IT Chapter 2

This. The running time is almost 3 hours and its filled with bad early 2000 era CGI.

How would you have made it better? It made perfect sense

Having Bill rip and tear into the Spider IT and crush his foul black heart.

It was ok and entertaining. Nothing great.

boxofficemojo.com/news/?id=4544&p=.htm

APOLOGIZE

youtube.com/watch?v=hb2Gkk9VsrU

It's not as good as the first. The adult storyline curse is still goin strong

It's very clear that the studio and director let the first movie's success go wildly to their heads, because this movie feels like such a bloated, arrogant overindulgence. A lot of unnecessary scenes that basically just exist to be call backs to the first one played for laughs or "I clapped when the thing happened!" Reddit moments. It's not horrible, there are some good parts, but it is messy and lacks, I think, the same earnest sincerity of the first one in that it just really wanted to be a faithful and solid adaptation of King's book. It seems to me there was a clear "people love Pennywise so we can't stray away from him and actually show the monster for what it is or be creative with it" mandate in play as well. Like this didn't want to be the end of the story or an adaptation, but rather the start of a franchise built around Pennywise more than anything. The tone throughout is kind of all over the place; snapping between silly Marvel quips, severe gore, and emotional character beats at whiplash speeds. The adult Ben is also really miscast imo and doesn't fit in with the rest, but the others are well done. James Ransone is perfect as Eddie particularly and James McAvoy is always a solid lead.

It’s pretty fucking good. Like the first one, it’s not all that scary(but it’s still got some fantastic moments like Hockstetter showing up), but it’s a great watch. It absolutely doesn’t feel like a three-hour runtime.

just saw this crapolla. it was shit and cringe and inconsistent
>suddenly use the term dead lights
>eddies cast doesnt have the loser on it when he goes to the pharmacy
>beverly killed her dad last flick, in this hes alive
>no spider, just multiarmed clown
>never ending quips
>shitty effects somehow worse than last flick
>the actors act like theyre kids, awkward dialogue

youtube.com/watch?v=U6PxmRbyx40

>too long
not quite, I've seen movies dragging on much more than this one.

>inconsistent
Not the word I'd use. It's consistent but left some potential storylines underused.

>cringe dialogue and character interactions
True, some interactions were just thrown in just to stick to the source material. Taking liberties with it would have better results.

>retcon of bev killing her father, now he died years after she left
It was implied but not stated so no, not retconned.

>eddie goes to the pharmacy and the bubble gum counter girl sees his cast but doesnt write the loser on it, but in the first one she acts like its the first time she sees it
He didn't have a cast on that scene.

>tried too hard to be funny
Nope.

>no spider, just pennywise with long crab arms
There are SEVERAL hints of It's true form scattered through the movie. And WTF, a crab?! You know some fucked up crabs, user.

>le bully the cosmic outer dimensional being to death
Pennywise's characterization is that of a bully in the first movie, without fear he's powerless. So it's very much in character what happened to him.

>unmemorable score
Meh.

>skarsgard changes his voice in every scene, fukn pick one and run with it
That also happened in the first movie and it didn't affect the results in the slightest.

>introduces gay shit between the losers, UH NO sweetie, its all of them smashing bev
That happened in the book, not in the movie. So yeah, get over it.

>unnecessary use of henry bowers, somehow hes aware of pennywise just because he saw a balloon, like u wot m8, in the book he talks to him but not here, no sir
He wasn't unnecessary, he was VERY underused. Also, Pennywise goaded him personally to kill Officer Bowers and returned him his missing switchblade with a RED BALLOON. You missed pretty big details there, user.

>amy adams shouldve been bev
Uhh no.

All the flashback scenes to them as kids feel like the actors parodying their own performances in the first one. The kid from Stranger Things in particular feels like he's playing a flanderized version of his own character on top of a bizarre retcon to him being secretly gay and in love with Eddie. Made no sense at all and his performance felt nothing like how he was in the first one. This was true for all of the child actors in this, but most noticable in his performance. Truly strange.

This ending would have been better...

youtube.com/watch?v=lMFCkJEtC1M

I started reading the book again as a result of the movie, trying to work my way through it.
I have no idea what this nigga was thinking with attempting to do both the kids and adults as a twisting, intertwining narrative.

I noticed this with Eddie. He was rushing his lines out in an effort to be as annoying as possible. Made me care a whole lot less about kid Eddie honestly

>bizarre retcon to him being secretly gay and in love with Eddie
Absolutely nothing in the first movie made reference to his sexual orientation No breaks of continuity there.

rewatch it, he has a cast on his arm kid

The middle 60 minutes are "SCARY CGI CLOWNS SCARE ME." Very goofy stuff. But the rest is great. Good characters and acting. I'd say it was a great film.

>It’s pretty fucking good.
The absolute state of that faggot zoomer board. We're truly Yea Forums-tier now I guess.

It’s a terrible horror but a great come

>kill IT
IT cant be killed

A lot of individually great scenes that don't add up to make a satisfying movie. It's a tonal and structural mess but some cool moments are worth the price of admission.

