|
That is really loving cool. I haven't been this hyped for a movie in quite a while. Maybe TDK. Loving everything I've seen so far. Everything. I know enough not to be duped by trailers in general but the loving TONE they've set and even the little storm drain clip we got just seemed really spot on. Hard to picture too much of drastic drop off in that context. Surprised they didn't push the release date closer to Halloween though. Speaking of that, the only bad thing likely to come out of IT is gonna be the over abundance of Pennywise costumes Oct. 31. Has King seen IT yet or commented on IT?
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2017 19:50
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 10:19 |
|
|
I think one of the trailers included a quick intro with him talking, so he seems to approve of it. Edit: It was from the scene they showed at Comicon, which has been wiped from the internet. Kevyn fucked around with this message at 20:26 on Aug 24, 2017 |
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2017 20:02
|
|
|
Kevyn posted:I think one of the trailers included a quick intro with him talking, so he seems to approve of it. I had forgotten about that. Not sure if King's approval is a good or a bad thing to be honest but in this case I'll take it as a plus since the book relies so much on atmosphere and, to a slightly lesser extent, characterization. If they nail those, they've got 2/3 of the movie working pretty well. The remaining third would just be getting the pacing, the acting, the effects and, above all else, the believability element down. Which is a weird thing to say, granted, about a killer clown who lives in the sewers, a giant spider, a space turtle and a gang bang. But most of the "far out", hard to film elements are in part 2. Part 1 is essentially about childhood fears and insecurity, where monsters really ARE under the bed, and IT looks like they have that on lockdown right now. Part 2 is gonna be much, MUCH trickier to pull off.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2017 20:44
|
|
|
King has horrible taste in movies, but he said it was great earlier this year. I think he also said The Mist (show) and TDT were great as well, though, so, yeah.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2017 20:49
|
|
|
Darko posted:King has horrible taste in movies, but he said it was great earlier this year. And he hated The Shining. That's what I mean. He's a great writer and I love him to death but his opinions and involvements with his movies have been rather hit and miss. Always been weird to me that the best of the King movie adaptations were always the less "scary" ones (Green Mile, Stand by Me, Shawshank, Misery, Delores Claiborne). I can see Gerald's Game translating well along these lines and don't hate the book like most people do. Comes out on Netflix Sep 29 apparently. Still baffling how no one has done "The Long Walk". I bet some student film maker could pull it off really well. Doesn't need a budget at all really. Apparently the rights are tied up. You could make that film for dirt. Even a short film could work. Wonder if any film school students have given it a shot?
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2017 21:40
|
|
|
BiggerBoat posted:And he hated The Shining. not really
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2017 21:55
|
|
|
He thought it was a good film but a bad adaptation of a story that was very personal to him. He was also probably annoyed by Kubrick ringing him up in the dead of night to ask him stuff like if he believed in God and if he agreed that ghost stories were inherently optimistic because they assumed there was some sort of afterlife.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2017 22:03
|
|
|
King tweeted this out: "Andy Muschietti's remake of IT (actually it's Part 1--The Losers' Club) succeeds beyond my expectations. Relax. Wait. And enjoy." Source: http://www.slashfilm.com/it-remake-approved-by-stephen-king/
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2017 23:30
|
|
|
BiggerBoat posted:And he hated The Shining. That's what I mean. He's a great writer and I love him to death but his opinions and involvements with his movies have been rather hit and miss. Always been weird to me that the best of the King movie adaptations were always the less "scary" ones (Green Mile, Stand by Me, Shawshank, Misery, Delores Claiborne). I agree with all this except Misery being considered a less "scary" one. I've always found it one of his absolute scariest, the movie as well.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2017 01:21
|
|
|
BiggerBoat posted:And he hated The Shining. That's what I mean. He's a great writer and I love him to death but his opinions and involvements with his movies have been rather hit and miss. Always been weird to me that the best of the King movie adaptations were always the less "scary" ones (Green Mile, Stand by Me, Shawshank, Misery, Delores Claiborne). Maybe he's bitter because the Shining movie is far better than it's source material. That TV mini series of the Shining that he backed was loving wretched.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2017 03:52
|
|
|
Yaws posted:Maybe he's bitter because the Shining movie is far better than it's source material. Kubrick's is not better than the book at all. It's mid-range Kubrick and interesting as gently caress, but doesn't hit the emotional notes or level of the novel, mainly due to making it about enabling addiction as opposed to overcoming it. The mini series was bad because it was TV level production and acting, not because of the raw material. For instance, the beehive thing, being the turning point, was a huge heartbreaking moment, something the movie lacked, as Jack was never "fighting" anything in the movie. However, in the miniseries, nobody cared about anything because of the pedestrian nature of it, so moments like that were, "whatever." Darko fucked around with this message at 04:58 on Aug 25, 2017 |
