|
Franchescanado posted:My mentality: If there is an icon like Jason, it'd be pretty foolish to put him in the trailer. Horror fans know IT, people in general know of IT, but it's still a reboot of a made-for-TV movie production from 27 years ago and a book from longer than that, it's still pretty unfamiliar for a lot of people. So you have a scary clown that eats kids in your movie. If all of a sudden Jason Vorhees is running around or Freddy Kruger, you can't contextually explain "No, that's still the clown, he shape-shifts to what scares you, and it's in the 80's", people would think that it's a weird cross-over or get too confused. It's an aspect of the story that's really difficult to market when your selling an evil clown that eats kids (the familiar concept). It would also lead the curious right down the road to spoilerville, because they'd be like "what the gently caress is Freddy doing in this movie". Tough to find out more without spoiling some of the most interesting stuff in the story.
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 22:25
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 23:34 |
|
|
DeimosRising posted:I don't agree thematically but it's a much harder sell now. Even by the 80s clowns as a friendly funny thing for kids were dying out, and now they're practically extinct. I dunno, wasn't the '80s Bozo's heyday?
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 22:29
|
|
|
Uncle Boogeyman posted:I dunno, wasn't the '80s Bozo's heyday? Was it? I thought he was more 60's and 70's
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 22:30
|
|
|
Bozo was definitely still on air when I was a kid, and I was born in '85. Not to mention the fact that Ronald McDonald was a staple of late 80's/early 90's marketing, if we're just talking about the presence of "good clowns" in the pop culture of the era.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 22:33
|
|
|
Uncle Boogeyman posted:I dunno, wasn't the '80s Bozo's heyday? He was relevant enough to be regularly parodied in The Simpsons. I've never seen Bozo in any capacity, just aware through cultural osmosis.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 22:34
|
|
|
Someone, maybe on this forum maybe somewhere else, wrote a thing about the world of the Simpsons being more 70s than 90s in that a clown is one of the most popular shows on TV and Homer is able to support a family and live a suburban middle class life with a blue collar job. Figuratively blue collar. Literally his collar is white.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 22:43
|
|
|
Fart City posted:If Everett McGill bursts through a wall wearing an eye patch and dressed as a reverend, movie gets an auto 5 stars. If this happened I'd start crying like I saw the face of God. "It's so beautiful! I can't comprehend how perfect it is!" Maybe this IT is referencing old clowns from the time it first awoke in modern times? Do a Google Image search for "1800s clown" and they're pretty hosed up looking.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 22:44
|
|
|
Violator posted:Maybe this IT is referencing old clowns from the time it first awoke in modern times? Do a Google Image search for "1800s clown" and they're pretty hosed up looking. The filmmakers have already said that that is exactly what they were going for when they revealed Pennywise's new look.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 22:55
|
|
|
Uncle Boogeyman posted:I dunno, wasn't the '80s Bozo's heyday? Cable did a lot for the Chicago Bozo production as I understand it, but what I mean by dying out was there were no new clowns getting popular, so clowning was hanging by the popularity of older, established characters. Like boxing now but less inherently ridiculous. When did hospital clowns become a thing?