I don't know if it's whoever did the screenplay for this movie and
/or the director's faults, or Stephen King himself, but the story does not treat It with much consistency. His powers should not be working the way they do on their adult selves in this movie. That's the whole point of him feeding on children, because he can't use his mind powers to scare and manipulate adults like that. That was the whole point of the kids all losing their virginity to Bev in the book, so that the monster could no longer prey on their innocence

>le cringeeeee
at least make it possible to take you seriously before you try to explain why you don't like something

Doesnt continue tho? Not with the gang but doesnt pennywise go somewhere els??

This movie just seemed like a remake of the first one, except they are adults now. They find out about IT, they all split up, each character gets a scare scene, they go to the house/cave, they defeat IT. So lazy

As far as the original book and movie are concerned, he can and does die. Which is of course not necessarily consistent with the rest of King's lore established in The Dark Tower series which says It and the rest of its kind can only be killed by a Gunslinger's pistol, but whatever I guess. The movie can't assume the audience knows that anyway, especially since The Dark Tower movie was such an abysmal failure that no one watched and did no justice to that story.

Did I miss something in the first one? When did Bev start smoking?

She was smoking in a bathroom stall near the beginning of part 1.

youre a literal queer if you find clowns scary. end of story. dont try to justify it faggot.

Attached: aleks.jpg (480x360, 25K)

That’s literally the point

>hyper inconsistent tone. Cracking jokes at the climax really made it seem corny vs scary. Casting Harder was a mistake
>never felt like there were any stakes. The characters that were killed had no characterization at all, just felt obligatory. Eddie dying at the end was fine but was too little too late
>it feels like they cut a ton from the first tmovie because a lot of shit was random and didn't make sense. Why was Richie's artifact a token? Since when was Paul Bunyan trying to kill him?

It had potential but didn't pull it off. My favorite subplots was the love triangle (the feeling of your friend taking the girl you love) and the concept of growing old and moving on from childhood friends but they felt kind of cheap with the other stuff

youtube.com/watch?v=yM5I6E459yg

It's kino.

pure horror comedy. the laughing is something straight out of evil dead 2. people can't seriously think this is a straight horror movie after this scene?

I felt like we didn't get a whole of Pennywise in general. People come for the clown. Wish we got more backstory on the guy outside of he's some cosmic horror that fell from space.

honestly part 1 had too much pennywise and part 2 didn't go far enough into his backstory but i preferred the character-focus in part 2 to the clown-focus in part 1.

>he

Richie was pretty much the only good thing. Even though the forced homosexual plotline was contrived Richie was kino and hilarious.

The creature isn't the clown. The "Pennywise" form is actually the problem here, because there's a lot more cool and weird things he can and does manifest as. Also, It is female. It's true form is a giant alien spider monster and it has a nest of eggs inside its lair at the end that Bill has to destroy. The movie ignoring all this to focus on Pennymeme the clown is an overall detriment to the film and shows that the studio just wants to capitalize on this particular aspect of the character to appeal to retarded normies instead of actually fleshing out the monster of the story properly.

It Was fun

Attached: 03CCA76F-207A-4F93-8472-E017B4886164.png (1334x750, 1.62M)

Oh no, it’s Pennywise! I hope he doesn’t find out that I’m terrified of big titty goth girls!

Attached: 1272446F-5A6A-4154-88E7-31B07439E887.jpg (700x700, 58K)

I know it lays eggs but how do we know how cosim otherwordly creatures' sex works? Maybe it's like a male seahorse.

It is an it.

*cosmic

>watch part 1
>Bev could harm It because she wasn't afraid of it

Attached: 1564464146948.jpg (380x380, 50K)

It 2 lacks all the menace and gore, it kept cutting AWAY from the scary moments and there weren't many of them to begin with. Worst scene doesn't even have anything to do with It really.

how is it that a movie made in 2017/19 is LESS scary than a poorly made miniseries frmo the cheesy fuckin 1990s?
youtube.com/watch?v=tSqjjWQLil4

huh? how does that make sense?

youtube.com/watch?v=1b0w38cDShE

>The Dark Tower series which says It and the rest of its kind can only be killed by a Gunslinger's pistol
Where does it ever say that?

off the top of my head, the baby insect thing in the chinese restaurant, the stanley uris thing in the shack, vicky and the fag getting eaten alive were pretty scary.

this

reddit replies

now THIS is fear kino
no need for huge special fx, just curry doing what he does. goes from friendly to straight up nightmare with a single expression change

3/10 it is shit... Just a jumpscare fest where the scares aren't earned as in the Chapter 1.

Also the most of the movie is pointless filler with a lot of jumpscares.

Monster designs are mediocre at best and vfx are sometimes laughably bad.

>paul bunyan
>does the same fucking giant mouth with big teeth thing as pennywise
this director is a fucking hack.

The two kids who get eaten in the movie were pretty fucked up/sad scenes on par with Georgie's death in part 1 imo.

All the people who really liked it probably haven't read the book. Even at a 3 hour runtime, it felt rushed because there was just so much source material that couldn't make the cut. I think they did a good job making up a condensed story, but you'll be disappointed if you go in wanting to see what you read.

No. Clown kino won't be with us for another month user.

IT will merely tide you over.

I read the book and thought it was passable. I was upset because they kept releasing balloons in my theater though and the shadow would obscure someone's face. I heard from Yea Forums that some things were cut though, so I think I sort of muted my expectations.

One thing I really wish was in the movie was a more detailed experience of Mike's history binge, because it's probably my favorite part of the book. I really like it, but they never do it. At least the scene with him and Bill was funny.

