It (Andrés Muschietti, 2017/2019)

Discuss films of the 21st century including current cinema, current filmmakers, and film festivals.
Post Reply
Message
Author
User avatar
cdnchris
Site Admin
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 2:45 pm
Location: Washington
Contact:

Re: It (Andrés Muschietti, 2017)

#151 Post by cdnchris » Fri Sep 29, 2017 4:48 pm

Why would that piss them off? Is the idea of Ronald McDonald eating children beneficial to the McD brand in Russia?

User avatar
Lost Highway
Joined: Thu Aug 29, 2013 7:41 am
Location: Berlin, Germany

Re: It (Andrés Muschietti, 2017)

#152 Post by Lost Highway » Wed Dec 20, 2017 4:50 am

I finally saw this and thought it was pretty good. I was already too old for the mini-series to have much of an effect on me and thought it was pretty crummy back then, so this was an improvement. Whatever flaws there may be, are with King‘s source novel, which I was never a huge fan of. When a monster becomes too powerful and can pull an unlimited amount of tricks out of its hat, I find it becomes somewhat unrelatable. There is an unnecessarily over-elaborate mythology at the core of It, though the film does well in dropping a portion of the mystical alternative universe mumbo-jumbo from the book.

But Muschietti pulls off some genuinely grotesque and disturbing imagery and the scares are well staged. The changes made to the novel, omitting the weird kiddie orgy and changing the monsters from their Universal Monster template to something more weird, are improvements. I didn’t have a problem with the jump scares we all are supposed to complain about these days in horror films. The only time I hate those is when they are fake scares. This is the type of fun house style spook show for which this approach works. Most importantly, the kids were likeable and kept me invested enough to care. The girl was particularly good.

Like the new Star Wars film, the reception of It followed a now familiar pattern. Early reviews declaring it a triumph, followed by a vicious online backlash where every aspect gets picked apart. I’m glad I saw it at some distance from that. This was a great year for horror films, so I’m not sure It even cracks my top ten but I‘m looking forward to the second part.


black&huge
Joined: Tue Dec 26, 2017 5:35 am

Re: Stephen King on Film

#154 Post by black&huge » Fri Jun 01, 2018 2:15 pm

Is IT the only King novel that has that structure of cutting off mid sentence at the end of a chapter in one timeline only to match/finish it in the opening sentence of the next chapter in another timeline? It's the only King novel I've "read" all the way through. "Read" meaning I actually just listened to the audiobook instead.

I know Muschietti plans to have the kids back in the sequel. It'd be a cool thing to see that structure carried on in film form.

User avatar
Big Ben
Joined: Mon Feb 08, 2016 12:54 pm
Location: Great Falls, Montana

Re: Stephen King on Film

#155 Post by Big Ben » Fri Jun 01, 2018 3:07 pm

black&huge wrote:
Fri Jun 01, 2018 2:15 pm
Is IT the only King novel that has that structure of cutting off mid sentence at the end of a chapter in one timeline only to match/finish it in the opening sentence of the next chapter in another timeline? It's the only King novel I've "read" all the way through. "Read" meaning I actually just listened to the audiobook instead.

I know Muschietti plans to have the kids back in the sequel. It'd be a cool thing to see that structure carried on in film form.
The original film still had aspects of Cary Fukunaga's original script in it so there might be some tonal shift (Despite the obvious one) in the newer film. Fukunaga's original script was absolutely nuts. Far more violent and it ended with the most absolute batshit phantasmagoria.

I'm excited to see what Muschietti does nonetheless as I quite enjoyed the first chapter.

black&huge
Joined: Tue Dec 26, 2017 5:35 am

Re: Stephen King on Film

#156 Post by black&huge » Fri Jun 01, 2018 3:49 pm

Big Ben wrote:
Fri Jun 01, 2018 3:07 pm

The original film still had aspects of Cary Fukunaga's original script in it so there might be some tonal shift (Despite the obvious one) in the newer film. Fukunaga's original script was absolutely nuts. Far more violent and it ended with the most absolute batshit phantasmagoria.

I'm excited to see what Muschietti does nonetheless as I quite enjoyed the first chapter.
The one thing I wish they kept was the concept for IT's lair and the chase leading up to it. The upside down island with the surrounding waterfalls was an incredibly imaginative thing.

connor
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2010 2:03 pm

Re: Stephen King on Film

#157 Post by connor » Sat Jun 02, 2018 6:15 pm

Only recently saw the new It and couldn't believe how terrible it was.

The opening is stunning, truly horrifying. You would think, after that, the filmmakers would say "hey! We really got the audience by the short and curlies now! We can treat this like the opening scene to Jaws and just build up the mood now! No need for ghostly shit for another half hour at least!" But instead of using the lingering effect of that jolt to spend considerable time on building up characters and setting tone, it shifts to jump scares like every 6 minutes.

For all the corniness of the TV version, it works much better (and for some reason, the score for that version really sticks with me).

User avatar
Big Ben
Joined: Mon Feb 08, 2016 12:54 pm
Location: Great Falls, Montana

Re: Stephen King on Film

#158 Post by Big Ben » Sat Jun 02, 2018 7:30 pm

connor wrote:
Sat Jun 02, 2018 6:15 pm
Only recently saw the new It and couldn't believe how terrible it was.

The opening is stunning, truly horrifying. You would think, after that, the filmmakers would say "hey! We really got the audience by the short and curlies now! We can treat this like the opening scene to Jaws and just build up the mood now! No need for ghostly shit for another half hour at least!" But instead of using the lingering effect of that jolt to spend considerable time on building up characters and setting tone, it shifts to jump scares like every 6 minutes.

For all the corniness of the TV version, it works much better (and for some reason, the score for that version really sticks with me).
In fairness to Muschietti that's the way it is in the book too. That isn't an invention of the screen. I don't think that necessarily negates your criticism but I think it's important to note.

Thinking on my own memories of the book I just don't think it's possible ( Ratings, legal and budgetary reasons) to do an incredibly faithful adaptation. Muschietti didn't have a Nolan budget and it certainly showed. We'll see how much a larger works for him in the next installment.

User avatar
domino harvey
Dot Com Dom
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm

Re: It (Andrés Muschietti, 2017/2019)

#159 Post by domino harvey » Fri Jun 22, 2018 10:00 am

Director Xavier Dolan will also appear in the sequel, no doubt as a favor to his BFF Chastain. Once I found out who he's playing, I couldn't deny it was spot-on casting:
SpoilerShow
He's playing Adrian Mellon, the first present day victim of IT / gay bashing.
I'm surprised they're including the character, as it seemed like something they'd not bother to keep, but it gives me a modicum of curious hope. Wonder if they'll keep the other interludes from the book too, especially since they're also of the zeitgeist

Post Reply