Inferno313
Banned
Yeah, R for "violence/horror, bloody images, and for language"
IT review thread (RT 91%)
- Thread starter Saucycarpdog
- Start date
Yeah, R for "violence/horror, bloody images, and for language"
It will definitely come, and I'm looking forward to it too.
Yeah, the endless trash gif and the video that it's from was casting a net that was far too wide, but I'm sure they knew that even then; they went overboard trying to emphasize the point they were trying to make. They owned up to it in the WW review, and I'm sure they'll do the same for IT. They don't take themselves seriously and they don't expect their audience to, either.
Bobby Roberts
Banned
Of course they do
If they didn't they woulda quit by now.
You don't do a thing for 10+ years and make it your full-time job without taking it seriously.
To be honest, I've always had hope for this movie since I think there could be a new IT movie that would outdo the previous one if it was closer to the book and improved on everything. Even the 1st image of Pennywise made me have hope still despite the backlash it got. Then the 1st teaser trailer came and I already knew this movie was going to do well critically.
Robdraggoo
Member
I think he means the content is not made to be taken seriously. As it's a joke.
A lot of the RLM stuff is not serious in the sense I think he meant (best of the worst, etc.), but they do plenty of non-joke reviews and offer up serious film criticism in a "jokey" wrapper. That's their general MO - criticism through various filters of humor.
But to Bobby's point, it's not like they're throwing off spur of the moment Twitter comments. They put a lot of planning, time and resources into their material, so they have to take their work seriously. We can distinguish between their jokes and the criticism on offer, just as RLM intends.
Bobby Roberts
Banned
No, you're supposed to take that seriously, too.
People don't spend this much time putting this much work into this much content without hoping the people they're making it for care about it.
The entire concept of "taking it seriously" as an inherent negative is fucking mindboggling, to me.
Of course you're supposed to take shit (even comedy) seriously when you engage with it. Otherwise what's the fucking point? If you don't give a fuck about what you're consuming, and you honestly believe the people making it don't give a fuck about how they serve it up, why even bother? Just pull a sock out from the hamper and fill it before taking a nap or something.
"Taking it seriously" doesn't mean "furrow your brow and think deeply" and only that. There are degrees of investment. And investing attention into something is the bare minimum you can do with your entertainment. That's taking it seriously.
It's just another way of saying "I care about this being worth my time." that's all.
sixteen-bit
Member
Random thought of the day: One of those nerd mashup sites like yetee would make bank with an IT and The IT Crowd crossover merch.
Might see this tonight.
Might see this tonight.
Never bet against the amazon demigod and killer clown from outer space.
Or the Power Rangers.
Inferno313
Banned
Megalosaro
Banned
I wasn't convinced this could be good until the clip of the kiss in the sewer.
The one thing I notice with some of the rotten reviews... most are valid criticisms, but there's a couple that say they don't even like the book as well. Haha. "I wish they had ditched the clown", "same shortcomings as King's original material".
I mean, I guess it's nice to see if the movie will change minds and all, but why send a reviewer who doesn't seem to like anything about the concept, to the movie? I dunno haha.
The critiques are totally fine, and the movie could get a 0% and I'd still see it, but these kinds of reviews always stick out to me. Like...poor reviewer having to sit through something they probably never would have enjoyed in the first place lol.
I mean, I guess it's nice to see if the movie will change minds and all, but why send a reviewer who doesn't seem to like anything about the concept, to the movie? I dunno haha.
The critiques are totally fine, and the movie could get a 0% and I'd still see it, but these kinds of reviews always stick out to me. Like...poor reviewer having to sit through something they probably never would have enjoyed in the first place lol.
Indeed, it's ridiculous. Again there are reviewers who review a movie, and reviewers who want to tell the world all about their personal tastes.
Paracelsus
Member
Actually that's the biggest qualm I have right now with the movie reviews.
"The kids are the draw", I'm in to see if Skarsgard out-pennywises Tim Curry and if they actually put the Rated R to good use in terms of twisted gory shit from the book. The whole Patrick thing for example.
M
Macapala
Unconfirmed Member
Down to 89%. I'm gonna see this tonight - I really hope it's good. Surely it can't be as bad as the 90's T.V movie...
I just feel bad for them lol. One guy straight up says he doesn't enjoy the book, so the movie must have been a exercise in tedium for him lol.
Well...the kids are the draw
Re: R rated stuff and Patrick, spoilers
I've heard the Patrick scene is not in the movie at all. Which is both a shame and a total relief for me (it's one of the most repulsive things I've ever read lol). And the movie is apparently bloody, but "bloodless", some have said? So maybe the gory stuff isn't used to full effect.
Have heard very very good things about Pennywise though, but that he's kind of held back to not overshadow the kids a bit. And that's fine. It's the Losers Club, not the Pennywise show.
More_Badass
Member
That's even better than before, right? Wasn't it at $70m?
Drilbit777
Member
Never bet against the amazon demigod and killer clown from outer space.
Lol I find it hilarious that wonder woman and it turned out to be good which makes two of those movies in there invalid now
Astral Dog
Member
Certified fresh! 🍅
Chaotic-Strike
Banned
I pretty much expect the scores to be around the first Conjuring or maybe the second when all is said and done.
