Read Mixed User Reviews for It

5

DirigiblePulpOct 1, 2017

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. This film doesn't work because it doesn't add up to anything. It's another in a long line of recent "franchise-y" films that are more about their existence than about anything resembling a coherent story or theme. This film, taken on its own terms, is about a boogeyman who's mostly a clown and a group of kids who find his house to bludgeon him to death. That's it, and even that's pushing it.

Yes, Pennywise says that famous catchphrase about floating, and even better the movie interprets it literally, as if the quote exists outside a reality tied to story, character, or theme - in this film, kids actually float down in his sewer. Ohhh creepy, that's what it means.

The whole thing is just a serious of intermingled "scare" scenes, one for each kid, wherein they are given the barest bones of character to make it work. Bill stutters, but only like once or twice and it never matters at all. Richie is a smartass, but he dresses cool and hip and is woke so modern audiences love him - his character doesn't grate at all making you wonder why he's such a "loser". Ben is fat, but in a fun superficial way and he's clearly not bothered by it. Mike's character might as well not exist at all (his entire raison d'etre is to have access to cattle guns). Eddie has his inhaler and uses it all of like once - he's more of a pill junkie. He seems rather charming and smart, and his mother is a bloated caricature that does nothing for his character either. Stan is a cipher.

At least Beverly has a some development, but it's driven home in such a broadly obvious over-the-top way that again, it feels like a comment on people's prior conception of her character and not as a real character herself in this story. Her dad is a one-dimensional sexual predator, and her ability to overcome him and in turn Pennywise, rewards her with a damsel in distress storyline that ends in a literal kiss from Prince Charming to wake her - there doesn't seem to be any irony here either.

The sequel to this almost can't exist based on how inept the storytelling in this one is - it will pretty much have to be it's own standalone film. I don't like to judge a film based on its source material, it should stand on its own, but this film fails miserably in both regards so it's a bit of moot point.

The acting is uniformly good however. The kids are well cast, and do their parts well. Bill Skarsgard has potential, though it's wasted by lackluster use of him. There's some kind of shaky-cam run at the camera trick that's bafflingly inept and seems like a cop out by a story that has run out of tricks and doesn't trust an actor to do his job creating tension.

A good example of this is the opening scene - little Georgie has this creepy encounter with Pennywise, and he's charming and owning the screen, when inexplicably the camera cuts to some old woman coming out of her house with a cat, then it cuts back to Pennywise and all the tension has started to dissipate. Then the movie has the "cajones" to literally show Georgie's arm getting torn off and Pennywise's mouth full of sharp teeth. Cut to the cat staring down at the street. That old trick - Alien first did it in 79. It's all so explicit way too early in the film and it kills all of the atmosphere and dread that could have permeated this.

Why. was. there. so. little. Silver. Hi. Yoo. Silver. Away. There's a throwaway line lost at the peripherals about the bike but otherwise nada. Why?… Expand

3 of 4 users found this helpful31

All this user's reviews

5

TyranianApr 10, 2019

Has some really good elements but ultimately left me a bit bored and over 'it'.

3 of 4 users found this helpful31

All this user's reviews

4

laulauSep 21, 2017

Just loud and obnoxious "scary" scenes without any tension. The kid scenes are decent, but the whole movie is just a bit tiring.
There was a good movie in there, but the execution is quite bad.
Pennywise looks cool. Mwehh..