I can't wait until it comes out on Blu Ray so people can just edit the two parts together like the TV movie was
Cut out all the bullshit

I think the director is planning to release a directors cut where the too are cut together with extra scenes. Would be around 4 hours long.

All the childhood flashback scenes in part 2 should honestly just be edited into part 1. They were generally kind of out of place in 2.

They kali ma'd him

Attached: 123512352132134.png (2408x1032, 3.29M)

"You're the clown!"
"Clown!"
>N-no bully
It was lame.

They could've just cut Henry Bowers cause he doesn't fucking do anything of consequence.

Bev, Eddie, Ben and Stan were horribly miscast.
I hate to say it but even McAvoy wasn't the greatest.
>Unmemorable score
Agreed
but Skarsgard was alright, still way better than Curry
CGI is fucking stupid, practical effects would've been better
And why was Eddie constantly swearing, seemed so cringe

Attached: 1464712342283.gif (167x170, 1.32M)

Have an attention span.

Your replies are as dumb as you are, he is right about everything he said.

Agreed. In part 1, it looks like he dies. They could have left it that way and nothing would have changed at all. No reason to include him in the second part at all when they didn't actually use him the way he is in the book.

>Eddie and Bev
>miscast

Those two are the only ones who actually look just like the kids, and James Ransone specifically already basically played an adult version of Eddie's character in Generation Kill so he was an obvious choice.

>that spoiler
>missing the point this hard
Absolute state of brainlets.

It does all of that shit to them in the novel too though. At least insofar as the statue, the restaurant and Bev's dad.

He literally explained why he thought it was cringe you doofus

The movie is pretty much carried by its actors, if you like the actors interaction then you’d like it. Bill Hader plays Finn Wolfhard very well and Finn Wolfhard also plays a very good Finn Wolfhard. Otherwise it’s just bad CGI and childish horror

>he leans before the knife hits him
holy fuck this is hilarious

The "true form" being a bigger version of Pennywise with spider legs was dumb as fuck and disappointing. Even the 90's movie with no budget actually pulled off the giant spider with practical effects, there's no excuse for a Hollywood blockbuster with modern CG to copout that hard and not design something really cool.

Fuck that noise. We wouldn't have gotten the only good shot in the film, the bodies and dismembered limbs flying out of the sewer.

>Those two are the only ones who actually look just like the kids.

Are you retarded? look at Sophia Lillis and Chastain, I'll grant you Eddie but Ransone is not the greatest actor, acted nothing like Eddie. Again horribly miscast.

Attached: pleaase.jpg (1440x1080, 115K)

It's pretty mediocre, really fucking long. But there's some alright scenes.
Honestly just wait for the best webm's as it's only about 10 minutes of this movie that's actually interesting.

>Clapping

Attached: ruuytryutrrtuy.gif (500x210, 1006K)

It is a flawed book that has been made into flawed adaptations. You need at least a Darabont to turn a King story into true KINO.

I never read the book but I had a feeling from the first time this gag came up that it was a metajoke. I accepted the ending because I realized unless Godzilla shows up at the end there's no bombastic and satisfying way of killing an ancient shapeshifting alien clown at the end of a five-hour movie. My girlfriend said something about them killing him in the book by channeling the power of a magical sky turtle, so I'm actually glad they didn't try to cram an entire cosmogony into the movie.
>amy adams shouldve been bev
I agree but the child actress said she wanted it to be Jessica Chastain so I'm happy they listened to her.

Literally the only miscast was Bev.

It's an awful fucking movie. Has the most anticlamatic and predictable ending but somehow ends up being worse than the first. It's incredibly long and drawn out too. Saw some boomers fall asleep in the theater lol

Yeah, the thing is his body language sure is fucking expressive.
Gif extremely related.

Attached: how fucking fascinating.gif (384x288, 2.55M)

It still isn't faithful to the book though, Richie's homosexuality was forced into this one movie

Why are you IT fans so easily assblasted over negative opinions?

Wolfhard didn't do anything extraordinary with his performance, he's par on par with the other kids. I have no idea why he's getting praised particularly, the only thing notable about him was the cgi face and distracting voice.

This, he was just "okay" in both movies.

I enjoyed it just felt a little bit dragged toward the end. Wouldve enjoyed more pennywise beatdowns before the last fight.

Attached: B25A7C98-6029-46E9-894D-347780DB5F03.jpg (846x960, 88K)

It is really bad

the dog joke was so fucking meme and retarded it wasn't even cringy, just confusing - like, even in a movie this trashy, such poor and stupid "humour" barely belongs.

Attached: maxresdefault.jpg (1280x720, 113K)

The humor in this one felt really forced compared to the first chapter
>The music suddenly playing while the leper vomits on Eddie
>The pomeranian gag
>Eddie quipping about Henry's mullet after being stabbed in the face right beforehand
Overall I still thought it was decent but damn it felt like I was watching a Deadpool movie at times.

What happend? Was the mother scared of rust on the bike?

Was IT?

Richie’s jokes are the only thing keeping this film entertaining, well all of my friends liked him enough

Yes

So hold up, the comedian dude was a homo?

>mfw people actually clapped when stephen king showed up on screen
Literally what the fuck i have NEVER heard people applaud at a god damn movie before.

