|
but the final defeat of it takes place in the 80s!!!
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 22:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 11, 2024 13:35 |
|
|
Now it doesn't. The whole point is the cycle and those kids coming back as adults, the specific eras don't matter. Production-side, it's probably also easier to stage only one lost era than two 
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 22:47
|
|
|
Ein cooler Typ posted:
Looks like the most irritating bunch of kids. It's crucial for us to like these kids and want to see them not get bullied. I think I want to see them bullied.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 22:51
|
|
|
I feel like it specifically being set in 1958 was a large part of the setting and am now feeling trepidation.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 22:51
|
|
|
I just think that, with the unforseen popularity of Stranger Things, the people running the new production of IT are going to start running with terrible ideas trying to capture the popularity and fandom of that series instead of, you know, capturing what makes IT special.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 23:03
|
|
|
Franchescanado posted:I just think that, with the unforseen popularity of Stranger Things, the people running the new production of IT are going to start running with terrible ideas trying to capture the popularity and fandom of that series instead of, you know, capturing what makes IT special. It'll be the Volcano to Dante's Peak. The Dreamscape to Nightmare on Elm Street. The Carnosaur to Jurassic Park! 
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 23:12
|
|
|
Seems like IT would be really hard to do decently with just a movie, it's probably gonna be poo poo
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 00:05
|
|
|
i wish the stranger things guys had done It as a netflix show.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 00:14
|
|
|
oldpainless posted:I feel like it specifically being set in 1958 was a large part of the setting and am now feeling trepidation. Eh, the 1958 part never really felt real to me, probably because it was just too far from my experience as someone born in the 80s. Not that I was super familiar with life in the 80s either, but at least I had like cousins who were. The biggest problem I'd see with it is that there's a few plot points of earlier It-caused horrible events that people the kids know were around for, and which wouldn't work if the story starts in the 80s - but that can be fixed by having them happen to the parents of those characters instead.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 00:15
|
|
|
Casimir Radon posted:The 50s are out, the 80s are in. Maybe they can drag in the 90z kidz by having It dump some Nickelodeon slime on them. "We drink Surge Georgie...we all drink Surge down here!" *clown's eyes become two silver pogs*
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 00:18
|
|
|
oh no guys we're gonna die *all the Losers pull out their cell phones to hail an uber* *pours adderall down the spider's throat* THIS IS BATTERY ACID YOU SLIME
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 00:44
|
|
|
instead of popping out of a book of old pictures, Pennywise will manifest the Snapchat icon's ghost into a REAL GHOST that pops out of Ben's iPhone
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 01:46
|
|
|
in this movie the kids only hang out in The Barrens because it's a PokeStop.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 01:47
|
|
|
do you think the movie will stay true to the source material, and have Ben having a huge dong?
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 03:26
|
|
|
A Typical Goon posted:do you think the movie will stay true to the source material, and have Ben having a huge dong? It loving better
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 03:31
|
|
|
Man that kid playing Ben is one of those kids so fat they look like they're made of wax. There's fat kids and then there's fat kids, man...
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 17:47
|
|
|
The Berzerker posted:instead of popping out of a book of old pictures, Pennywise will manifest the Snapchat icon's ghost into a REAL GHOST that pops out of Ben's iPhone Or an 8-bit Pennywise on a NES.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 19:18
|
|
|
Canuckistan posted:Or an 8-bit Pennywise on a NES. Uhm hello, fangs and red eyes? I thought Penny-wise was supposed to be a funny, happy clown like in the original! Revisionist remake BS, that clown is terrifying, 2/10, would not go see movie.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 19:46
|
|
|
I don't think the time period is all that vital to the story. Been a long time since I read IT though.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 20:24
|
|
|
Aquarium Gravel posted:Uhm hello, fangs and red eyes? I thought Penny-wise was supposed to be a funny, happy clown like in the original! Revisionist remake BS, that clown is terrifying, 2/10, would not go see movie. this doesn't work.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 20:25
|
|
|
BiggerBoat posted:I don't think the time period is all that vital to the story. Been a long time since I read IT though. The time period is very important.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 21:55
|
|
|
Here's a t-shirt someone sent me a message about. It makes no sense to me, and if there's a joke, I don't get it. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 21:56
|
|
|
I'll blow anyone in this thread for a quarter
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2016 02:44
|
|
|
cheerfullydrab posted:Here's a t-shirt someone sent me a message about. It makes no sense to me, and if there's a joke, I don't get it. the joke is reading is for nerds.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2016 03:15
|
|
|
fishmech posted:No, absolutely not. In fact they're quite a big problem for light pollution! They're a big problem for light pollution but they're better for astronomy because they're such narrowband light, they are easy for astronomers to filter out. http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/...R&filetype=.pdf
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2016 03:29
|
|
|
Stephen King: Light Pollution Chat
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2016 11:14
|
|
|