4 of 6 users found this helpful42

All this user's reviews

6

scealaveryOct 6, 2017

It has seen an unprecedented amount of attention. You would think that something seen in all the marketing and ads makes the movie something different, that it does something revolutionary, that it improves upon previous horror movies whileIt has seen an unprecedented amount of attention. You would think that something seen in all the marketing and ads makes the movie something different, that it does something revolutionary, that it improves upon previous horror movies while paving the way for more terrifying adventures led by loveable kid characters. Well you would be right, to some degree.
The story features a collection of teenagers living in the small American town of Derry. At the beginning of the movie we are shown the younger brother of their leader, Bill being brutally murdered by Pennywise the clown who dwells in the sewers. This sets off a chain of frightening and creative scenes where each member of the losers club is faced with Pennywise taking the form of their greatest fear. They then make the collective decision to pursue the clown and kill it once and for all.
The story says relatively uncomplicated which means there aren't too many times where you find yourself confused. There are also plenty of scenes where the characters are able to bond with one another and grown their relationship. Each actor gives an outstanding performance and work the personality of their respected character flawlessly. There is no sugar coating with the characters who all have social, domestic and school related problems. This makes them easier to connect with given that they all have problems they cant outrun much like ourselves. Bill Skarsgard also gives Pennywise a quirky yet demonic personality which differs only slightly from the performance given by Tim Curry. They both relish in terrorising these children but Skarsgard proves noticeably more sinister and serious. I am not saying having a more serious Pennywise is a bad thing but it only makes him more similar to hundreds of other serious faced, emotionless bad guys from other horror movies. But Pennywise wouldn't be anything without his fearsome talent.
It has scares by the dozen and each one is as creative and spine-chilling as the last, each one manages to connect with something deeply feared by their corresponding character wether it be Bill seeing Georgie decay before him or the Leper chasing Ed, a child with OCD. Rarely is any blood shown which only highlights the situation and effects when it does make an appearance. But for every scare the kids are faced with there is a real life problem to go along with it, this makes the idea of conquering pennywise represent tackling our own fears and problems in real life, and the best way to do it is as a team. It is not a flawless movie. The story has many moments and details that feel quite useless and add nothing to the story, this wouldn't be so bad if they added to the humour or added more depth to the characters but they don't which only drags the movie on for longer. As I have said before I am quite fond of the scares in the movie but they are also guilty of jump-scares, a notoriously cheap way to scare the audience. About seventy percent of times you will hear a scream from the audience because of a jump, a mistake the movie also makes is how surprisingly well the kids seem to deal with life with Pennywise. Every time a terrifying scene concludes we see the characters doing something completely normal where they appear unaffected. This manages to lessen the impact of any scares and makes Pennywise seem like a nuisance than a threat.
So in conclusion, It is a fresh and uniquely scary take on the Stephen king novel and one that is well worth your money and your appreciation.… Expand

2 of 3 users found this helpful21

All this user's reviews

6

PlzRMOct 2, 2017

Это первый ужастик, который мне понравился, в нем есть отличная история, за коей интересно наблюдать, моментами и пугает и веселит, но порой персонажи слишком много "рофлят" друг над другом. Если бы все ужастики были такие, как этот фильм,Это первый ужастик, который мне понравился, в нем есть отличная история, за коей интересно наблюдать, моментами и пугает и веселит, но порой персонажи слишком много "рофлят" друг над другом. Если бы все ужастики были такие, как этот фильм, может быть я бы и смотрел эти "трипл А" проекты.… Expand

2 of 3 users found this helpful21

All this user's reviews

5

NintendoGamer1Feb 23, 2018

This movie has a good plot, but it is executed horribly. The movie's effects look surprisingly amature for a movie with this kind of budget. This movie even fails at being a horror movie.

2 of 3 users found this helpful21

All this user's reviews

5

juliiouseSep 10, 2017

Although there was a lot to like about It from the minute-to-minute, the overall experience was let down by trying to do too much with the two and a half hours the film ran for. As a story, It has three main threads: the first (and mostAlthough there was a lot to like about It from the minute-to-minute, the overall experience was let down by trying to do too much with the two and a half hours the film ran for. As a story, It has three main threads: the first (and most advertised) is the horror aspect; following that is mystery, and then coming of age. Whilst each of these areas are visited in the film, none of them are really given enough time to breathe and can come across as either rushed or half-baked, leading to an incomplete experience. The main draw for audiences for the film would be the horror and mystery aspects, but much of the screen time is dedicated to the coming of age story, which often feels disjointed to the rest of the film. These moments feel a little too light and comedic given the subject matter. I occasionally felt as though each part was written separately and put together at the end, as characters would suffer from extremely traumatic experiences and then not bring them up when they were with their friends the next day. I thought that this may be down to It messing with their memory, but it is never made clear and can feel a little weird. Possibly the strangest example of this is a light hearted cleaning montage of a bathroom which-- the scene before-- had been the stage of one of the most distressing moments in the story.

