Reading the interview it seems like this is the reason they did the twist. They wanted to lift aspects of the book that couldn't be done with a 30year-old actor. I kind of understand their motivations, in that case. And I think it was probably best to establish the change in course now instead of catching viewers off guard with such a radical alteration.If we don't get a CG Gage running around like a madman ****ing up people I boycott.![]()
Mike Flanagan and Zak Hilditch also did a fantastic job.Agreed. Muschietti is one of the few filmmakers who “gets” Stephen King along with Frank Darabont and Rob Reiner.
All the reviews seem to be great. After the last trailer, I was a little hesitant but this is getting my expectations back up.
Out of the three Stephen King adaptations this year, this was the one with the biggest question mark for me.
Just wait until next month when the teaser for Part 2 comes out. The hype will be back up before you know it.OT but... Doesn't it seem like the phenomenon of IT part 1 was like almost a decade ago? Maybe it's the way the news has been with real life geopolitics spinning a tale most would have balked at as being too contrived to be real but even things like say the release of huge hits like Black Panther and Infinity War seem like it was years and years and years ago... But it was 2o18.
It has its moments, and by moments I mean the performances of Fred Gwynne, the little boy and one particularly creepy special effect but not much else.I haven't seen the 1989 movie yet, is it worth watching? Wondering if I should go in fresh not knowing anything about this story, or watch the 1989 one so I have a point of comparison....
Now THAT'S what I call a proper horror movie poster.