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 22:55
|
|
|
Bozo was on WGN, which is a Chicago telelvision station that's nationally broadcasted, which is why you get Cubs/Bozo fans in Arizona or whatever. My class in grade school got to go to a taping of Bozo, my best friend at the time ended up getting picked for the Grand Prize Game which was pretty cool. Our principle never gave him his prizes after the show though, which was pretty hilarious.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 23:36
|
|
|
If I've never seen a Grudge movie should I go with the 2002 Japanese version or the 2004 American remake? Also loving the Christmas Evil talk, that movie really is up there with the best in holiday horror and stands on its own too.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 23:54
|
|
|
Uncle Boogeyman posted:I dunno, wasn't the '80s Bozo's heyday? You're thinking of Bonzo, Reagan made him Secretary of the Interior.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2017 00:21
|
|
|
HUNDU THE BEAST GOD posted:You're thinking of Bonzo, Reagan made him Secretary of the Interior. lol, thank you
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2017 00:23
|
|
|
So what do y'all think the odds are that the stinger to It will be adult Stu slitting his wrists after learning that It's back? I mean, it seems almost too obvious to pass up.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2017 01:50
|
|
|
I'm thinking they could replace "orgy" with "kissing" and get the same effect without the ick. That said, the idea of a bunch of kids getting drawn into weird ritual sex magic is genuinely disturbing in that William Burroughs-y way.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2017 02:04
|
|
|
Neumonic posted:I'm thinking they could replace "orgy" with "kissing" and get the same effect without the ick. Yeah I get why people don't like it and it's not the kinda thing I'll expend too much energy defending but I think it kinda works in that transgressive fiction way.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2017 02:22
|
|
|
Violator posted:I'm guilty of have no major awareness of other horror from the 80s. If they didn't make a movie about it, like Hellraiser, I admittedly know nothing about it. Barker would be one of those authors that out creeps King on a regular basis. Read (or don't) The Great and Secret Show. There's some genuinely disturbing poo poo in that, including cockroach masturbation (as in a guy using cockroaches to masturbate, not a weird Kafkaesque scene). On the subject of IT, I remember reading an interview with King about the miniseries and he was surprisingly fine with shifting the time period the kids grew up in. He went for the 50's, since that was his era, but the TV writers bumped it up to the 60's. A few things changed, like Richie being a TV host instead of a radio DJ, etc ... and King goes on about it being a product of the difference in ages between him and the guy who did the adaptation. I don't remember what publication the interview was in, but it was an interesting read. IT is the first Stephen King novel I read, way too young, so I've always had an affinity toward it. The Talisman, as well. I'm pleasantly surprised by the trailer.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2017 02:32
|
|
|
The ending to the IT trailer was some outstanding acting. The little laugh after the second "You'll float too!" and then morphing into screaming it was legit chilling. I'm actually really impressed with what I've seen so far. OldTennisCourt fucked around with this message at 02:49 on Mar 30, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2017 02:46
|
|
|
Has anyone commented on the fact that the IT miniseries aired in 1990. 27 years ago. Coincidence?
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2017 05:02
|
|
|
Violator posted:Maybe this IT is referencing old clowns from the time it first awoke in modern times? Do a Google Image search for "1800s clown" and they're pretty hosed up looking. I did just that, and mutherfuckin Tim Curry popped up less than five rows down. Then again four rows after that. Then John Wayne Gacy. Basically, it's a hosed up search.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2017 05:06
|
|
|
I think superficially innocent-looking Pennywise is the right call, but I have a certain amount of sympathy for the dilemma the filmmakers are faced with, namely that clowns aren't scary
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2017 06:15
|
|
|
Yeah, I remember watching Bozo the Clown as a kid and this was mid 80s so those types of shows were still on. drat John Ritter is in It 1990 and it so sad when I think about him. Hollismason fucked around with this message at 06:34 on Mar 30, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2017 06:28
|
|
|
FreudianSlippers posted:Someone, maybe on this forum maybe somewhere else, wrote a thing about the world of the Simpsons being more 70s than 90s in that a clown is one of the most popular shows on TV and Homer is able to support a family and live a suburban middle class life with a blue collar job. I'd assume nuclear safety inspector is one of the highest-paying blue-collar jobs you can have. Kvlt! posted:If I've never seen a Grudge movie should I go with the 2002 Japanese version or the 2004 American remake? The remake is alright, but there's no reason not to watch the original instead, unless you the very concept of reading subtitles physically repulses you.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2017 12:32