The horror aspects of the film all felt a little rushed and lacking in tension. Each follows a strict formula: the manifestation of a character's fear appears, there's a close up of said scary thing, then it runs at the character who promptly escapes. The first few times this happened put me on edge a little bit, but by the fourth time, they came across as a weak attempt at dark humour rather than being legitimately scary. No time is really given for tension to build up for the horror, which is absolutely crucial in the same way a good joke needs time to build up to a punchline. I wasn't too sure what to expect coming into the film, but it was sold to me as a friend as being the story of a community slowly being controlled and overwhelmed by a force of pure evil. There was no build up in atmosphere or darkening of the world to show this. The horror moments just happened, ended, and the plot rumbled on. A good contrast to this would be Paranormal Activity, The Shining or Jojo's Bizarre Adventure: Diamond is Unbreakable, in which the malevolent forces' build up in power is felt everywhere and becomes almost oppressive, building up to a brutal crescendo at the end. There was none of this here: the final raid on It's lair felt like some bored kids trying to pass the time rather than a necessary act to end evil's hold on a small town. The mystery of It's nature is alluded to but never really looked at. One of the kid's does some investigation and unsettling pictures from the past are shown, which worked very well and pulled me in, but this was quickly shelved and didn't really go anywhere. Overall, I feel that two things could have been done to improve the film: the first would be to tell more stories through subtext and the second would be to make it a miniseries in order to free up more hours to dedicate to plot threads. Some better editing and use of subtexts would really free up time that could have been spent exploring the nature of It and to allow horror elements to breathe. Around an hour is spent establishing that each character is a social outcast and that they are being bullied; this could have been shortened to a few minutes with a montage of them being bullied or even just establishing them as a group that already know each other and have them being chased by the bullies in their car. The whole plot with the bullies doesn't really go anywhere either. We see one being possessed but that ends without really building tension or threatening the group past a small power struggle. This may sound overly negative, but it's mainly borne of disappointment rather that disdain. The sense of setting and world-building were top notch, and some of the characterisation worked really well. I don't thing the film has sold me to watch the second chapter when it releases next year, but I have already picked up the novel it was adapted from and I am eager to start reading it.… Expand

7 of 11 users found this helpful74

All this user's reviews

6

bradwardSep 11, 2017

"It" was entertaining overall, scary at times, visually appealing, but lacking in an overall artistic vision. Since I do recommend seeing it, and there are plenty of good aspects of the movie, I'm going to focus on the few things that I"It" was entertaining overall, scary at times, visually appealing, but lacking in an overall artistic vision. Since I do recommend seeing it, and there are plenty of good aspects of the movie, I'm going to focus on the few things that I thought really missed the mark.
The movie is obviously supposed to be horror at heart, but the horror elements were often undermined by misplaced comedy. During the more intense moments, where life is literally on the line, no kid in real life is going to be joking around about something stupid in that moment, but in "It," it happens pretty routinely. It really undercuts the believability and breaks immersion when this happens, and makes you wonder what the director was trying to achieve.
The other gripe I have it with the storytelling. Before major events, usually you have some lead-up or foreshadowing so that when a character does something significant, you know why they are doing it. In "It," the characters were often doing some pretty major actions with seemingly little reason to do so. There are also a few parts in the movie that only make sense if you have read the book or have seen the original 1990 movie, making it so that this movie doesn't entirely stand on its own.
Misplaced comedy and shortcutted storytelling aside, this was a pretty entertaining movie. The visual effects and locations were well-done and creepy, and it made me jump in my seat once.
So, go see "It," but expect to see a very "hollywood" release, for better or for worse.… Expand

3 of 5 users found this helpful32

All this user's reviews

4

XogoSep 9, 2017

While much better than the made for TV version, this film is just ok. Moves very slowly as it goes through each kids experience with PW and what fear its based on. Does not explain the clowns motive or history. Maybe more in next Ch 2, butWhile much better than the made for TV version, this film is just ok. Moves very slowly as it goes through each kids experience with PW and what fear its based on. Does not explain the clowns motive or history. Maybe more in next Ch 2, but why not include it here. Ill see the next one, but only out of curiosity as to how they will tell the rest of the story.… Expand

7 of 12 users found this helpful75

All this user's reviews

5

SelkciPlumSep 11, 2017

If on a 10 scale, 7 and above means that I would voluntarily watch the movie again, this movie would get a 5, or 6 at the very most.

tl;dr IT WAS AIGHT

4 of 7 users found this helpful43

All this user's reviews

5

marco34laSep 9, 2017

Over-rated and underwhelmed. The movie is an adequate one. It has some very funny lines by the kids which was a surprise, visually it's good to watch, the clown is good and so on. It's not a horror or scary movie though, it feels like "theOver-rated and underwhelmed. The movie is an adequate one. It has some very funny lines by the kids which was a surprise, visually it's good to watch, the clown is good and so on. It's not a horror or scary movie though, it feels like "the goonies" or maybe "strange things" (but not as good). It lacks legitimate scares, instead has lots of screaming kids instead of suspense. The director should have watched an episode of 2 of the X-Files and perhaps he could have created some actual suspense. Overall, it wasn't a bad movie, it had moments... but not enough for a 2 hr 15min movie. Should you see it... eh, why not. Are you missing anything is you don't... definitely not.… Expand

8 of 16 users found this helpful88

All this user's reviews

6

MattBrady99Sep 25, 2017

"Beep Beep Richie!"