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2017 04:56
|
|
|
Stanley Kubrick is one of the best directors of all time and he took a middling novel from an author who writes airport trash for the masses and elevated it into what is widely considered to be one of the best horror films ever.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2017 05:16
|
|
|
I've never liked the term "airport trash", and have always been uncomfortable between the largely manufactured and insipid hierarchy between "low" and "high" art. But, even if I were to give those terms the time of day, I don't think King's works categorize as Airport trash, which by their nature are disposable and often replaced. King's works are often iconic, and stand the test of time.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2017 05:35
|
|
|
Yaws posted:Stanley Kubrick is one of the best directors of all time and he took a middling novel from an author who writes airport trash for the masses and elevated it into what is widely considered to be one of the best horror films ever. Well that sure is a spicy take
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2017 05:35
|
|
|
Naw, I agree. The Shining is a much better film than a book. Even as a big King fan I can admit that much, especially since I didn't find the book very scary while the movie has one of the most unnerving atmospheres I've seen in a horror movie. King's just mad because Jack Torrance is based off of himself and Kubrick didn't give him an unearned redemption arc like in the book.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2017 06:32
|
|
|
Mantis42 posted:Naw, I agree. The Shining is a much better film than a book. Even as a big King fan I can admit that much, especially since I didn't find the book very scary while the movie has one of the most unnerving atmospheres I've seen in a horror movie. King's just mad because Jack Torrance is based off of himself and Kubrick didn't give him an unearned redemption arc like in the book. The fear in The Shining (novel) is about how someone fighting strongly against addiction can be led back into it from things outside of their control. It's a real life fear that many people can relate to, with themselves or with close friends and family - which I find "scarier" than the mood of the film. I would definitely not say it was "unearned," as the entire book was him searching for forgiveness for something he was genuinely repentant about and being undermined at every turn. He got a phyrric victory in that he was finally able to save his family/beat his demons at the very end at the cost of his own life.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2017 12:19
|
|
|
The Shining as a book is an excellent book with kind of mediocre execution. The idea is brilliant, the topics it covers are excellent and the story and characters are bananas. Unfortunately it bogs itself down with some non-plausible stuff and the ending leaves the quality and writing behind in favour of Krusty's Skary Horror Show, fan-fiction-like character arc resolutions and scenes, and even the "Black Man To The Rescue" cliche which IMHO is pretty cringeworthy by today's standards. The Shining movie does away with the mediocrity and focuses on the best parts of the movie all the way to the end. In particular it discards Krusty's Skary Horror Show in favor of more sublime and legit frightening set pieces. TBH I feel a major failing of many of King's books is his desire to finish off by revealing the monster and having some sort of battle with it. It falls flat pretty much every time and usually ends up leaving cookie-cutter endings to otherwise great concepts. Bisse fucked around with this message at 13:08 on Aug 25, 2017 |
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2017 13:06
|
|
|
Yaws posted:Stanley Kubrick is one of the best directors of all time and he took a middling novel from an author who writes airport trash for the masses and elevated it into what is widely considered to be one of the best horror films ever. They're both okay.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2017 13:28
|
|
|
Bisse posted:The Shining as a book is an excellent book with kind of mediocre execution. The idea is brilliant, the topics it covers are excellent and the story and characters are bananas. Unfortunately it bogs itself down with some non-plausible stuff and the ending leaves the quality and writing behind in favour of Krusty's Skary Horror Show, fan-fiction-like character arc resolutions and scenes, and even the "Black Man To The Rescue" cliche which IMHO is pretty cringeworthy by today's standards. That's a lot of words for King is bad at ending his books which is correct. Still mad about The Stand.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2017 13:42
|
|
|
Bisse posted:TBH I feel a major failing of many of King's books is his desire to finish off by revealing the monster and having some sort of battle with it. ^^^Big time.^^^ Worse is when it takes on all these new forms and characteristics it's never exhibited before. I liked both The Shining movie as well as the book for decidedly different reasons and thought that Kubrick's take on it was masterful. I still notice new stuff every time I watch it and I love movies like that. There was just so much going on with the tone, the framing, the lighting, the great acting, the sound (Danny's big wheel on the carpet and the hardwood), all the constant symmetrical shots and especially the sheer scale of the Overlook itself and its contradictory, bizarre, physically impossible layout. The SIZE of the hotel made it feel like a monster in and of itself and Kubrick captured that brilliantly. Movie fucks with your head because it's doing so many little things to you at the same time it's punching you in the face. I think it's my favorite Kubrick film; or at least the one I watch the most often. HArd to argue with Dr. Strangelove though. Is there a Kubrick thread? Very very psyched for IT but very worried about part 2. Are they filming them concurrently or one at a time? Is Mama worth checking out? EDIT: And dismissing King as "airport trash" is loving ridiculous. He's written his fair share of crap, for sure, but calling his work "trash" is the sort of thing snobbish people say about things that are popular as well as good. Like when an alternative band scores a top ten hit. BiggerBoat fucked around with this message at 15:22 on Aug 25, 2017 |