Attached: 85283527.jpg (323x326, 16K)

>mfw that weird combination of humor and "scare" throughout the entire ending
I really dont understand who the fuck thought this was a good idea. This movies pacing was a god damn mess as well.

Attached: 960 (1).jpg (960x540, 67K)

I was hoping with this and Chucky we'd get a horror slasher revival of kino... but the main problem is they have no idea how to do the slashers themselves.

Fuck anyone who says Tim Curry is worse than Skarsgard. Skarsgard barely has a damn personality or any memorable scenes, they barely give him dialogue or let him do anything that isn't trying to be scary. Doubt I need to go over why the new Chucky is absolutely worse than the old one.

Sucks as I am a big slasher connoisseur but when producers only want big EPIC moments and not slow burn engaging performances out of the slasher themselves it's doomed to alway be another one of those arts lost to the 90s.

I actually really like the design of the new clown, and the moments where he got to act was great. They honestly wasted his talent and just went for a cgi fest.

Skarsgard and his design are fine, just different. The problem is how they use him. He barely gets to fucking talk. He's a walking jump scare, like a FNAF animatronic. It pisses me off because Tim Curry carried that fucking miniseries in the 90s.

No one gives a shit about the adult actors you fucks. They want more Pennywise development. Not just showing him on screen neither. What a disappointment.

>trash CGI
>Marvel quips in every scene

Waste of almost 3 hours. They could have cut it down to 1.5 and the movie wouldn't have suffered.

Did everyone saying that they hated the ending meant the gang bang part

>amy adams shouldve been bev
With all the; >"ZOMG THE ADULT CASTING IS SO PERFECT"
That one triggers my autism the most. Amy would have been perfect

It´s ok, not so much of a horror movie, the first one did it much better in that aspect. It is too much in your face and the scares get silly, while the first one lands those aspects better. It is still good as a sort of dark fantasy

After Joker, where can I get my clown fix?

Because the miniseries realized you didn't need to load up on a bunch of bad CGI to try and be scary.

The picture of Georgie bleeding, the photo album coming to life, the balloon bouncing violently against the road after Bev escapes her house. The miniseries had a lot of understated practical horror that unnerved people. The new one had to rely on CGI shaky monsters.

strawpoll.me/18301190/r

>The "true form" being a bigger version of Pennywise with spider legs was dumb as fuck and disappointing.

Technically it's "true form" was the 3 lights hanging directly above the Spiderwise. Remember there was a giant fucking mouth above the "arena" where they fought Spiderwise. The 3 Deadlights came out of that giant mouth and you could see a "fog" connecting the Deadlights to Spiderwise.

>its fun

whoa with that in-depth description you could become a youtuber

>point by point brainlet rebuttal

I don't even need to read the post youre replying to to know hes right and youre wrong when you post something as faggoty as this.

Don't bother. It feels like it was made by studio focus testing.
Basically they doubled down on the 'banter' to the point where there are marvel movie style quips after almost every event.
They also have pennywise merely do one vaguely creepy face/gesture or line before running at the character/camera as a sharp noise plays.
That's how he behaves throughout the entire thing.

Also, they clearly got good feedback from the georgie scene, so they pretty much scene for scene redo it with a little girl, and a firefly/birthmark as opposed to a toy boat.

The whole thing felt so cheap and soulless compared to the original. Like they'd dumbed down every aspect to suit feedback from the lowest common denominator.

Sad really, because for all its flaws, the first one was okay.

only the tim curry ones are good you zoomer test tube baby retard

The clapping and laughing at that fucking lame, out of place quip is why they put so much of that shit in.
Just wait, whatever the next film these people make is will have MORE of that.

The ONLY bit that was close to scary was the fat boy's flashback.
Vicky getting eaten was sad and creepy but the rest was such rubbish cgi that it killed any scariness.
Then again, once it showed up you just expected a sudden rush towards the camera or protagonist anyway. It was REALLY predictable.

Gay dudes wanna fuck that kid.

okay so technically if the clown is simply a "projection" of the real IT (of sorts?) how come he's capable of causing physical harm? Is he like, actually corporeal and not just an 'illusion'?

Bev never killed her dad in the first movie, dumbass

Do most of your friends happen to be female?
Also Bill was making most of the jokes in chapter 2 though.

Why was Pennywise allowed to kill Eddie, but he can't kill any of the other adults? He fucking impales Eddie and then does nothing. I thought he could only kill people that are afraid of him, Eddie wasn't scared of shit. Penny feels inconsistent.

This movie really exposes how many brainlets and normies there are here.
>People complain about the gay stuff even though it and much more was in the book
>People complain that it's too long when it's an adaptation of a book with over 1100 pages, and it would be a crime to trim down the movies
>People complain that it's not scary when IT isn't meant to be a horror story

Attached: downloadfile-28.jpg (480x478, 17K)

Eddie hurt IT, so it decided to stop fucking around in that moment

>>he leans before the knife hits him
>holy fuck this is hilarious
A guy who sees something coming towards his head instinctively flinches away from it? Well, I am shocked...

Have sex incel.

Movie is too long. They changed too much from the book. Characters are movie's strong point. Too many jump scares. Too much shit cgi monsters. However: some kills are great, some monsters are great. Movie is worth a watch imo, but it needs a better edit.