I'm not much of reader when it comes to books. The reason why I couldn't care less when a book gets adapted into film, because not every word is gonna translate well on screen. However, I do remember at a young age"Beep Beep Richie!"

I'm not much of reader when it comes to books. The reason why I couldn't care less when a book gets adapted into film, because not every word is gonna translate well on screen. However, I do remember at a young age watching the 1990 adaptation starring the amazing Tim Curry. While I was never scared, due to it's goofy and sloppy scenes, but Curry performance left a last long impression on me and other people. Re-watching the TV movie didn't help to painfully realize how out dated it is. I wouldn't even call it good, just bad. If a reboot was ever needed, this was it. Now here we are today.

"It" (2017) is a massive improvement and avoids watering it down like other terrible TV movie adaptations. While not on the same level of greatness like "The Shining", "Stand By Me" or "The Green Mile" in terms of quality, but compare to "The Dark Tower" that came out last month, this is pretty strong.

It's not the scariest movie I've seen this year, as the biggest problem is the loud jump scars that feels repetitive and destroys any unsettling moments. Not to say there isn't any, just wish it stayed away from being too mainstream horror.

I like how brutal and violet this got. Especially the beginning which took me off guard of how much it went that far. With no age rating holding it back, kids are acting like kids. Swearing and them physically getting hurt. There was even an attempt rape with one of the kids. As I said, it doesn't hold back on anything.

Bill Skarsgård absolutely kills it as Pennywise. His appearance is both intriguing and terrifying that it can give a grown man nightmares. The smartest thing Skarsgård did was not copy Curry's performance and instead do a different take. Everything from the devilish smile, twisted sense of humor, and the demonic Scooby-Doo voice added lays to the character, giving it life. Who knows, he might be this generations Freddy Krueger. Even in the scene when Pennywise started dancing was funny, but with his head not moving with the rest of the body and eyes locked onto you, it's pretty scary.

All the child actors were pretty great as well. Showing a positive future ahead of them. Finn Wolfhard, Jaeden Lieberher, Sofia Lillis, Jeremy Ray Taylor, and Jack Dylan Grazer are ones to keep your eye on for whatever they do next. The losers club are pretty much The Goonies, but better.

The pacing could've been a lot more sharper, as the 2nd act really did drag. There were a few unintentionally hilarious moments that wasn't meant to be taken that way.

Overall rating: You'll float too.… Expand

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

All this user's reviews

6

PipeCSep 25, 2017

A diabolically unlaughable clown.

When children of all ages begin to disappear mysteriously in the small and the acerbic town of Derry, a clan of little boys, self- recognized under the pseudonym of The Losers' Club, will have to face theirA diabolically unlaughable clown.

When children of all ages begin to disappear mysteriously in the small and the acerbic town of Derry, a clan of little boys, self- recognized under the pseudonym of The Losers' Club, will have to face their biggest and most remote fears, coming in the form of saffron hair, creepy nose, accused forehead, manipulative eyes and puffy balloons with great amounts of terror. Now, say hello to Pennywise!

After Will Poulter dropped out, Bill Skarsgård was the one who seized with propriety and promptness of the star antagonistic role. His Pennywise is rogue, disturbing and dreadful, however, having to keep solid his function of film adaptation, the character relegates his duty to produce fear in order to have a preference for a more fantastic vision, utopias that seriously impair the impact it must have in the genre. Most of the jump-scares coming from Bob Gray are discredited by the perceptible and even crappy CGI saturation, however, ingenuity and originality in the introduction of each of his appearances is laudable and is one of the most remarkable and spooky facts as far as horror is concerned. It's disappointing to testify that despite his performance full of strength and magnetism, he never managed to reach the levels of glory of the opening sequence.

