Login
Just got back from seeing 'IT'. Expectations were that of great interest but also apprehension. Eight years ago, back when there was a personal unfamiliarity and ignorance of Stephen King's style and less appreciation for the book, there is the admission of saying don't bother with a re-make.
Couldn't be more wrong. This was a case where another adaptation was not only warranted but necessary. 'IT' is such a great story that deserves to be done justice and with one of the best trailers of the year this actually looked good. However, with the other King film released this year 'The Dark Tower' being such a disappointment, there was apprehension as to whether a film based on such a huge book would work.
'IT' as a book is one of King's best and one of the best of the horror genre. King's attention to detail, how he writes scenes with children and depiction of fear are unparalleled, with wonderfully drawn characters, one of the terrifying antagonists in literature and many unforgettable scenes, ones that burn long in the memory in how scary they are. The book is much more than just a horror story though, also with nostalgia, comedy, pathos and deep characterisation.
'IT' was previously adapted as a mini-series in 1990, which is remembered fondly by those who saw it as children and left them terrified but often derided by fans of the book. To me, it has a lot wrong with it with a vastly inferior second half and an anti-climactic let down of an ending with the infamously terrible effects of IT's true form. But it is nowhere near one of the worst King adaptations, it's not even the worst of the mini-series. Compared to the book it's very poor, as a standalone it's wildly uneven but has more to it than Tim Curry's unforgettably magnificent Pennywise. It has a great first half with strong performances from the child actors, some unsettling moments, a 'Stand By Me'-like nostalgia and a great music score.
This 2017 film adaptation is a big improvement and one of the best King adaptations in years. It does have changes, including the change in decade, not following the same structure, different IT encounters for some characters and another motivation for wanting to defeat IT. However, it is very loyal in spirit to the book that is apparent throughout. What makes it better are better production values, explanations and character motivations being more logical, Henry Bowers being more of a psychopath (and he is given a reason for why he came to be the way he is, when it was only implied once in passing previously), Beverly's father and the relationship between the two having more of a creep factor and even better child performances.
Not without its faults. Not all the special effects work, the fangs and the overdone Pennywise shaking look cheap. Mike is underused and underdeveloped compared to the others and the other bullies are pretty much given short shrift (Victor Criss practically anonymous).
Some people have said that 'IT' is not scary. Personally disagree, finding it one of the scariest films seen in a long time. Not many films recently made my heart jump, covering my eyes, biting nails or stifling a scream. The Niebolt Street, bathroom, George and Pennywise and photograph/slideshow scenes especially are absolutely terrifying, and there are beautifully timed jolts, real tension and eeriness and suspenseful lead-ups, aided by atmospheric intricate lighting and clever effects for IT's forms (that leper!).
With that being said, 'IT' is much more than a horror film, and is more successful in its other elements. It has comedy, and it's hilarious especially with Richie and Eddie. There is an affectionate nostalgia, reminiscent of 'Stand By Me' and 'The Goonies' and reminding one of how good King was at writing scenes with children and childhood adolescence, which the writers understood and it translates brilliantly on screen. There is pathos, like with Ben's poem and the two most heart-wrenching moments are in the frightening, heart-tugging and triumphant climax. The characters are written very well on the most part, particularly Bill, Beverly and Ben, while Pennywise is evil-incarnate.
Production values mostly are terrific, not just the lighting but also the beautifully realised Derry setting (Niebolt Street is a standout), taut editing and cinematography that's both stunning and unnerving. The effects mostly are not bad, the make-up is superb and how Pennywise is made up has a creepier effect. The music score is truly haunting, "Oranges and Lemons" has never freaked me out this much.
Andy Muschietti directs with suspense, potent realism, confidence and affection, while the writing has a great balance of hilarious comedy, touching drama and pathos, references to the time period, King and history of Derry and nostalgia. The story, even with the change of time-line and structure, is cohesive and logical, rich in suspense and emotion but it's the chemistry between the children and the sweet and surprisingly real relationship between Beverly and Ben that resonate most.
One couldn't ask for better performances. The children are uniformly wonderful, especially a vulnerable Sophia Lillis, a hilarious Finn Wolfhard and a relatable Jeremy Ray Taylor. Jaeden Lieberher handles Bill's dramatic arc very touchingly while Jack Dylan Grazer is very funny. Mike and Stan are well cast. As for Pennywise, it is a very difficult feat filling the iconic Tim Curry's giant clown shoes, but Bill Skarsgard does so superbly, providing a different interpretation that never feels like a copy and has just as much chilling menace, nightmarish air and dark twisted amusement. Curry's laugh is creepier, but Skarsgard's is closer to that described in the book.
All in all, brilliant and if the second film with the adults happens please have the same writer, director and Skarsgard on board, and use this as a model rather than the mini-series' second half with better cast adults and a far better ending. 9/10 Bethany Cox
9/10