>Too long
Why are Americans so impatient?

Me
I read the book, but the way they handled the movies wasn't very effective. They cut out great sections of the book (ITs history, big disasters like the Bradley Gang, fire at the black spot) and instead went back and forth between kids and adults through a big chunk of the movie. Some flashbacks were fine, but they could've used all that time to build tension more for the adults, rather than constant jumpscares. The book is pretty horrifying also in my opinion. It's also very atmospheric, which is something this movie mostly lacked, apart from a few admittedly kino moments, like the opening kill and the little girl kill. Those had build up of tension and drama, that's how you build up a scare and the horror aspect.
Overall still an alright movie, but bloated in the wrong way.

Not an American. I explain myself more in depth here:
Also: IT should be a 10 hour miniseries, not two movies. It should go back and forth between kid and adult perspectives from the get go, rather than splitting the two like they did in these films and in the original miniseries.

At least you had a reasonable take. I still very much disagree on it being too long. I mean, if a movie is entertaining me and I'm engaged, I'd want it to keep going.

It is about the same as the first movie except with an awkward narrative structure. The book was mess as well, so all things considered its about the best compromise you can get with these movie adaptations. I enjoyed both movies a lot, though its more about just enjoying the characters and Pennywise as opposed to seeking a pristine narrative.

Sneed shoots him with his shotgun

The adult portion was always going to be the weaker half and the filmmakers knew this. I think it was a good move to put lots of comedy in to compensate for the boring parts of the Losers just walking around town

I'm crossing my fingers for the 6 hour extended cut that the director keeps teasing. Hopefully it'll include the space turtle

Does the book do a better job at explaining why Penny comes back and what's his backstory like in the book? I feel like a lot of stuff around Pennywise and the Losers in this movie was contrived. I'm still not sure why he just didn't merk them either like he did with Eddie, it makes Penny look incompetent.

Really my main complaint about this movie is Penny and his lore. None of it felt satisfying.

Did they see its true form in the book, where it was a giant spider thing and they just ripped the spiders legs?

Pennywise is a cosmic entity who has a rivalry with a space turtle after it had a stomach ache and vomited up our universe into existence

>Bottom half of Betty Ripsom doing a tap dance
>Adrian Mellon gets a chunk bitten out of his armpit
>little Bev's burning head
>moldy heads floating in the fishtanks of the Chinese restaurant
>Henry Bowers waking up among the bodyparts of the children that Pennywise dragged into his lair
>Stanley's head turning into the Spider Thing, with one leg poking through his eye

Didn't look like they were pulling punches any more or less than in Part 1.

I would be willing to bet that studio pressure pushes Stephen King to finally write a sequel to IT. He has sprinkled mentions and references to Pennywise throughout many of his other books implying that it didn't die so it's obvious he has always wanted to leave it open to doing that anyway. But with the amount of money these two movies have made, I can't see them letting go of Pennywise so easily any time soon. This entire movie felt like them clinging to the character as a brand rather than making a sincere effort at finishing the story because brainlet normies only even watched these movies for the DURR SCARY CLOWN LMAO. Hell, the director even said he wants to do a Pennywise origin story and has all the ideas for it already, so expect this shit to get run into the ground hard like Hollywood always does.

Pennywise Begins could be kino if they show IT through the ages.

Remember that scene in the miniseries where the Losers Club are flicking through the old History of Derry photo album? Use that as a wraparound story. Set it in the 50's as a nod to the original time period. Every page they turn could be a new bit of story, almost like a modern Creepshow. It would allow them to play around with different genres and time periods. Show the Bradley Gang shootout. Show the Black Spot. Show the first settlers of Derry. For my money, these newer IT films didn't spend nearly enough energy linking IT and Derry as one and the same. They could even recreate the end of that scene with the last photo coming to life and Pennywise jump scaring the audience.

The biggest hurdle is that it'll be nothing but a lore dump, it wont actually have a "story" of it's own to tell. There'll just be a series of disconnected stories. King did a decent enough job in his Interlude chapters to give them enough material to work with.

The problem is, you have to know they won't do that at all. Because as I said, the brand to them is Pennywise. Not the IT creature itself, but specifically just the clown version of it. So anything they do with it going forward will always and forever just be Facebook and Reddit pandering starring Pennywise the clown. There's nothing worthwhile or interesting about that, it would just be a rehash prequel where you know the human characters will lose/die in the end or else the original story can't happen. He did not always have that disguise, so that also rules out millions of years of his backstory and origins, such as him consuming entire other worlds before coming to Earth as he claims. It even rules out the early settlement periods of Derry since the clown he presumably killed to become was from sometime in the early 1900's-1930's. The only good potential story they could do would be a full blown sequel written by King, but is that really necessary?

Saying it was in the book does not excuse problems.