After the abrupt and disquieting Cary Fukunaga departure, Andy Muschietti is put behind the cameras impregnating his hoarding touch for horror in every frame, marks revealed by impressive Hollywood debut "Mama". It has to be recognized that Muschietti fathoms the ways to conceive and play with the camera in order to set up an in crescendo atmosphere, Besides having a critical eye to conceive beautiful visuals and moving characters, however, the filmmaker loses control of the film at the instant that sets aside the importance and coherence of the story by cheap and ephemeral scares. It's also worth highlighting a homogeneous mixture of genres and original tension sequences, having the ability to revolutionize the ablatives of the audience in the twinkling of an eye. In addition to being the greatest pillar for the movie, he proudly exhibits clear references to today's horror film; to name just one: "The Conjuring" universe, with the use of infinite horror tricks, in fact, one scene and one character resemble some particulars of the third installment of Wan's world. The under-age actors are, far and away, a mass appeal for the plot, their performances are sparkling and touching in the formation of the audience-characters fundamental link. While the infants will always be much more likely to create a true connection, the young septet achieves a relatively high-performing level, however, many of them do it with sadly stereotyped characters as Finn Wolfhard's big- mouthed comic relief (Richie Tozier), Jeremy Ray Taylor's loving and credulous paunchy (Ben Hanscom) and Chosen Jacobs' tormented boy (Mike Hanlon). But the tradition is broken with tremendously novel characters and zero clichés as the tough-minded and human protagonist Jaeden Lieberher (Bill Denbrough), the incredibly Jewish Wyatt Oleff (Stanley Uris) and, of course, Sophia Lillis' subversive and bad-ass role (Beverly Marsh), who is certainly one of the most fascinating female juvenile performances in recent horror.

Written by Chase Palmer, Cary Fukunaga and Gary Dauberman, of course, on Stephen King's legendary pedestal, the story and script are below average in general terms. They choose to focus attention explicitly on the meetings between the members of the club and the Dancing Clown, giving sub-plots of dramatic weight to the supporting characters, in addition, the self-same main character doesn't get a short mention about his mother and father, it merely presents the moral and emotional conflict with his traumas, comrades and his little brother. Andy Muschietti doesn't disappoint, but sadly he doesn't overwhelm us. His remake/revival of Pennywise tale, which will come in only two installment, provides sufficient amount of fidelity in the visual field, however, the movie clearly fails to show its narrative aspects and horror tools, which fall apart, gradually, because of the sudden ton of fantasy that stifles the last act. For habitual audiences, "It" (2017) will endure breaking records thanks to an efficient marketing campaign, global childhood nostalgia, the sincere literary followers, the great doses of suspense and traditional jump-scares, however, for the most draconian and true lovers of the genre and the works of the author, the film doesn't really explore new horizons, besides, suffers from a lack of true horror nuance, slighting it by drama and suspense experiences that leave us a sense of nonconformity and even sadness when we see rolling down the closing credits, due to the abrupt ending of the story that does not have the same horror dimensions as the acts of its evil villain.… Expand

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

All this user's reviews

6

drambuie_Oct 6, 2017

it was a good standing movie and i kinda enjoyed it.Stephen King's landmarks were all over the movie (you'll float too, the balloon,splatter of blood all over a room). BUT come on! now we all know what was the actual inspiration behind theit was a good standing movie and i kinda enjoyed it.Stephen King's landmarks were all over the movie (you'll float too, the balloon,splatter of blood all over a room). BUT come on! now we all know what was the actual inspiration behind the series "stranger things", at least they shouldnt have had the same kid(Finn Wolfhard)play at both of them./ he was excellent though!… Expand

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

All this user's reviews

6

AginagalaNov 5, 2017

An unnervingly horror filled film this was more creepy than anything. Not containing as many jump scares as your classic horror film but the psychological aspects of this film factored in with very unnerving sound tracks are a greatAn unnervingly horror filled film this was more creepy than anything. Not containing as many jump scares as your classic horror film but the psychological aspects of this film factored in with very unnerving sound tracks are a great combination to make this an enjoyable watch for horror fans. The remastered version of Stephen Kings IT is played by child actors, sometimes been a mistake of a lot of horror films, however in this it was quite the opposite. Every actor(ress) had their own unique and well written personalities along with genuine reactions to the 'it' clown and scares of the rest of the film. I saw myself cringing and squirming in my seat when watching this on the big screen however it left my satisfied as a horror fan.… Expand

