Stephen King's "IT" Part I and Part II

Yeah, and he had originally began to carve it when they were kids. He had feelings for Eddie then, it wasn't just in memory.
 
Supercut Of IT With A Running Time Of 6,5 Hours
Posted: September 10, 2019, 15:13:39
Section: Film » It
Director Andy Muschietti has confirmed to Entertainment Tonight that talks are underway with Warner Bros for an even longer version of IT. The plan is for a supercut that brings both films into one, adding in deleted material, and filming fresh scenes for it as well. Muschietti estimates his supercut will be around six and a half hours.


“People can choose how to see it, all in one or, you know, making little pauses”, Muschietti mused. “Or bingeing! Maybe it’s divided in episodes. People now, they binge a series for 10 hours of viewing, so it wouldn’t surprise me”.


Copied from Lilja's Library: Lilja's Library - The World of Stephen King [1996 - 2019]

King Talks IT
Posted: September 10, 2019, 14:13:05
Section: Film » It
Have you seen IT: Chapter 2? If not, see it first and then come back to read this.


“When Bill Denbrough walked into the thrift shop, he had a flashback of him and Beverly browsing the same place 27 years ago,” Muschietti said. “It was a little romantic moment there, and then they were approached by the shopkeeper as a younger version.”

There would have been no digital de-aging for King, however. Instead, the younger shopkeeper who ruins their tender moment would have been played by King’s son, author Joe Hill.

“Andy’s original idea was so genius,” King said. “He wanted to use Joe as that guy in a flashback with the kid, and it would’ve worked because Joe and I look a lot alike.”

Alas, the idea was never shot. “We started with a script that was 160 pages, and that was the short version,” Muschietti said. “Unfortunately, we had to shave it off. It was impossible.”


Copied from Lilja's Library: Lilja's Library - The World of Stephen King [1996 - 2019]
 
I am so down. A 6 and a half hour movie? Would that be a record?

Interesting about WB letting him shoot new scenes. Wonder which ones he’ll add?
 
Richie is definitely gay. The arcade was a subtle hint at it that then gets shouted. It’s clearly something he hasn’t come to terms with and hasn’t really told anyone. Pennywise played with this secret and taunted him with it. Then Xavier Dolan’s character walks by and flirts with him. Richie really trying to save his best friend and possible crush at the end clearly is an iffy area but the heart with the R+E kind of signifies the crush and friendship.

I’m sure there were things cut for time that told more about Richie’s struggles... hopefully they get added back in in some extended cut (since the first version of the film came in at 4 hours...). It is a shame that the film starts with a really awful gay beating and then doesn’t really follow through and make a point with the other gay character in the movie. Missed opportunity.
 
Went and seen it last night.

Really enjoyable for the most part only had one or two moments that felt like they could have been trimmed down or cut. McAvoy & Hader were the standouts for me.

Still think the first one is the better overall film but this one way in no way a letdown.

7/10
 
I liked it too but it wasn't perfect and I preferred Chapter 1.

I still have issues with Mike. They never quite make him feel like part of the group. He feels more like a guide than a friend and that's very unfortunate because I never viewed him that way in the book.
 
Yea he feels like the most underdeveloped one in the first chapter, which is kind of not a good look for the only black character.
 
At least he’s part of the fight at the end, wherein the book he’s stuck in a hospital room.
 
Mike is by far the least developed character in the series. Of the losers I mean
 
I never read the book so don't know if its done like that in it as well but I really liked that Stanley actually killed himself to get the Losers back together, seemed like kind of a sucky ending for him to begin with but was a lot more impactful at the end when you find out why he did it.
 
I never read the book so don't know if its done like that in it as well but I really liked that Stanley actually killed himself to get the Losers back together, seemed like kind of a sucky ending for him to begin with but was a lot more impactful at the end when you find out why he did it.

It most certainly isn't that way in the book, and that's a really stupid change.

Stan killing himself is tragic, and it casts a pall over the Losers reunion. It hits them hard, particularly when they realize it happened immediately after Mike called him. It's partly what motivates them to move on forward.

There is also a bigger difference between the two as It is pregnant when they first meet It as children, and It has laid It's eggs when they are adults. On some intuitive level, Stan knew It was pregnant. And because it's implied Stan remembered everything all at once when Mike calls him, he psychologically can't handle it.

Turning Stan killing himself into a noble act is bull****, and kind of irresponsible on the writer's part.
 
In somewhat related news, I just read the actor who plays Patrick has been cast to play Harold in The Stand series.
 
I loved the movie but I'm still annoyed at the Stanley revelation, worst aspect of the movie for me
 
Mike is by far the least developed character in the series. Of the losers I mean

Which is so weird because there is no reason he should be. The change of history buff from Mike to Ben in the first movie is still one of the most baffling decisions of that film.
 
I didn't love the first movie, but this still feels like a pretty significant step down from that movie. I don't know, but a lot of this just didn't really work for me especially the scares. Also, while I was never bored this had no business being almost 3 hours long IMO. The cast is definitely the best part of this movie with Hader and Ransone easily getting some of the best lines/scenes, but I do think the comedy was a bit too much in certain scenes. Also, poor Skarsgard. They just can't let the guy actually be naturally scary without using a ridiculous amount of CGI. I really disliked that stuff in the last one and it's even worse here, especially in that finale and man don't even get me started on that awful de-aging effect they used on the kids in those flashbacks.

5/10
 
Had a few days to let this movie sink in, and yeah... it really doesn’t hold up. While they do some good stuff with the material, too many alterations are made from the book, the fetch quest plot is terrible, too much reliance is put on Pennywise, and the flashback stuff to the kids is really not needed. A shame.
 
I actually would be interested in seeing the combined 6-hour version of this. They could borrow the structure of the book and have the adult and kid parts intersect; I think it would help the episodic nature of the adult portions in Part 2, which were kind of a repetitive drag as is. Put it out on Netflix in six episodes or something.
 
Why chop it up at all into 6 parts? Just re-edit it into one giant full 6 hour narrative on Blu-Ray - along with the original cuts as as well.
 
I liked the film. I think it was a step down from the first, but certainly still enjoyable. I loved the scary/zany elements, they sorta set it apart from anything else in the horror genre. And for a movie about a killer clown, they fit pretty perfectly.

8/10
(chapter 1 was a 9/10)
 
Why chop it up at all into 6 parts? Just re-edit it into one giant full 6 hour narrative on Blu-Ray - along with the original cuts as as well.
That's his intention, yeah, along with new material.
 
I enjoyed it. Felt a bit long towards the end, but not nearly as bad as Endgame.
 
I feel like a combined 6 hour version would only make the flashbacks in part 2 more grating.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"