Yeah, in the book the kids realize there's a chance It might not be dead, so yeah, 27 years later Pennywise wants them to return so he can kill them all. He/She/It wants revenge. In the book Pennywise is less incompetent. He tries to kill them more often, and the Losers narrowly escape. For example, in the book, Bill and Richie go to Neibolt together, and encounter It in a Werewolf form. They shoot it with Bill's gun, but bullets have no effect. The monsters chases them and almost kills them both. Another scene Bill almost gets killed when his hand goes through Georgie's photoalbum. He only narrowly pulls his hand back in time. This is the difference between the book and the movies and miniseries every damn time. In the movies, they constantly get trolled, but Pennywise doesn't try to kill them. In the book, they NARROWLY escape every time, and Pennywise doesn't quite understand it him/itself either, until he realizes they are strengthened by both their strong bond AND Its enemy the Turtle. The Turtle is subtly protecting them and helping them to fight It.
So in the book there's more going on between them all and on the "cosmic" level. In a way, the Losers are the Turtles proxy to fight It/Pennywise.

When I see Bill's gun, I mean his father's gun. He snatches the gun from a drawer or something, I don't remember, but yeah, they test a gun out on Pennywise, and it has 0 effect. Later on the whole gang makes silver bullets (Ben makes them), and by believing in it, they manage to wound Its werewolf form severely, because Pennywise takes on a mythical form, and in turn can be damaged by its mythical counterpart, the silver bullet, which in legend says can kill a werewolf. So power of belief plus rules of the form Pennywise takes on, can be used to defeat It.

The movie tries to touch on this theme of "Pennywise's choice of form/shape can also be a weakness due to having to obey the laws and rules of that particular form" bit, but doesn't go deep enough.

See that's the one thing I forgot about the book that was absolutely crucial that neither miniseries or film even tried; the chapters that focused of IT and what IT was feeling/thinking. I forgot that we got scenes from IT's perspective. Skarsgard could have really done with a few introspective moments.

>Clown kino
Nah that releases next month.

Attached: 6z137hqon6o11.png (1080x1338, 1004K)

I read the whole thing recently in preparation for the movie, and It/Pennywise explains it not only verbally to the Losers, taunting them with it, saying "I called you back, tonight you're all dead, you're too old to stop me now", then later we get an internal monologue from It Itself explaining its reasons, desires and later also Its fears when it becomes less cocky. We also get lots of dialogue from the main characters who confirm that Pennywise wanted them to return for payback. But it's also revealed that it wasn't just Pennywise calling them back, it was also the Turtle, so again, both cosmic entities are battling each other with the 7 characters as chesspieces. Although 8 or more chesspieces maybe. There's also Henry Bowers + company. In the book they're all connected more in this cosmic fight. The Turtle influences the Losers, and It influences Henry and Derry itself.

There's also the whole segment of It building an army to eat the Earth (hence the whole "eater of worlds" thing). Its eggs, so it can also take on a female form, or maybe It is in essence female, that's left a bit open ended. Ben eventually squashes the eggs, while Bill and Richie finish off It in its weakened state after Eddie is killed.

Basically the lore of the book is really cool, despite some of the more loopy/heavily criticized parts like the "orgy" scene.

Just got back from seeing it. It was pretty shit. Looked forward to seeing Pennywise's final form. Sure they kept the drider legs but a giant clown head? He even keeps his costume for some reason. Fuck sake.

It's the same movie as the first.

>but muh book
If I have to read the book in order to understand the plot properly then the screenwriters and directors have failed their jobs. You can't expect everyone to have read the book (especially one like IT), it's unrealistic and stupid.

The gay shit with Richie was forced and was blantantly there for fan service. If anyone should have been gay it was Eddie.

Yeah there was way too much filler that even longtime fans and normies wouldn't care for.

IT was marketed as a scary coming of age film, not a comedy, no idea why you're trying to prentend that it was meant to be anything else.

#
>but muh book
If I have to read the book in order to understand the plot properly then the screenwriters and directors have failed their jobs. You can't expect everyone to have read the book (especially one like IT), it's unrealistic and stupid.

The gay shit with Richie was forced and was blatantly there for fan service. If anyone should have been gay it was Eddie.

Yeah there was way too much filler that even longtime fans and normies wouldn't care for.

IT was marketed as a scary coming of age film, not a comedy, no idea why you're trying to pretend that it was meant to be anything else.

Best boy

Attached: Ry Prior.jpg (668x519, 41K)

It's an adaptation, they have no obligation to dumb it down for you. Take it up with the source material.

That really sounds a lot better in terms of lore and the Losers escaping death, thank you. I was getting mildly annoyed when Penny had all of these opportunities to kill them but doesn't. Then I gave up on him when he kills Eddie with little effort, but still taunts the remaining adults and then fucking dying. Why didn't he just impale them like he did to Eddie? IT act 2 is incredibly incompetent and unsatisfying.

You could cut out the token fetchquest and not lose anything, though. All that runtime could've gone to better establishing the cosmic horror aspect, Henry losing his mind, Derry's history being fucked with by IT, and so on.

Attached: IT artbook.jpg (576x768, 100K)

Well, in the book there's even a scene where a character hears the actual pop as air fills the vacuum after IT disappears.

WHY THE FUCK DO PEOPLE CLAP. IT'S A FUCKING MOVIE, THE ACTORS AREN'T THERE SO YOU AREN'T APPLAUDING ANYONE

The book is definitely weirder and more fully fleshed out. Both movie adaptations just latch onto the evil silly clown aspect and that is a pitiful, low IQ move imo. Chapter 2 demonstrates the failure of doubling down on this approach very clearly because they are forcing a literal eldritch abomination space god into a very small box and restraining the boundless creative limits such a being could be used for to something so inane and simple just because they know it sells to retards with only surface level intelligence. Pennymeme is actually what stood in the way of the story ever being properly adapted because the clown is all it is known for. On some level, I'd be willing to bet this bothers Stephen King, but he gets his millions so whatever.