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

All this user's reviews

4

EpicLadySpongeSep 8, 2017

It has a great premise and a great result for a film but things fall when they start recycling clichéd horror monsters of yesteryear. To make the cherry to the top, the clichéd horror monster of yesteryear was none other than your averageIt has a great premise and a great result for a film but things fall when they start recycling clichéd horror monsters of yesteryear. To make the cherry to the top, the clichéd horror monster of yesteryear was none other than your average horrifying clichéd clown. This is why I end up recommending a skip to horror films since the point to watch them is to end up getting horrified, but I find no reason to be scared over uninteresting and clichéd clowns. It is definitely worth a skip but if you dare, watch It if you can actually be horrified over clichéd clowns.… Expand

8 of 20 users found this helpful812

All this user's reviews

4

TrevorsViewSep 8, 2017

Clowns look pretty freaky, right? I remember feeling quite unnerved by them in my younger days, yet as I got older, clowns intimidated me less. To be frank, clowns land more along the lines of “creepy” rather than scary, unlike real unmaskedClowns look pretty freaky, right? I remember feeling quite unnerved by them in my younger days, yet as I got older, clowns intimidated me less. To be frank, clowns land more along the lines of “creepy” rather than scary, unlike real unmasked people who could hurt you.

It’s familiar opening scene captures that true scariness: an unsupervised small boy takes a paper boat out on a rainy day, which falls down the sewer drain. A clown peers his head up from below the darkness, his appearance throwing the boy off guard. He displays unusual kindness to the boy, returning to him the lost paper boat. Then suddenly, the predator chews the boy’s arm off, and a God’s eye view looks down on his poor defenseless body flowing into the drain, a truly disturbing sight in this otherwise misguided adaptation of Stephen King’s classic novel.

Now, I understand the movie’s current rave, as It now stands at 90% on RottenTomatoes, and YouTube celebrity Chris Stuckmann gave It an A-, but I for one differ from the public opinion.

Although the critical praise does speak some truth; each preteen we meet goes through change in some way. The sewer-bound kid’s stuttering brother, Bill, is shunned by everybody, and his friends each face their personal growing pains too. Eddie is forced against his will to keep taking meds, Richie resents whatever his friends tell him to do, and Stanley refuses to pursue his family’s Jewish beliefs. Other friends they make include a Black farmer boy, Mike, who must kill sheep for his heartless father, Ben, an overweight new kid who needs friends outside of the books, and Beverly, a gorgeous flame-haired drug addict. Her father creates by far the creepiest moments, as he sniffs her hair like some sex offender. The horror should stem from places like here, the common fears every teenager shares.

Instead, the inexperienced director, Andy Muschietti, abused Dutch angles and motion sickness while filming the “scary” moments. He followed the common misconception that low lighting adds to the fright, which in actuality hurt the thrill here since you now cannot tell what is supposed to scare you. Think about some of the most iconic shots in horror: The shower scene in Psycho, the twins in The Shining, Jack Nicholson in the same movie shouting “Here’s Johnny!”, or even in the original It when Pennywise pops out from beneath the pale-tinted shower. Notice a theme? These images are each evenly lit, anything hidden in the shadows contrasting against something else to fear. Truly effective horror fills in the unknown blanks based on what you think you already see. Maybe if Muschietti utilized real fears, such as a community’s religious state, other than clichés, and knew how to stage them, then these scares could leave a longer impression to the extent of The Exorcist.

The scares particularly fail more due to the atrocious casting of the child actors. Whenever the kids were supposed to act afraid, they just stared blankly and walked stiltly. Even outside the scary scenes, the kids either talked too fast or too slow while screaming their lines when supposed to act angry. Based on speculation, these annoying kids obviously achieved their chemistry by following tape marks and cue cards with the direction, “Just say your lines and go home.”
These kids’ stories also lack any structural balance. The brother-to-brother bond initiated right at the start gets forgotten across a large portion, especially at the very last scene; and Stanley’s Jewish struggles loses any footing with little to do compared to the stronger treatment of his friends. As for the bullies, their interesting backstories receive an undeservingly low amount of screen time, instead existing more for lazy predictable scenarios we’ve seen countless times.

Very little fear strikes your nerve in these moments, as you can never empathize with these kids’ foul-mouthed tendencies. Rather than showing the hard reality of growing up, the kids celebrate their hatred against the oppressors. It even attempts to beautify the one female preteen, Beverly, as much as possible, as she jumps into a lake wearing only her underwear, then lets her new boyfriends gawk at her body as she naps in their eyesight. Then in another dialogue played only for laughs, a pharmacist, who she says looks like Clark Kent, comments her back, saying she looks like Lois Lane! Honestly, the whole beautification of her character made me feel pedophilic myself.

