to the movie. I think as much as they have confidence in just how great their look for Pennywise is--and it is an interesting look--I think it misses the mark on Pennywise's whole deal. In reality I think their character has a lot in common with Freddy Krueger in terms of just their disdain for their young victims. Despite their otherworldliness, they are very much coded as adults. Adults who resent, hate, and want to devour children. They are fundamentally abusers as seen through the lenses of grungy late 80s fairytales. I think what worked so well about Curry's Pennywise is that he really was just a lovely Bozo the Clown. Even a picture of Curry just looking friendly in the clown make-up is terrifying because Bozo and Ronald McDonald look creepy. But there is at work this other level that the children are made to feel unreasonable. Bozo and Ronald McDonald are scary looking dudes created by adults and pushed onto children. And it is the children who are treated unreasonable when they find the creatures scary. This ties into an element of the book that the adults are literally blind to the horrors the kids face. Pennywise is such a scary force because he exists with a level of authority. The parents, teachers, and cops are all on some level complicit in his actions. A lot of the scariest parts of the book and original movie are not when he violently goes on the attack, but when he tries to lure kids to him. When he lets them feel uneasy but also helpless to not listen to him. The book and the original film really push the notion that the biggest fear the kids often face is the adults in their lives. The Losers know Pennywise is a real threat, but like those who abuse children in the real world, Pennywise works to force them to feel unreasonable for challenging him or even being afraid of him. The new Pennywise design is simultaneously much more Victorian looking and also much more childlike in appearance. And I think it just loses all the stuff I'm talking about. He's something that you fundamentally know you should find scary. Making him more antique in appearance works to sort of divorce him from the realm of adulthood and everyday lives of the kids. And the more childlike appearance takes away from that gross adult disdain of youth that defined Curry's performance. I will say though, there is one part in the original book where It turns into Frankenstein's monster. Since this is the 80s, I would lose my poo poo if he showed up as Jason or something for a scene.
|
# ? Mar 31, 2017 03:28 |
|
Two things that really stood out for me from the book that were left out of the TV movie was the weird time shifting old house with the scary as gently caress mummy that pops out of a basement window, and something about a fridge full of flesh eating bugs. If they can add those two and maybe do justice to the weird lovecraftian spider thing towards the end that everyone seems to hate (but I love) I'll be pretty happy. The trailer gives me hope.
|
# ? Mar 31, 2017 03:40 |
|
The purposefully scary Pennywise look loses the sense of incongruity.
|
# ? Mar 31, 2017 06:55 |
|
I always felt that a movie version of the story should have different actors portraying slightly different versions of Pennywise the Dancing Clown to lend to the eeriness of his character. That said, I kind of dig the old victorian look he's wearing in the movie. It's kind of unsettling in it's own way.
|
# ? Mar 31, 2017 07:12 |
|
TheBigBudgetSequel posted:I always felt that a movie version of the story should have different actors portraying slightly different versions of Pennywise the Dancing Clown to lend to the eeriness of his character. That said, I kind of dig the old victorian look he's wearing in the movie. It's kind of unsettling in it's own way. I think he reminds of my issue with Annabelle which does a lot to make it's doll look super creepy and forgets that dolls are creepy on their own.
|
# ? Mar 31, 2017 10:38 |
|
Ensign_Ricky posted:For It feeds on fear. Also children. But fear makes them so tasty. I'm hoping there's more to this in this adaptation. The 90's TV movie hyper-focused on Pennywise being IT a little too much in my opinion, as opposed to IT being able to manifest as an avatar of fear itself.
|
# ? Mar 31, 2017 15:03 |
|
Timeless Appeal posted:I think he reminds of my issue with Annabelle which does a lot to make it's doll look super creepy and forgets that dolls are creepy on their own. They should have taken a cue from the short film horror masterpiece, DOOM HOUSE. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SeBjr8Bm_wA
|
# ? Mar 31, 2017 15:31 |
|
Neo Rasa posted:They should have taken a cue from the short film horror masterpiece, DOOM HOUSE. Isn't it about time for a big screen adaptation of this yet? Or maybe a Netflix original series
|
# ? Mar 31, 2017 15:36 |
|
Iron Crowned posted:Isn't it about time for a big screen adaptation of this yet? Or maybe a Netflix original series Nope!
|
# ? Mar 31, 2017 15:44 |
|
I rewatched the made for tv movies last night, its almost comically how ignorant and malevolent the common people of the town are. Like how no adults trust the kids and even that kid who the fat kid's family is living with saying that they only took them in because of their "Christian's duty". Its almost like the small town deserves to be preyed upon by a giant spider monster. The second part gets so boring for me to watch. They go into the sewers with a sling shot? These are grown adults and they show them being kinda successful. They couldn't be bothered to bring any guns to hunt IT? Isn't one of them a cop too?
|
# ? Apr 1, 2017 02:32 |
|
Tenzarin posted:I rewatched the made for tv movies last night, its almost comically how ignorant and malevolent the common people of the town are. Like how no adults trust the kids and even that kid who the fat kid's family is living with saying that they only took them in because of their "Christian's duty". Its almost like the small town deserves to be preyed upon by a giant spider monster. A major factor with It is that it isn't vulnerable to actual weapons. It's vulnerable to childish faith. The reason why it waits until they are adults to get revenge is that it believes (largely correctly) that they no longer have the ability to hurt it.
|
# ? Apr 1, 2017 02:35 |
|
A slingshot is a weapon!
|
# ? Apr 1, 2017 03:29 |
|
Yeah but when in 1985 are you going to see a grown person carrying a slingshot as a way to defend themselves. That's the idea - it's a child's weapon.
|
# ? Apr 1, 2017 03:38 |
|
I kinda want to get clowned up and hang out in the theater parking ramp on opening night... but then again, I'd just be begging for this poo poo... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1hYDYrdiYX8
|
# ? Apr 1, 2017 03:57 |
|
Ty1990 posted:They really can't keep *that scene* in the movie without the MPAA slapping it with an NC17 and effectively shutting that poo poo down...right? Was Jack's cum dripping out of Wendy's pussy in either version of the Shining?
|
# ? Apr 1, 2017 04:08 |
|
|
# ? Jun 3, 2024 21:37 |
|
ruddiger posted:Was Jack's cum dripping out of Wendy's pussy in either version of the Shining? Excuse me, I think you mean his "seed" ran down her "thigh".
|
# ? Apr 1, 2017 04:09 |