It only preys on children because they’re easier to scare. Scaring people makes them tastier or some shit. Doesn’t mean he can’t prey on adults too.

>thinks writing a coherent script is 'dumbing down'
Retard

Doesn't the book have an It POV scene where it explains some shit like why it goes to the trouble of scaring people before killing them, where it came from, how much it hates the Losers for escaping it, etc.? I think the movie could've benefited from an It solo scene in the sewers to that effect.

It's Kng's own fault to be honest. Most of IT's transformations led back to the Clown in some way. The Bradley Gang Interlude still had townsfolk swear up and down that in the middle of the shootout they saw a clown taking part. The Fire at the Black Spot? Survivors saw a Clown carrying a klan member away. When IT transformed into the Mummy in the park? The Mummy eventually sported pom-poms. So many scenes of IT had a Clown reveal as a stinger. It's no wonder that people focus so much on it.

zzzzzzzzz saw it on the half price tuesday. some of the special effects were cool and the short scenes were creative but the movie as a whole was meh af

True enough, but those are just the most concise storytelling tricks to connect the dots for the reader in case they start to think there's more than one monster or that he wasn't at the center of the town's history. It's not quite the same as the movie just clinging desperately to the clown form in every scenario that even the giant spider that is meant to represent it's true face is still the stupid fucking clown in the end. The movie also fails in that the clown is not a relatable thing nowadays. The book takes place in the 1950's, when circuses actually still existed and clowns were still seen as a fun, goofy thing that a lot of kids liked. Even for the 1980's, clowns and circuses weren't nearly as relatable or appealing, so Pennywise using that form successfully makes no sense. Essentially, what the movie fails to understand and why this falls on its face, is because in the book the clown form is what IT uses as bait to get kids to trust and like him enough to get close enough to pounce. The movie attempts this in a way that is blatantly winking at the viewer with the much more modern lens of "clowns are scary, nobody likes them" which has not always been true. Clowns used to be a popular and well liked form of children's entertainment. In the 1950's, this guise is an effective lure. In the 1980's and today, it is not. We the audience see the clown as a horror object because we know it's the monster and because most of us find clowns lame or distasteful in general. But the characters are not supposed to see it this way. They are meant to be drawn to the seemingly harmless goofball. The movie blurs this line too much for it to make sense because the clown is blatantly just horror movie scary, not innocent and playful enough for anyone, even a rare child that somehow doesn't hate clowns, to actually be foolish enough to approach. His chosen form of bait is twisted in the movie through a modern view of clowns being scary which undermines the concept.

The ending in the book was waaaaay better. Stupider and weirder, granted, but at least interesting. They just repeated the ending of the first movie again in this one.

I don't disagree, but for all intents and purpose it's close enough to be the same. If people don't like how they defeat Pennywise in the movie they aren't going to be that much more satisfied with the book. It's still plays out more or less the same. If nothing else, the reveal of the eggs and the town being destroyed along with him should have stayed in though.

I also just thought they botched the look of It's "true" form by making it the clown again just with crab legs. Granted the book ritual would have sucked in a movie adaptation, just Bill and It staring at each other seeing who could think the hardest would have been lame.

Having Pennywise be part of the final form wouldn't have been as lame if he was Thinged out to look more like a spider with organs and body parts you can't quite figure out, and it wasn't controlling Pennywise anymore. Having him be IT's dominant form for the finale was a bad idea.

I agree with a lot of this

Also the Stephen King cameo was cringe and why did they reveal Pennywise was a circus clown then go nowhere?

Yes IF you watch the originals !

Attached: the REAL clown.jpg (580x318, 33K)

Indeed. If they didn't want it to just be a giant spider, they could have done something disgusting and horrific like that. Where the clown form is all deformed and falling apart like a ruined puppet with the spider parts coming out

Pennywise lacked presence and just needed to appear more in his clown form before the final battle. We know he knows the gang is back in town so I would've like a scene where he acknowledges this and appears before the gang. A single frame shot at the climax of the Chinese restaurant scene would've been perfect. I also kind of wish they had more history scenes of It in Derry and more creepy children singing in the soundtrack.

Other than that the most standout moment in the film was Ms Kersh. Shame her actual monster appearance was so silly after that since the whole scene was pretty creepy with Kersh doing those dumb shit in the background, like that smiling librarian in the first film.

They should have just CG'd that old lady actor to be bigger and grosser looking. These 2 IT movies in general go way too cartoony with the monsters. The Leper also suffered from being turned in to a cartoon.

In the book, Pennywise uses the name "Bob Gray" numerous times. IT's a creature from outside the universe, so it was never human.

My impression was that there was a real, human Pennywise originally whose name was Bob Gray, and IT just took his shape and identity.

Stephen King probably should have just had Universal make the film instead of WB so that the Werewolf, Creature from the Black Lagoon, and Frankenstein's monster could be used in it. IT is basically a boggart from Harry Potter that takes the form of other pop culture monsters that each victim is afraid of. One kid even sees it as the shark from Jaws swimming in the river. The various forms he took in the movie that aren't Pennywise are basically made up because they didn't have the rights to all the movie monsters King references in the book. Imagine if they could have done that instead though? Would have been a kino version of Ready Player One.

