Directed by:
Andy MuschiettiCinematography:
Chung-hoon ChungComposer:
Benjamin WallfischCast:
Jaeden Martell, Sophia Lillis, Jeremy Ray Taylor, Finn Wolfhard, Jack Dylan Grazer, Wyatt Oleff, Chosen Jacobs, Nicholas Hamilton, Owen Teague (more)VOD (3)
Plots(1)
In Derry, Maine, seven young friends unite against a terrifying supernatural creature that has been haunting their small town for centuries. Calling itself Pennywise the Dancing Clown, IT is a moster of unspeakable power that takes the form of everyone's most horrific fears. Threatened by their worst nightmares, the only way these kids can survive IT is together. (Warner Bros. Home Entertainment)
(more)Videos (14)
Reviews (17)
This is what the 1990 version should have looked like; to this day, we would’ve remembered it as one of the best Stephen King adaptations. And today’s version should’ve been based on a more sophisticated, James Wan style of inducing terror. However, I’m not disparaging this movie; it is intentionally directed in the 1980s style, honoring the original novel and its characters. Thanks to the quality rendering, it’s not boring, not even for a single moment of its 130-minute runtime. It also has great widescreen visuals without a single technical fault and a nicely refreshing ending, which is something that’s rarely seen in today’s horror movies. And above all, as early as at the beginning, it breaks the rule I recently mentioned in my review of Annabelle 2, which is that in a mainstream Hollywood horror movie, nothing can happen to kids. But as for the evocation of fear, which is a rather fundamental aspect of the movie, I was never frightened, not even startled. I just felt really angry on behalf on the youngsters at the end and desperately wanted to kick that drooling bastard’s ass.
()
Legendary. That's what the book form of the saga is. A complex dealing with childhood, injustices, bullying, and more generally, adolescence. It also encompasses almost all genres, making it highly enticing and equally susceptible to being adapted into a film. It is precisely the childhood part that accounts for about two-thirds of the story, told through memories, exploration of history, personal desires, and imaginings, and occasionally even visions – a language that is somewhat unconventional for film. However, the film manages to touch upon or even adequately develop these themes as if by magic, and even though it primarily focuses on the most captivating centerpiece, Pennywise himself, everything unfolds smoothly like Swiss clockwork, to the point where I couldn't believe that the entire search was nearing its end. Unfortunately, not all members of the Losers' Club get their due during this process, especially Mike, who is merely included for the sake of numbers, and Richie is partially reduced to being a pubescent troublemaker (although even in this position, Finn Wolfhard portrays him with great likability). On the other hand, Jaeden Lieberher seems as if he stepped right out of my book version of Bill, and I can believe that I would have followed him anywhere during my childhood, even into the sewers, even though I wouldn't be able to explain why exactly I was doing it.
()
An excellent experience and the best horror film since The Conjuring. That much is clear from the ratings alone, which hold an amazing 81%, the same as The Conjuring, and the only two horror films to maintain that rating in this century. It, in addition to its amazing ratings and satisfied reviews, boasts excellent box office receipts, grossing a perfect $121 million in its first weekend in America, making it the biggest horror opener ever! Stephen King's adaptation has proved to be a very strong brand where the R-rating will please the most, this is perhaps the first mainstream haunted horror film to ever get an R-rating and it has done the impossible, I hope in the future filmmakers will stick to this and prepare more horror films like this for us. And now for the movie: I haven't read the book, I haven't seen the original It (shame on me!), but I could not have been more surprised by the plot development and as an ignorant viewer, the film absolutely hit me, crushed me, squeezed me and spit me out! From the start, the impressive performance of child actors, the amazing cinematography, the beautiful visuals, the solid soundtrack, the humour, the references to A Nightmare on Elm Street are very rewarding, and once Pennywise is on the set, the horror delights begin, not only his dialogues with the children are considerably scary, but his transformation into various creatures presented an extraordinary horror experience and the imagination of the filmmakers cannot be denied. Some people will complain that the film doesn't have enough scares, but it builds more on atmosphere, which packs a punch; there is also some violence, and the finale in the house is such a blast that I want to see it again immediately. You might jump too much, but you might shit your pants int tribute. For me, I'm completely satisfied. I walked away thrilled. (the silence in the almost full cinema hall at the end was unbelievable). A clear contender for the first place, only Leatherface can take it down this year perhaps! 95%
()
It is a great pity that the undoubted potential of this project ultimately boils down to very little inventive work with horror and fear. Make no mistake. Pennywise is great, and a couple of jump scares are really successful. But Muschietti gives the impression of a director who has little time and patience to create tension, so he chooses shortcuts and, moreover, properly old-school shortcuts. Unfortunately, Pennywise's jumping from all corners of the screen gradually gets old, and one only nostalgically remembers, for example, the masterpiece of the seemingly endless infernal terror in the second Conjuring. Similarly, films like It Follows or Get Out create a rather relentless contrast to this solid routine in terms of directing. However, IT excels with great characters and an intelligent image of growing up in an indifferent and dangerous world. It is very easy to identify with the characters, the film is funny and poetic, and it evokes Stand by Me in certain respects. At the same time, the film cleverly plays on the trendy notes of 80s nostalgia, but it’s a pity that it does not do it as subtly as Stranger Things. The Loser’s Club quickly grows on you and Derry's atmosphere is duly burdensome... nevertheless, the intrusive feeling that IT could have reached even deeper into the subconscious persists. But I have to admit without torture that I am looking forward to the second part. The first chapter is definitely one of the better King adaptations, but when one sees the amount of accumulated talent, it is clear that IT could and should have been one of the best. And that didn't happen...
()
Yesterday, I had fun with a comment under a hipster-tearful article from Indiewire, from a user parodying the occasional critic lamentations over the new adaptation of IT , saying "it's actually very good, but it's not reminiscent of Tarkovsky's Solaris,” and then adding "shut up and enjoy the movie". On the one hand, I fully agree with them. Andy Muscietti managed to make a good film that is relatively faithful to King’s poetics, and it’s certainly among the TOP 5 adaptations of his horror masterpieces (together with The Shining, Misery, Carrie and The Mist). The cast is amazing and the direction of the young actors is as if by the way. And Bill Skarsgård’s portray of Pennywise is superb. On the other hand, I can’t avoid the feeling that more could have been done with it; even maintaining all the creators and the tropes of a “pleasing mainstream horror movie”. To really scare, IT doesn’t appear all that much and in order to squeeze everything, the spooky scenes end surprisingly fast with jump-scares; there is no time to properly escalate the tension (from a pure horror side, I thought the recent sequel of Annabelle was more effective and scarier). But what I lament the most is that Pennywise isn’t a full-fledged character, but only a bogeyman. It’s a real shame that he was not given more space to speak, because in those few scenes where manages to not only say ‘boo!’ but to also verbally interact with his victims, you can see a potential that was not exploited. Maybe next time, in Part Two. And the next time, and the time after that, in all the sequels, because there’s no way the studios will limit this excellently performed, main horror character to two films – especially given the expected profits. 75%
()
Ads