Production budget was $35,000,000 so there's going to be some mighty fine Christmas bonuses given out for those involved in the movie.
Just saw IT! SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS
- Thread starter Baby Blue
- Start date
-
This message board permanently closed on June 30th, 2020 at 4PM EDT and is no longer accepting new members.
Robert Gray
Well-Known Member
I picked up my copy of the movie poster from the Bangor Movie Theater today (I put a dibs on it way back when). I also put a dibs in on the large vinyl hang poster they have up too. I need to get the film poster framed and start trying to collect signatures of the actors, director, and perhaps SK someday on the poster. I did this with my poster of Pulp Fiction too.
Last edited:
Yes, she kicked ass but all that was lost when she was captured - hence damsel in distress - and she never got the administer the defeating blow. Also, you point out the big plot hole of the climax. Why would Pennywise want to bring the whole gang back together to face him? The first time he did, he suffered a setback. Sticking to his tried, tested, and proven successful over the ages method of picking his victims off one by one was what he would have stuck to.
I'm not going to ding the movie much for the climax setup because everything else was great. I'd liked it, even more, the second time but the Bev kidnapping sticks out like a sore thumb. Adaptations require changes and I'm fine with them but the yardstick I measure against is the source material and in this instance, the source material did it better.
Well... that didn't take long to get around.
I don't get it! Wearing a pin is not tantamount to leading a boycott. She might be wearing it ironically. And, if she doesn't like the film, what is the big deal? SK looks okay with it. She's apparently a loyal employee of several decades. It's The Enquirer people! If they do a cover, 'Grin Willard's Sad Last Days', don't start divvying up my stuff! I'm actually more disturbed at the 'Katie rages at Tom. YOU MAKE ME SICK!' blurb. Poor Tom! But Katie? Between us, he makes me sick too.
It was just a gag regarding a couple of Ms Mods posts. The Enquirer never had a cover like that.
Bill does say just before they drive Pennywise away though (and I may get the quote wrong so bear with me) "That's why he couldn't kill Bev, because she wasn't scared of him." Something along those lines anyway. Which suggests that maybe the intention had not been to kidnap Bev but to kill her and he was trying to pick the Losers off one by one.
Also, I think in the book there is a message to the adult Losers left at one of the murder scenes to "COME HOME". Which would be the same plot hole more or less if you consider it to be a plot hole (I think the murder in question happened before Stan's suicide so the group wasn't weakened by numbers at that point),
Robert Gray
Well-Known Member
Leaving the book out of the discussion of the film (and I agree the book does it better), I don't think Bev was bait. I think it went after her first simply because she hurt it the most in the previous battle. It diagnosed her as the greatest threat and took her off the board. Why didn't it just kill her? I think other posters have already hit on why; Bev wasn't sufficiently scared of it to make a good meal. It took her back to its larder with the intention of getting the meat tenderized properly. When it failed to scare her to the desired degree again, it put her in a catatonic state so it could try again later. I think the film's monster put Bowers in motion simply because it knew it was going down for its long sleep soon, and it might not get around to killing them all. It set Bowers in motion simply for a backup and kicks.
The film monster is rather pragmatic. It was clearly surprised when the other Losers showed up in its lair. I don't think, for a moment, that the monster believed the guys it had been terrifying would come down there willingly. If it had been baiting a trap, it would have launched it when they were at their most vulnerable, i.e. when they were working on waking up Bev, or when they were stretched out and split up making their way down. The monster didn't do any of that because it wasn't aware they were coming. That is why it immediately attempted confuse and deceive them with the Georgie bit. It only went straight into battle mode when that failed. And the moment it realized it wasn't winning that fight, it attempted (again) to separate them by giving the others a choice to leave, offering for them to get away if they sacrifice Bill.
I think taking the film as entirely self-contained mythology, we can see several things going on. Think about all the bodies floating around down there. I am guessing many of them were like Bev, and made it to that hellhole alive to be terrorized (the monster's version of cooking) until it got around to killing them. I think that is its first choice most of the time. The thing had no way of knowing they would even discover Bev was missing, or if they did... when. I think it did leave them all a message that would have made the paper and filtered down to the Losers when it took her, but not for bait purposes. It was more of a... got her... your next... kind of implication.
The film monster is rather pragmatic. It was clearly surprised when the other Losers showed up in its lair. I don't think, for a moment, that the monster believed the guys it had been terrifying would come down there willingly. If it had been baiting a trap, it would have launched it when they were at their most vulnerable, i.e. when they were working on waking up Bev, or when they were stretched out and split up making their way down. The monster didn't do any of that because it wasn't aware they were coming. That is why it immediately attempted confuse and deceive them with the Georgie bit. It only went straight into battle mode when that failed. And the moment it realized it wasn't winning that fight, it attempted (again) to separate them by giving the others a choice to leave, offering for them to get away if they sacrifice Bill.
I think taking the film as entirely self-contained mythology, we can see several things going on. Think about all the bodies floating around down there. I am guessing many of them were like Bev, and made it to that hellhole alive to be terrorized (the monster's version of cooking) until it got around to killing them. I think that is its first choice most of the time. The thing had no way of knowing they would even discover Bev was missing, or if they did... when. I think it did leave them all a message that would have made the paper and filtered down to the Losers when it took her, but not for bait purposes. It was more of a... got her... your next... kind of implication.
robert gray stated it better and in more detail, but if you see bev staring into the monsters face and saying "i'm not afraid of you" and get "damsel", i fear you're missing a point somewhere.
something else i'd like to point out . . . kidnapping and hostage taking happens in all forms in movies, and to both males and females. it doesn't make someone automatically weak. it's interesting to note there's no male version of "damsel in distress" which should indicate to you what a ridiculous argument it is to begin with.
Guess who's coming back two Septembers from now?
"IT: Chapter Two" Set For Sept 2019 - Dark Horizons
"IT: Chapter Two" Set For Sept 2019 - Dark Horizons
Oh yeah, this is definitely cracking half a billion before it leaves theatres. Half a BILLION. A horror film is doing superhero-movie numbers here. And they say people don't like clowns...
It (2017) - Box Office Mojo
It (2017) - Box Office Mojo
I just hope the studios learn something here: if you adapt an existing property and honour the source material, people will respond.
Worldwide: $478,096,375
Ohhhh, yeah, baby!!!
Ohhhh, yeah, baby!!!
That's a phenomenal amount. Wow!
Okay, serious question here: I've seen this thing twice now (will go a third time), and I was really happy with the quality of the film.
Do you think WB should consider an Oscar campaign for this film? I'm thinking it could qualify for the technical categories like sound & musical score, maybe editing?
Do you think WB should consider an Oscar campaign for this film? I'm thinking it could qualify for the technical categories like sound & musical score, maybe editing?
they should, even if though the oscars will probably turn their nose up at it.
Yeah, I think the exposure alone would be great. I mean, I loved Logan, and Fox is contemplating an Oscar campaign for it even though I don't think it's that good. And I mean, jeez, if a film like Avatar could be considered Oscar-worthy...
Hey all, I posted a new thread in IT (Part Two) but the announced date for Part Two is September 6, 2019.
IT Sequel Release Date Announced - IGN
IT Sequel Release Date Announced - IGN