IT review thread (RT 91%)

Rotten Tomatoes: 89%
Metacritic: 70

IGN 9.2
IT may not be the best Stephen King movie (even though it comes impressively close), but it’s probably the MOST Stephen King movie. Director Andy Muschietti evokes the horror author’s effortless melodrama and in-your-face psychological torments simultaneously, because he seems to understand that these sensibilities bring out the best and, by definition, the worst in one another. Nightmares are scarier when they emerge from happy dreams, and happy endings mean a heck of a lot more when unthinkable horror precedes them.
Nerdist 4/5
Horror films are always hit and miss… horror adaptations even more so. But It not only made me fall in love with The Losers Club all over again, it made me excited for a sequel! Who would play these kids as adults? Can we get another installment with the kids before their grown-up selves reunite in Derry? Yes, I crawled out of my skin and yes, Pennywise is still scary as all get-out, but the real strength of this film lies in The Losers Club and that incredible cast.
Empire 4/5
More successful as a coming-of-age movie than a horror, It still ranks among the better Stephen King adaptations — no small praise indeed.
Indiewire B-
At times, the movie excels at portraying the dread of children forced to confront a world indifferent to their concerns. But no matter how many times Pennywise leaps out from unexpected places, it’s impossible to shake the feeling that we’ve been here many times before.
Entertainment Weekly B
It is essentially two movies. The better by far (and it’s very good) is the one that feels like a darker Stand by Me — a nostalgic coming-of-age story about seven likable outcasts riding around on their bikes and facing their fears together... Less successful are the sections that trot out Pennywise. The more we see of him, the less scary he becomes.
The A.V. Club B
Muschietti excels in creature design, and It contains some very effective and well-executed nightmare imagery. When the supernatural creeps up on the ordinary and our young heroes’ greatest fears are literally coming after them...It can be deliciously macabre.
Variety
Visual flair and a solid cast keep Andy Muschietti's patchy Stephen King adaptation afloat.
The Hollywood Reporter
It is a solid thriller that works best when it is most involved in its adolescent heroes' non-monster-related concerns. It will prove much more satisfying to King's legion of fans than "Dark Tower" did. But it falls well short of the King-derived film it clearly wants to evoke, "Stand By Me"; and newcomers who were spoiled by the eight richly developed hours of Stranger Things may wonder what the big deal is supposed to be.

Collider: B+
Herald Sun: 4/5
Gulf News: 4/5
Chicago Sun Times: 4/4
The telegraph: 4/5
The playlist: B+
Arizona Republic: 4/5

It's late but I'll try to continue to update as more reviews pop up.
 
Muschietti excels at creepy imagery and setting up Pennywise’s attacks, but he’s not terribly concerned with making this It’s story. The film almost seems afraid to really let Skarsgard shine with Pennywise because he might overshadow the Losers. There are a few scenes where he really gets to let loose, but he’s stuck in a pattern—It is the predator, and the kids are his prey. The creature is only motivated by hunger and a need to fear on fear. That’s not particularly interesting, and while you can get some frightening images out of his creations, the heart of the movie needs to be the characters who can grow and change, the Losers.

Hmm seems like this version of Pennywise is a bit misguided? Skarsgard does a good to great job acting but he doesn't capture the essence of Pennywise?
 
Hmm seems like this version of Pennywise is a bit misguided? Skarsgard does a good to great job acting but he doesn't capture the essence of Pennywise?

? A creature motivated by hunger and a need to feed on fear is exactly what It is.
 
Hmm seems like this version of Pennywise is a bit misguided? Skarsgard does a good to great job acting but he doesn't capture the essence of Pennywise?
That sounds exactly like Pennywise. He doesn't get all that thought provoking until the adult timeline, the child timeline is more about the losers.
 
Hypes as hell for this and I usually never watch horror movies. I remember watching the miniseries as a kid and I was ridiculously intrigued by the premise. It scared me but I found the story interesting as hell.
 
Hmm seems like this version of Pennywise is a bit misguided? Skarsgard does a good to great job acting but he doesn't capture the essence of Pennywise?

It is the predator, and the kids are his prey. The creature is only motivated by hunger and a need to fear on fear.
That's a perfect description of IT.

Too bad they didn't get Derry down, though.
 
It does have a personality though. Just reducing it to beast seems a bit too much.

I'm about 1/3 of the way into my re-read of the book and so far, IT is 90% beast, 10% personality. There's a little bit of taunting in there, but IT mostly comes out the sewer/canal and chases kids. Sometimes it catches them and kills them, sometimes not.

IIRC IT has more personality in the adult sections, out of necessity. But with the kids it's really mostly a monster that goes after them directly.

The Georgie clip we saw a while back hit the balance perfectly, if they walk that through the film, I'm happy.
 