Yeah some of my favorite parts of the book are how It takes corny movie monsters and makes them a little fucked up. My favorite "minor" transformation was when It turned into dracula, but instead of having fangs his mouth is full of razor blades. Would have loved to see it.

I never read the book but whats the whole deal with the space turtle shit? Why is so important but they don’t include in the adaptations.

In the novel, the Turtle is a powerful cosmic entity that is sort of the yin to IT's yang, and i think they're brothers too from what I remember. The whole novel is a sort of battle between the two, with the Turtle using the losers club as pawns. It's Dark Tower extended universe shit, and also native american mythology stuff. King is obsessed with native religion and rituals and stuff, pretty much every book of his has it. The story is totally fine without it though in my opinion. Not that it's bad necessarily, I can just take it or leave it and it's not essential.

I would've liked it if they went all the way and explained Pennywise's backstory but I guess it's best left ambiguous for a horror monster. I'd imagine the real Pennywise was a benign regular clown back in the day and It, seeing how he attracted all the children decided to kill the guy off and steal his form to prey on the children. The circus cart at the bottom of the sewer in the first film could've been the same one the real Pennywise and It used and It just kept it in his lair when the whole traveling clown gig became too impractical in modern times

>American cinemas

For one, it's probably considered way too weird and out there for casual audiences to swallow so studios just won't touch it. And two, it is a major part of the overarching lore connecting and binding all of Stephen King's books and would require some serious explanation and exposition that there isn't really room for in a standalone adaptation. You have to consider that Stephen King's books aren't that standalone. Many characters, places, and events are mentioned or appear in other books and effect each other, and there's a lot of multiverse kind of stuff at play. All of this is tied together via The Dark Tower series, which Hollywood has already squandered its attempt at so they kind of can't do it.

The kid trying to find a zipper on the Gillman right before he dies was depressing, I wish they had brought that moment in.

They were going to bring Freddy Krueger in as one of the forms, but decided against it unfortunately.

I'm honestly shocked that they didn't add the 'Pennywise lives' moment from Dreamcatcher as a post-credits scene.

It got set up took with Ritchie carving his and Eddies initials onto the bridge. All they had to do was cut back to the bridge after the credits and have their initials be desecrated with a bloody "PENNYWISE LIVES" covering them.

It bugs me how the knife is right in the middle of his torso but when Ben sees him out the window a few moments later he pulls the knife out of his upper left shoulder

At one point of the story one of the characters basically gets mind raped/mind melds with It and thinks "Oh god, it's female!" or something along those lines.

Decent scene. The actor portraying Bowers did a great job. Shame they gave him so little material.
Eddies actor also did a good job,he's already in emotional turmoil, and then this shit happens out of nowhere, and he's totally shocked, and then survival instinct kicks in. Then le quip happens, meh but whatever.

Word is, Tommyknockers is being made into a movie with James Wan directing. Pennywise appears briefly in that book since it takes place in the neighboring town to Derry. I'll be curious if they include that scene in the movie or if they just completely leave that connection alone. Also, Dreamcatcher is such an underrated book/movie and I always loved how the story parallels IT with a separate group of kids from Derry who grow up to have to fight a totally different alien monster that also happens to call itself Mr. Gray. That town might as well be Area 51.

So the best moment in the movie was undoubtedly Ritchie getting absolutely BTFO by the Deadlights mid speech right?

What the fuck even was that good morning angel shit with the leper puke?

That's in my top 3, with the little girl getting killed scene during the, what was it, football match? And the opening scene with the gay guy getting chomped.

The movie had a tonal problem and tried way too hard to be a comedy half the time.

Insomnia literally felt like torture to get through the first half of the book, it's only when the Little Doctors show up that it even gets remotely interesting.

The entire first half is just about how being fucking old is miserable and depressing and you are just waiting for death and doing mundane routine things day in, day out.

>Bev killing her dad was retconned

Or, I dunno, she forgot?

Attached: 1568219801824.jpg (843x925, 77K)

>the queer ally we thought he was

These people are sick

you fucking morons seriously don't understand sarcasm

It was never retconned because she never killed him, retard. He was clearly alive the last time he was seen in Chapter 1

>I was only pretending to be retarded
ok retard

I guess you haven't seen all the gay PennywiseXBabadook fan art then.

I mean yeah makes sense. It felt really tacked on. You'd think they'd have had time to have him listening to the song early on as a fear cope or some shit, and then have the song play as soon as he realized he could fight back.

Theres not that comfy kid summer feeling because they're all old and fucked up and know thats the point but its what makes it inferior to the first movie.

It - 8/10
It Chapter 2 7/10

>But it's okay when Evil Dead forces comedy in

the last time she interacts with him she beats him to death with a toilet cover and hes bleeding on the floor not moving. we never see him again

Idiot
m.youtube.com/watch?v=fj6Pi-5wwVs

>horror comedy has comedy woven into its identity
versus
>horror movie has jarring and unfitting music get added in post at the execs’ behest to make a scene “funny”

exactly, hes dead

You can hear him breathing

She takes a pack while distracting the creepy pharmacist.

No modern zoomer classic is complete without some quips.