I have a wait and see attitude about IT. The Internet is fast to prejudge and tear apart anything I'm surprised they are leaking so much this early. cheerfullydrab posted:Here's a t-shirt someone sent me a message about. It makes no sense to me, and if there's a joke, I don't get it. I actually own this shirt. The shirt is worn by a kid in the 80's movie Monster Squad.  nate fisher fucked around with this message at 14:50 on Aug 20, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2016 14:44
|
|
|
cheerfullydrab posted:The time period is very important. How so? I'm genuinely curious. The only thing I remembered being important time wise was the passage of years between the two main parts of the book. I don't remember anything vital that's significantly needed for the plot being tied specifically into to the time period. I can't think of a reason they can't move it up a decade or two.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2016 19:11
|
|
|
BiggerBoat posted:How so? I'm genuinely curious. Some of the earlier cycles of It's evil were directly experienced by parents/grandparents in the book, but that's easy enough to fix by making them happen to an earlier generation.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2016 19:40
|
|
|
cheerfullydrab posted:The time period is very important. Except it isn't at all
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2016 22:33
|
|
|
It's not important, technically, but I really enjoyed the queasy 50s vibes and I felt like they provided a lot of atmosphere. It was just such a totally different time, and the "golden era" setting really complimented the brutal, unforgiving horror of not only IT but of the world around them. Little things like the x-ray machine really set it apart.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2016 22:45
|
|
|
nate fisher posted:I have a wait and see attitude about IT. The Internet is fast to prejudge and tear apart anything I'm surprised they are leaking so much this early. In a better world, Fred Dekker takes Mick Garris' place and directs some of the greatest Stephen King movies of all time.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2016 23:55
|
|
|
The only reason the 50's were really important to IT is that King is at his strongest when he's writing in that era. A lot of why that book is so good is because King is so good at telling stories about being a child in the 50's and 60's. The story would work in another time frame, but King's writing would have been much weaker.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2016 01:29
|
|
|
Untrue. Compare the writing of the kids in IT to the writing of the child characters in Under the Dome and they are equally well written.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2016 01:51
|
|
|
Speaking of Under the Dome, I just finished it, and while I enjoyed it a lot, this is a dark, dark book. I guess it's not entirely nihilistic, since the message at the end seems to be "people or aliens can not be dicks, sometimes", but it's a very ugly view of humanity nonetheless. It made for hard reading at times, just because King does well at making some truly awful people. Also while everything in the plot does build up to the big fire, and it does fit with the whole "we destroy ourselves" theme, it's still a very abrupt and not entirely satisfactory ending to the big town plotline. I mean, the actual conclusion to Rennie and all that is fitting, it just feels like more could have been done with the town fully under his control and the resistance before everything goes to poo poo. I know, King endings and all (although I didn't really have a problem with the actual ending to the Dome).
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2016 02:25
|
|
|
Thanks to this thread, I'm reading IT again for the first time in 23 years. The book has its problems, but drat, what a ride. I know a lot of people would pick "The Stand", but for me this has always been King's opus. The ugliness and menace lying just under the surface in Derry is amazing. And the first time I read it in '93, it was especially disturbing because it of this belief I had when I was a kid, that there was some evil thing that grownups just didn't believe in, weren't capable of believing in, but that could be made flesh by my belief in it. And my fear of it. And I thought it could read my mind, and sort of be drawn by my fear. Then about fifteen years later I'm reading about Pennywise, and it's kind of like being seven all over again! One thing I do wonder about the remake is how the child murders and other heinous poo poo in Derry can escape national attention in 1989 and 2016.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2016 03:07
|
|
|
Lord Hydronium posted:Speaking of Under the Dome, I just finished it, and while I enjoyed it a lot, this is a dark, dark book. I guess it's not entirely nihilistic, since the message at the end seems to be "people or aliens can not be dicks, sometimes", but it's a very ugly view of humanity nonetheless. It made for hard reading at times, just because King does well at making some truly awful people. King wrote Under the Dome when he was coming down from the nightmare of the Bush years. A lot of the negativity that he was feeling about politics bled through to the novel. Rennie is supposed to be an amalgam of Donald Rumsfeld and Dick Cheney.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2016 04:28
|
|
|
I thought the villains in UTD were kind of caricatures. I didn't believe in them. I know it was satire but.....
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2016 09:42
|
|
|
the time period is somewhat important considering why it wakes in 1984. it's certainly something that could happen nowadays still but it's far more likely and believable all those years ago (especially since the murder actually happened).
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2016 11:50
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 11, 2024 13:35 |
|
|
Groovelord Neato posted:the time period is somewhat important considering why it wakes in 1984. it's certainly something that could happen nowadays still but it's far more likely and believable all those years ago (especially since the murder actually happened). Couldn't that murder just become part of the backdrop? I don't think the time period is as important as some people act like it is, but they want it to stay the same just so they're more familiar with the story. Updating it won't hurt it, since they're going to be telling the It story all the same.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2016 12:53
|
|