I read several reports that the clowning industry has suffered because of It, promoting coulrophobia, I find this hard to believe. It does not feed off coulrophobia, but rather anthropophobia, particularly predatorial parents. No wonder the Alamo Drafthouse theaters in Austin and Brooklyn hosted all-clown screenings, since clearly, we might as well root for the demonic circus act to win!… Expand

6 of 15 users found this helpful69

All this user's reviews

5

SpangleSep 12, 2017

Joining Get Out, Baby Driver, and Wonder Woman, as solid but wildly overhyped films, Andy Muschietti continues to prove that he is a horror director who has no idea how to direct horror films. Excelling when it comes the childhoodJoining Get Out, Baby Driver, and Wonder Woman, as solid but wildly overhyped films, Andy Muschietti continues to prove that he is a horror director who has no idea how to direct horror films. Excelling when it comes the childhood relationships on display and the mystery regarding the town of Derry, Muschietti directs the horror scenes like an amateur and has to rely on jump scares to actually conjure up any scare or any sense of atmosphere. Had the film lacked its heart - the kids - then Stephen King's It would have been a film that could have been tossed on the pile of other disappointing King adaptations. As it stands, it is a film that is far funnier and endearing than scary and, as a horror film from Stephen King, it should manage to be all of three of these things. Unfortunately, Muschietti's failure to conjure up any scares that have a lasting impact leave It as nothing more than above average film that fails to live up to its considerable hype.

What makes the film's scares so dull and uninteresting is two-fold. For one, they are predictable. As the camera pans around a bathroom past Beverly (Sophia Lillis), it is obvious what will be in the corner of the room right behind her. As the kids walk through the Well House, it is obvious where the clown will be and what it will do. As the Jewish kid looks at the painting and the picture is gone, take a wild guess what is now behind him. It is a film that never shocks the audience. There are no chances taken. It is by-the-numbers horror filmmaking, putting Pennywise exactly where he is expected to be and then acting that it is scary anyways just because Pennywise makes some creepy face and sprints at the camera. Rarely does this work and Muschietti would be well served to keep his audience guessing, instead of giving into our every inclination. The best horror films hint at the evil lurking around the corner, but never show it unless the timing and anticipation is just right. For this film, it believes Pennywise to be such a compelling horror figure that it just has to rush him out immediately. Often times in film and in It, the horror is scariest when off-screen. Here, when other kids go missing without their disappearance being shown, the film is laced with a great sense of dread. Unfortunately, all too often, Muschietti gives into temptation and sprinkles Pennywise quite liberally throughout this film. By the end, the result is a clown that does not lurk in the shadows, but out in the open and right behind you every single time.

The other element that holds back It's horror impact is its reliance on jump scares. Going hand-in-hand with its predictability, It relies on jump scares or Pennywise running at the screen as his head violently shakes far too often. Gross-out horror and gore are also relied upon at times with similarly minimal impact. Rather than taking the time to build anticipation and an overwhelming sense of dread, Muschietti instead relies upon cheap tricks to steer this ship. Unfortunately, for horror films, reliance on cheap scares is what often undermines their quality and what can make so many quite disposable and forgettable. Though It has a lot to love and some smart themes, it is not really one that can be described as scary. The closest it gets comes as the kids walk around the Well House looking for Pennywise which carries considerable dread and is loaded with classic horror moments that elicit panicked "don't go in there"'s from the crowd. Unfortunately, Pennywise will always pop up right where he is expected to via a pair of jump scares, rendering the scene one with a great build-up but no actual punch. In essence, It not only lacks any imagination for how to elicit fear, but when it does elicit fear, it does so cheaply and in a fashion that rarely actually scares.