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2017 15:18
|
|
|
BiggerBoat posted:^^^Big time.^^^ From what I understand they haven't even started It part 2. IMDB doesn't even have a page for it. Mama is worth a watch. The third act is a little out there, but it's s pretty creepy movie.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2017 15:43
|
|
|
CopywrightMMXI posted:From what I understand they haven't even started It part 2. IMDB doesn't even have a page for it. Maybe they are waiting to see if It pulls a "Dark Tower".
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2017 15:57
|
|
|
The Fuzzy Hulk posted:Maybe they are waiting to see if It pulls a "Dark Tower". It's on track for a $50m opening weekend, which is insanely high for a horror movie. The RT score will determine how it fares from there.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2017 16:01
|
|
|
The Fuzzy Hulk posted:Maybe they are waiting to see if It pulls a "Dark Tower". Yeah no way. This will probably be a Conjuring sized hit.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2017 16:04
|
|
|
I'd be shocked if this movie didn't outperform The Dark Tower. The book and the miniseries still have a ton of pop culture relevance, at least compared to Dark Tower. It cuts across generations too, me and my parents both have vivid memories of Tim Curry's Pennywise.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2017 16:04
|
|
|
I can't remember where but I had read that they were excited to make part 2 since it was going to give them a chance to include a bunch of scenes they had to cut from part 1, like the fire at the black spot and the Bradley gang. I think that sounds like a better way anyways, pad part 2 with the great background flashback stuff and history.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2017 16:06
|
|
|
Tom Guycot posted:I can't remember where but I had read that they were excited to make part 2 since it was going to give them a chance to include a bunch of scenes they had to cut from part 1, like the fire at the black spot and the Bradley gang. I think that sounds like a better way anyways, pad part 2 with the great background flashback stuff and history. That is a good idea. And honestly I think with a few things like that it will be easy to flesh out the Adult portion since I thought it didn't have as much going on but there is definitely enough for a whole movie and then some just with the adults after finishing my reread just a few days ago. Also man, I've read IT twice. Once when I was 16 and know again at 32. It's kinda neat how different it feels reading it and identifying more with the adult Losers and that whole loss of childhood thing than the kids this time around.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2017 17:03
|
|
|
BlackJosh posted:That is a good idea. And honestly I think with a few things like that it will be easy to flesh out the Adult portion since I thought it didn't have as much going on but there is definitely enough for a whole movie and then some just with the adults after finishing my reread just a few days ago. I just hope the differences in tone and the lack of intertwining the chapters doesn't gently caress IT up somehow. The book DID hop around a bit from a timeline standpoint, and that really worked, but I also don't believe the movies have to necessarily be done that way and follow the same structure in order to work. In this case, IT might actually be better to film them separately since the challenges inherent to telling both parts seem so fundamentally different, rather than going with a full on LOTR approach and doing IT all at once. I honestly don't know. I like the idea of using cut footage for part 2 to tie the two movies together, but I'd also hate to get a great interpretation in part 1 and then entirely poo poo the bed on the second one. I'm also worried that whatever criticisms are leveled at part 1 will overly influence the overall vision of the totality of the project and lead to a ton of bullshit re-shoots or tonal shifts, but I can also see that working to IT's advantage. Regardless, I am stoked for IT.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2017 17:32
|
|
|
Shakespeare is a hack. He only writes poo poo that sells tickets in London, and he's hardly an Artist. It's all just lowest-common-denominator crap that he writes to make money. You see how much poo poo he's churned out in his lifetime? VOLUME = LOW QUALITY
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2017 18:09
|
|
|
IT is going to make a fuckload of money. There's always a market for horror, the 80s are big, the footage look great, clowns are in, the first trailer was memetic.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2017 18:10
|
|
|
Typically "airport trash" isn't like 1000+ pages though. From what I know about King I think he'd be perfectly happy to be known as a writer of stories that had extremely broad appeal. It's not like anyone out there is accusing him of being on the same level a Dean Koontz, now he's much more in line with what I'd consider "airport trash"(and I still enjoy a good portion of his work).