ElMexiMerican
Member
Looks like I'll see if I can go tomorrow night then. Can't wait.
Astral Dog
Member
And be better than both? :^)
Expendable.
Member
There's probably 5 scenes of actual bullying, but it's a feeing across the whole film. Scenes dealing with IT (even if IT isn't in them) is actually the vast majority of the movies.
And I never got tired of the catchphrases/ribbing. They are intricate jokes but they are really funny.
It's not terribly gory, but there's a few gory/bloody parts. Nothing worse than say The Walking Dead though. There is however swearing like every third word.
Depending on their maturity I don't think it'd be that big of a deal. Especially because the "normal" scenes are great.
Edsmells12345
Member
I never said anything about it being a spoiler; only a suggestion to advise that some people may not want to know that information heading into the movie.
MetalliCabombination
Member
Why is a 3/5 rotten?
Tricky I Shadow
Banned
I just asked my friend who got out like 20 minutes ago. He said 9.5. He also told me it's quite possibly the most shocking scene with fantastic buildup.
VaultBoy101
Member
Not being maudlin and overly manipulative, for starters. Visual flair and editing as well, which is not surprising from a De Palma film.
The reviewer decides what is fresh/rotten, but that's a weird one. What outlet?
Given the fresh reviews are mixed I'm tempering my expectations, having said that the rotten reviews are completely awful.
Laura Clifford's review and Eric Henderson's review for Slant really annoyed me. There is no version of King's novel they would've given a fresh review. And how is a 3/5 rotten? Idiots.
Laura Clifford's review and Eric Henderson's review for Slant really annoyed me. There is no version of King's novel they would've given a fresh review. And how is a 3/5 rotten? Idiots.
neurosisxeno
Member
3/5 is 60% which is right on the cusp of failing. If it's a place that does .5's I could see 3/5 being Rotten for them, but I think sub-50% should be Rotten.
I think it's valid to see differing aspects of interest in a book like IT (and therefore by extension the film based on it).
Personally I had the same reaction after reading the book. I felt it contained some of his best and most consistent writing and characterization however by the end I felt the horror aspect had completely run out of steam and was just dumb by the end (King really, really should drop his weird stoned hippy meta-cosmos stuff IMHO he's awful at it). The story of the kids themselves, their struggle with family and bullies and just growing up ended up far more compelling than the horror tale it was wrapped around.
I'd take a film with that kid cast without the Clown too. That said I'm happy to take one with the Clown as the initial build up of the horror tale was great it just collapsed at the end.
Mister Wilhelm
Member
EDIT: Posted this in the review thread where it belongs.
Probably my second favorite Steven King adaptation, and the best Steven King horror film. They made you genuinely care for the characters in a way that The Shinning failed to do, (and most horror films skimp on), my heart wasn't pounding because of some lame jump scares, but because I was really rooting for the characters to win. The scares were inventive too. They accomplished so much in the space of 2 hours, like a Stranger Things energy pill. I wouldn't be surprised to see WB demanding rewrites of chapter 2's script to include more flash backs of the kids
TheKingOfSheep
Member
@Mister Wilhelm Yeah that's not the Backstreet Boys on Ben's door, wish it were. It's much, much worse than that it's
Wardrobe on point? In one scene Ben is wearing
from the 2010's. Put on any John Hughes movie, or E.T. or Goonies, or even Stranger Things. And you'll see the wardrobe in IT isn't particularly 80's at all. Not to mention the kids
. I can imagine Bev's dad
, but still. This is not the eighties.
If this movie actually came out in the eighties, It would've gone direct to video. Because it's really not a whole lot better than most of the top horror movies from that decade, featuring kids and teens -
Also the character development in the mini-series is way better, and that's saying a lot. But, and I give this movie that. The kids, make it enjoyable, all of them.
New Kids on The Block
Wardrobe on point? In one scene Ben is wearing
a T-Shirt
bedrooms
being the cause she doesn't have idols like Madonna or George Michael or a boyband or a Tom Cruise poster on the wall
How about Georgie having a walkie-talkie at his person? Did you notice that? Outside, a block before the storm drain, Bill warns him, Georgie, Be Careful. Yet, Georgie doesn't seem inclined to call in over the walkie-talkie he discovered a clown in the storm drain...
Later on Bill's walkie-talkie pops up from time to time when Georgie is near. They could have used this to track IT.
Later on Bill's walkie-talkie pops up from time to time when Georgie is near. They could have used this to track IT.
If this movie actually came out in the eighties, It would've gone direct to video. Because it's really not a whole lot better than most of the top horror movies from that decade, featuring kids and teens -
and those movies actually represented that decade. Seriously NO boy in the eighties would bring a tape of New Kids on the Block to school - that's probably why Henry felt the need to cut Ben in the first place, Ben's love for New Kids on the Block.
Also the character development in the mini-series is way better, and that's saying a lot. But, and I give this movie that. The kids, make it enjoyable, all of them.
Bobby Roberts
Banned
Reminder: if you've seen the flick, and you wanna discuss it, but you don't wanna have to put a whole buncha black bars and spoilers in a spoiler free thread (like this one)
Thats what the OT is for!
Come on down.
WE ALL FLOAT DOWN HERE.
Thats what the OT is for!
Come on down.
WE ALL FLOAT DOWN HERE.