|
|
|
AbsolutelySane posted:On the subject of IT, I remember reading an interview with King about the miniseries and he was surprisingly fine with shifting the time period the kids grew up in. He went for the 50's, since that was his era, but the TV writers bumped it up to the 60's. A few things changed, like Richie being a TV host instead of a radio DJ, etc ... and King goes on about it being a product of the difference in ages between him and the guy who did the adaptation. I don't remember what publication the interview was in, but it was an interesting read. IT is the first Stephen King novel I read, way too young, so I've always had an affinity toward it. The Talisman, as well. I'm pleasantly surprised by the trailer. I think this is one of the biggest ironies with King. He just doesn't really care when it comes to adaptations, and will (seemingly) let filmmakers take any liberties they want with the movies, except for Kubrick. I think King just really didn't like Kubrick. King was already well-known by the time The Shining went into production. The way King tells it, though, he never really felt secure in his career until the 80's, around when IT came out. So you take a simple guy from Maine who's become a phenomenon for writing weird books and one of the most popular critically-acclaimed and eccentric filmmakers who's known for taking lesser-known books and making them into fantastic films, it's like you're asking for a clash of egos. Coupled with all the stories of Kubrick calling King at all hours of the night to ask oddly personal questions or talk about chess, King's drug use, etc. King is largely sympathetic towards Jack, because King's writing about himself as a neglectful alcoholic father and bad husband. Kubrick saw Jack as a gently caress-up, child abuser and as a reincarnated psycho. No wonder King's defensive. I think it took King making Maximum Overdrive (and rehab) to realize he's not a filmmaker, he's a storyteller, and that no adaptation (except for eventually Shawshank) will be as good as or better than The Shining. He just can't admit it because, you know, pride.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2017 12:49
|
|
|
There's also that story about Kubrick calling King at like 3am to answer some tedious question that only Kubrick could possibly give a poo poo about. King was probably like if you're going to miss the point of my main character then at least let me sleep through the night?
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2017 14:02
|
|
|
Franchescanado posted:King is largely sympathetic towards Jack, because King's writing about himself as a neglectful alcoholic father and bad husband. Kubrick saw Jack as a gently caress-up, child abuser and as a reincarnated psycho. No wonder King's defensive. This is the biggest thing to me. Despite the ghosts and whatnot, there are large portions of The Shining that read as largely autobiographical (namely concerning the substance abuse and pressures of providing for a family through writing). Kubrick saw Jack through an objective lens, whereas King was as close to the character as he could get without swinging around a roque mallet. Jack is pretty much batshit crazy from go in Kubrick's flick. I imagine that read must have been akin to getting an earful about how much of an rear end in a top hat you turned into at that party once you started drinking.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2017 14:09
|
|
|
Yeah everyone rags on King for hating the Kubrick film and then making the mediocre TV movie and liking that more, but to be honest by all accounts Kubrick was a giant shithead during filming and I can imagine having some dude call you at 3 AM for some asinine question can piss you off.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2017 14:19
|
|
|
I actually think the television series The Stand is the best King adaptation not The Shining.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2017 14:21
|
|
|
Speaking of King I really want a NOS4A2 adaptation. Honestly, Owen has started to eclipse his father in a lot of respects, 20th Century Ghosts also rules.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2017 14:24
|
|
|
Horns was a really good adaptation of his novel and I agree getting a NOS4A2 adaptation would be really good. Really hoping that Locke and Key series gets off the ground . This would be the 2nd attempt though at making it though.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2017 14:26
|
|
|
OldTennisCourt posted:Speaking of King I really want a NOS4A2 adaptation. Honestly, Owen has started to eclipse his father in a lot of respects, 20th Century Ghosts also rules. He'll just never be as prolific, it would be near impossible without hardcore drugs and gallons of booze.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2017 14:29
|
|
|
He's pretty prolific he also writes comics and in other mediums. He really looks like his dad too.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2017 14:29
|
|
|
NOS4A2 is great because you can see the parallels with IT within the book but it goes off in it's own direction and has totally differing themes and ideas behind it. A lesser writer would have basically made IT 2.0 and coasted off his name but Owen took germs of ideas from his father's work and took it someplace new and really interesting. I think that's what makes me respect Owen so drat much, he's never tried to cash in on his last name and his work is so drat good he doesn't need to. Honestly, the dude needs to put out another short story collection.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2017 14:30