The film's cliche ending further disappoints. After two-plus hours of the kids coming together to fight bullies and urging one another to stick together, they do just that in facing off with Pennywise. Unfortunately, the scene not only lacks any tension, but it lacks any originality. Pulling off his mask to force this supernatural being to realize that he has no power anymore due to the lack of fear in the children's hearts, the film really sells its own villain short in the process of delivering a cliche, kill the bad guy as a group type of ending. By reducing Pennywise to being nothing more than a physical representation of fear, the film winds up undermining all of the ominous historical development it showed and turns the character into a rather pathetic one. Lacking the menace, horrifying unpredictability, and inevitability of the very best horror villains, Pennywise is a character who is easily defeated once controlled. Though smartly including this to bring the film's themes regarding fear and how to not let it consume you, it really makes for a lackluster villain in a film that needed his menace. Bill Skarsgard plays the role well, but the mightily… Expand

2 of 5 users found this helpful23

All this user's reviews

4

BN333Sep 8, 2017

By the numbers modern horror only slightly saved by the premise. Humor, creepy factor lacking compared with the original film/s including the IT it is re-imagining. Feels more forced then genuine. Lacks the chemistry, wit and productionBy the numbers modern horror only slightly saved by the premise. Humor, creepy factor lacking compared with the original film/s including the IT it is re-imagining. Feels more forced then genuine. Lacks the chemistry, wit and production quality of the original. Poorer attempt at a Stand by Me/ Big Chill that the original mini film series perfected. Cast less cohesive then previous attempts and personalities feel less defined. Humor feels off compared with Currys taunting. Pennywise lacks the cohesive human/monster combo that Tim Curry's Pennywise represented, feels disjointed in comparison and should have been scarier. Effects are a wee bit off at times which distract from any genuine scare attempt.

Film feels like a missed opportunity.… Expand

6 of 17 users found this helpful611

All this user's reviews

6

section20mi6Apr 8, 2018

Spooky and Freaky, It features swearing kids, dirty environments and ugly monsters that successfully scare the audience, but nothing else in terms of the story.

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

4

GBG_JasonOct 6, 2017

According to the Internet Movie Database, there were forty four remakes, sequels or reboots released, or are to be released, in 2017 alone. For those of you who are bad at math, that’s almost one per week. Why we as a society keep revisitingAccording to the Internet Movie Database, there were forty four remakes, sequels or reboots released, or are to be released, in 2017 alone. For those of you who are bad at math, that’s almost one per week. Why we as a society keep revisiting stories that have been told time and time again is beyond me. It, based on the Stephen King novel of the same name, is the most recent to follow this trend.

The film tells the story of an outbreak of cases of missing children in the same town of Derry, Maine during the summer of 1989. It opens much like the original, with the young Georgie losing his paper boat down a storm drain. If you’ve seen the original or read the book, you know where this is going. I will say that this was the most tense and unsettling scene in the entire film. This is primarily due to the amazing performance of Bill Skarsgard (Hemlock Grove, Atomic Blonde) as Pennywise, the dancing clown.

Not since Heath Ledger’s turn as the Joker has someone taken a role previously played by another actor and truly made it their own; breaking the mold and exceeding all expectations. Even without saying a word, Pennywise is creepy as hell and sure to give anyone with a fear of clowns plenty of nightmares for the rest of their lives. While the character is featured prominently throughout the film and steals the show any time he is featured, he is simply not in the film enough.

With a running time over two hours, you’ll see Pennywise for approximately 30 minutes of it; mostly during the climax. The remainder of the film follows “The Loser Club,” a group of young friends that are social outcasts and spend their free time exploring sewers and evading the local bullies. While the young group of actors displays a wealth of talent, especially Finn Wolfhard (Stranger Things), the writing and pacing is extremely lacking.

Most of the film is spent dealing with horrors our heroes face that are not so supernatural, such as abusive parents or the previously mentioned bullies. I found it strange that out of a group of more than five kids, you only see a small number of their parents throughout the film. I’m unsure if the parents are taking a page from the Liam Neeson book of parenting or really were that uninvolved in their kid’s lives, but it distracts from the story. Additionally, 2 of 2 dad’s you meet in the film are portrayed as pedophiles, which does little to confirm whether the kids were really seeing Pennywise or they were using him as a scapegoat for their fears.

Unlike some of my GBG comrades, I am not a fan of the 80’s, but I was able to recognize a number of callbacks and small details that did make the film feel authentic. From the music, cars, costume design and set pieces, the 80’s setting is believable. Even down to the Molly Ringwald-ish looking Sophia Lillis, this feels like a movie released circa 1989.

You’ve likely already decided if you are going to go see It or not, but as someone who holds high respect for the original, I found the remake to be lackluster on most fronts. I would strongly recommend that if you are interested in seeing the film, wait until it’s released at your local Red Box.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

5

psychomuseJul 4, 2018

This is like a longer, boring version of Stranger Things. Just go there. Time to float? No, it's time to go to the Upside Down!