I'm about 1/3 of the way into my re-read of the book and so far, IT is 90% beast, 10% personality. There's a little bit of taunting in there, but IT mostly comes out the sewer/canal and chases kids. Sometimes it catches them and kills them, sometimes not.

IIRC IT has more personality in the adult sections, out of necessity. But with the kids it's really mostly a monster that goes after them directly.

The Georgie clip we saw a while back hit the balance perfectly, if they walk that through the film, I'm happy.

Exactly. Do people expect Pennywise to be a foe with deep motivations and diverse character traits? It's a fucking monster.
 
I'm about 1/3 of the way into my re-read of the book and so far, IT is 90% beast, 10% personality. There's a little bit of taunting in there, but IT mostly comes out the sewer/canal and chases kids. Sometimes it catches them and kills them, sometimes not.

IIRC IT has more personality in the adult sections, out of necessity. But with the kids it's really mostly a monster that goes after them directly.
IT definitely has more personality in '85 as the events that happen when they're adults is because
IT is pissed off
. However there are also segments at the end that give brief insight into its mindset during the 1958 era. IT is condescending but also grows afraid near the end and so resorts to a number of tactics to scare the Losers off.

IT also has a flair for the dramatic such as waving hi to Mike during the parade, which doesn't serve an immediate goal other than to fuck with Mike.
 
Sounds like It's solid overall. It's too bad it doesn't seem to deliver fully in the horror department, but given how many modern horror flicks play out in that regard it could probably be worse. I'm glad that the kids seem to be realized well enough.
 
Sounds like a good time for sure. Not too hyped about the tepid response to the fear factor here, but I'm all for the losers.

I'll be there Friday night.
 
I saw it. I really liked it! I thought some of the jump scares worked pretty well, but it definitely works better as a coming of age film. Lot more humor in this than expected, but it all works really well.

The kids are all genuinely fantastic, and only one of them feels like they don't really have much to do.

Also, Chung-hoon Chung's cinematography is really pretty, and captures that 80's aesthetic without shoving it down your throat. Really liked how the color red was utilized throughout.

(Haven't read the book, for what it's worth.)
 
bandicam2017-09-0603-adxyu.png


Lets see what happens later on!
 
The book isn't even that scary most of the time. It's an andventure all centered around friendship and trust. <3 I hope the movie is a success so they can finish what they started. There are some fucked up themes that probably didn't make it into the film but even on the surface it should be a good time.
 
I thought the book was also more successful as a coming of age story than a horror one. And generally speaking, I think most SK books are best when the monsters and supernatural stuff aren't there, or are there in small amounts.
A darker stand by me sounds perfect.

Looking forward to IT.

And I hope when the second movie releases they also put together an extended/complete edition, re edited to go back and forth between young and adult like in the book
 
Hmm seems like this version of Pennywise is a bit misguided? Skarsgard does a good to great job acting but he doesn't capture the essence of Pennywise?

Pennywise doesn't have human motivations for doing what he does. He mimics human emotion primarily to create fear, despair, and
loyalty
.
 
Hmm seems like this version of Pennywise is a bit misguided? Skarsgard does a good to great job acting but he doesn't capture the essence of Pennywise?

Skarsgard does a really good job with what he's given but he arguably isn't given enough. The Georgie scene at the beginning is the best horror-driven scene in the movie because it's the scene where the dialogue works the hardest, where the tension is allowed to build most effectively, and where Bill is allowed to act his socks off.

No other scene in the movie demands as much of Bill or gives him the opportunity to show off a range of emotions in a single scene as that one. I also personally thought he could have been given more screen time. I know people were crying out for the transformations/shapeshifting but I think those forms, as represented in this movie anyway, are....not great compared to what Pennywise can offer.

Really I would have just liked another 5-10 minutes of Pennywise with a lot more dialogue from him. I don't think it's an exaggeration to say that a very significant chunk of his dialogue in the entire movie comes from just that one Georgie scene.
 
Skarsgard does a really good job with what he's given but he arguably isn't given enough. The Georgie scene at the beginning is the best horror-driven scene in the movie because it's the scene where the dialogue works the hardest, where the tension is allowed to build most effectively, and where Bill is allowed to act his socks off.

No other scene in the movie demands as much of Bill or gives him the opportunity to show off a range of emotions in a single scene as that one. I also personally thought he could have been given more screen time. I know people were crying out for the transformations/shapeshifting but I think those forms, as represented in this movie anyway, are....not great compared to what Pennywise can offer.

Really I would have just liked another 5-10 minutes of Pennywise with a lot more dialogue from him. I don't think it's an exaggeration to say that a very significant chunk of his dialogue in the entire movie comes from just that one Georgie scene.

Isn't he mostly silent in the story, though? I'm re-reading the book and halfway through that's pretty much the one scene with the most dialogue he got. I may be misremembering something, though.
 
Nobody is expecting it to stay at 100% but that's still really encouraging as a starting place.

Friday morning get here!
 
Top Bottom