|
|
|
OldTennisCourt posted:NOS4A2 is great because you can see the parallels with IT within the book but it goes off in it's own direction and has totally differing themes and ideas behind it. A lesser writer would have basically made IT 2.0 and coasted off his name but Owen took germs of ideas from his father's work and took it someplace new and really interesting. You've got the wrong King kid. Joseph Hill is Joseph King who is the writer of NOS4A2. Owen King is a author as well but not really as prolific but uses Kings last name.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2017 14:32
|
|
|
Hollismason posted:You've got the wrong King kid. Joseph Hill is Joseph King who is the writer of NOS4A2. Owen King is a author as well but not really as prolific but uses Kings last name. I have literally no clue why my mind jumped to Owen for that, you're totally right. Also, on wikipedia: On December 8, 2015 it was announced that the novel is currently in development to become a TV miniseries on AMC. It is unknown who will direct or write the script for the series.[15] Totally down for that. Man I'm trying to dream cast Manx now.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2017 14:36
|
|
|
Basebf555 posted:He'll just never be as prolific, it would be near impossible without hardcore drugs and gallons of booze. Hollismason posted:He's pretty prolific he also writes comics and in other mediums. He really looks like his dad too. Locke & Key is one of the best comics I've read, but Joe Hill gets less and less impressive the more I read his works. He's totally a competent writer, but he emulates his father to the point of repeating tropes to the T (magical mentally handicapped guy, fat people are bad, magical black people, etc.). You shouldn't be able to say, "Oh, NOS4A2 is a lot like IT", "The Fireman is a lot like The Stand." It doesn't really show you stand on your own, which, again, is a really difficult situation that he's playing into instead of breaking the mold. I'd like a Locke & Key mini-series, but the problem is a lot of the comics take advantage of being a comic: the "November" issue can't be done in a TV show, the old War Comic issues wouldn't translate well, etc. It'd have to reinvent itself and take advantage of the new medium of television or (even better) streaming services, like a supernatural version of the Arrested Development format.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2017 14:44
|
|
|
So sat down and watched Body Parts again since I hadn't seen it in years. I almost tapped out until I saw Brad Dourif who was just great in it. The last twenty minutes were also so bonkers and fun. I also never noticed how similar Jeff Fahey looked to Michael Keaton in Batman with the curly hair and glasses.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2017 16:01
|
|
|
The only thing I've seen of Locke and Key is a scene where an evil leprechaun rapes a recovering alcoholic woman while forcing her to drink tons of booze, then her daughter comes home, sees her laid out on the floor stinking of booze and tells her to gently caress off out of her life for breaking her promise to stay sober and walks out of the house, and I was like "Yeah I don't need to read this".
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2017 16:06
|
|
|
Lurdiak posted:The only thing I've seen of Locke and Key is a scene where an evil leprechaun rapes a recovering alcoholic woman while forcing her to drink tons of booze, then her daughter comes home, sees her laid out on the floor stinking of booze and tells her to gently caress off out of her life for breaking her promise to stay sober and walks out of the house, and I was like "Yeah I don't need to read this". Uhm, yes and no. The evil leprechaun is the shape-shifting bad guy who's whole goal is to destroy the family by exploiting their weaknesses and turning them against each other. He does not rape her, though the character is a victim of sexual assault by her husband's murderers, so there are some similarities on purpose. The mom is a recovering alcoholic who had fallen off the wagon several times. The issue or so prior, she had promised her daughter to fully recover after binge drinking. She is not really a parent to her children, they are raising themselves at this point. The daughter has used a supernatural key to remove "negative" emotions, removing her ability to feel sympathy. She is only able to feel anger, happiness, etc. I forget what, but the mom was supposed to do something for one of her kids when this happened, so to the daughter, the mom is selfishly loving up again instead of trying. It's a really rough moment in the story for the characters, and out of context it's very weird, but in context I feel it is 100% justified and earned and works with the characters very well. It is not a happy book at all.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2017 16:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 23:34 |
|
|
Also you can play the game of "Take something out of the context of the work and describe it in a horrifying way" to literally every piece of fictional media ever produced.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2017 16:32
|
|