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2017 18:13
|
|
|
porfiria posted:IT is going to make a fuckload of money. There's always a market for horror, the 80s are big, the footage look great, clowns are in, the first trailer was memetic. Oh, God. This is a real word now isn't it?
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2017 18:14
|
|
|
To clarify, I think in a hundred years, after we're all long-gone, King will be as revered and studied as Shakespeare is today.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2017 18:25
|
|
|
King is real good and the only reason he doesn't get given the literary credibility he deserves is because he mostly writes genre fiction.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2017 19:01
|
|
|
Lincoln posted:To clarify, I think in a hundred years, after we're all long-gone, King will be as revered and studied as Shakespeare is today. I got the sarcasm and I agree wholeheartedly. But Shakespeare is not so much "popular" as he is "taught" and "revered". Known. I think the person that wrote that "airport trash" post was sort of positing that...I dunno....something along the lines of "Shakespeare is not read in airports", combined with the misguided idea that once something is popular it's no longer "cool", and drawing edgy, backwards conclusion about King's place in literature from there. It's a dumb opinion but, like you said, it'll come around and King WILL be taught in Universities and higher ed (if he's not already) and deservedly so. There's a LOT of "airport" or "beach" books that are mediocre and instantly forgettable but gently caress that poo poo. King's books are NOT in that category at all. Most of them anyway. I count a lot of his material as some of the most memorable things I've ever read.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2017 19:18
|
|
|
Also just from a technical perspective King's writing is head and shoulders above the stuff you'd typically consider airport fiction. There's a ton of writers who have become relatively successful with that kind of thing but their actual writing abilities are extremely amateurish. When you read King you're reading a pro and it's very obvious.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2017 19:21
|
|
|
King will probably be around in 100 years, but I don't know about Shakespeare. Maybe Dickens.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2017 19:22
|
|
|
Basebf555 posted:Also just from a technical perspective King's writing is head and shoulders above the stuff you'd typically consider airport fiction. There's a ton of writers who have become relatively successful with that kind of thing but their actual writing abilities are extremely amateurish. When you read King you're reading a pro and it's very obvious. Totally agree. King is a master of language, setting, pace and rhythm. Not all the time, and maybe not always with prose, but certainly often enough. If you read Kellerman, Cornwell or Koontz (King's closest "competitor") or something like that that's normally considered pulp, the drop off is quite noticeable, often to to the point that I need to put down whatever I'm reading and can't finish it. A lot of times, it's like trying to watch a movie with a decent enough plot but with absolutely terrible acting and hackneyed scripting, which is the best analogy I can think of it right now. There's nothing "trash" about King beyond simply being "popular" and "liked well enough by people who don't read that much". To me, that's actually a point in his favor though. He gets people who don't normally read to loving READ. And he's really good at it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2017 19:40
|
|
|
In the introduction to Salem's Lot he talks about how his mom thought a lot of what he read as a kid, Dracula, E.C. horror comics, and stuff along those lines, was trash but she didn't mind him reading it as long as it wasn't "bad trash". He then goes on to say that if his mother had lived to read the book she would've considered it trash but not bad trash. I think he is fully aware that he is basically the king of the pulp writers.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2017 20:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 10:19 |
|
|
BiggerBoat posted:I think the person that wrote that "airport trash" post was sort of positing that...I dunno....something along the lines of "Shakespeare is not read in airports", combined with the misguided idea that once something is popular it's no longer "cool", and drawing edgy, backwards conclusion about King's place in literature from there. It's a dumb opinion but, like you said, it'll come around and King WILL be taught in Universities and higher ed (if he's not already) and deservedly so. Don't put words in my mouth
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2017 23:00
|
|