Grade for it

[chief4db]

Just saw it yesterday. For movie goers who never read the book probably an A. Especially for all the high schoolers and 20 something's who watch any scary movie that comes to town. I give it a C+. The plot just wasn't thick enough and didn't draw me in. The scenes just didn't feel connected. No transitions. The part I really liked was when Ben was doing the research on the history. That is what got me into it but that is as far as it went. Definitely more character development. Hopefully chapter 2 will be better. What grade do u think it earned??

 

[HedlessChickn]

Let's have fun with newspeak:

IT was superdoubleextraplusgood.

 

[doowopgirl]

I would probably give it a B+. While it was creepy, I think we needed just a bit more home scenes. Perhaps in chapter 2.

 

[kingricefan]

I give it an A-. Would be an A+ but that'll have to wait until the director's cut comes out on bluray!

 

[Steffen]

Same as my pal above: an A-.

 

[Dana Jean]

I'd give it a nice, solid A.

 

[Robert Gray]

I give it an A too, and I'm a pretty harsh critic. I agree with the posters who would have liked more scenes and a bit more of a slow burn. Ideally, I would have liked to have seen a trilogy. The first film would have gone up only until all seven were in the Losers, i.e. the Rock Fight and their first sort of face off as a group (that garage scene with the slides). Cutting everything after that for the next film, would have allowed more on each individual Loser (and Bowers). The second film should have been their escalating war with Bowers and subsequent battles with It and coming to an end as we saw it. Thus, the story of the young Losers would have been 4-5 hours between the two films. The third film would have been their return and battle as adults. Not only do I think we would have gotten a bit more (and I would have given it an A+) but from a financial standpoint it would have made the studio a hell of a lot more money.

All that being said, it is an excellent film. In fairness, I don't think there is any way to compare it to the book. If I did, my rating might drop to a C+ to a B- but no lower than that. Oddly enough, while I liked all the Losers in the new film, there were stronger performances in the last film adaptation. I wish I could mix and match them. I liked both Ben characters, but I preferred the actor and expanded story of the last one. I want to see Haystack. The new Ben didn't have enough edge to come out. The closest we saw was one bellow during the rock fight. In other words, the actors were all great but the condensed nature of the film (because it should have been three instead of two) caused us to get less from each individual. That was the trade off. I think they did fine with the time they had, but they needed more time to really do it justice. Ain't that always the case?

This is the problem when rating a film from a book, particularly a King book which is entirely CHARACTER driven. A film does this unfortunate triage (a slide show like in the film) and so much that is important doesn't make the cut. Those of us who have read the book are invested in those characters and want to see all of that. I like that we can discuss the film honestly and fairly. Great film, a new classic. The eventual series on HBO, STARZ or whatever... will be even better.

 

[morgan]

Oddly enough, while I liked all the Losers in the new film, there were stronger performances in the last film adaptation. I wish I could mix and match them. I liked both Ben characters, but I preferred the actor and expanded story of the last one. I want to see Haystack. The new Ben didn't have enough edge to come out. The closest we saw was one bellow during the rock fight.

I think that even though they changed a lot of Mike Hanlon's back story from the book, they didn't give him enough presence in the new movie either.

 

[mal]

It was a solid B+ for me. The laugh at the end of credits brought it up to an A-.

 

[Steve in WI]

Just saw it yesterday. For movie goers who never read the book probably an A. Especially for all the high schoolers and 20 something's who watch any scary movie that comes to town. I give it a C+.

That's interesting. I see it the opposite way. As a movie, standing on its own, I'd grade it at about a B or B-. That's based on what I heard from the people I saw it with who were not familiar with the story and some of the reviews and podcasts I've consumed. I have to admit that on its own, the movie feels a little rushed and isn't 100% effective.

Grading it on a curve though, based on what I think the perfect movie-length adaptation of It could be, I give it an A or A+. Let's face it - the novel is far too long to cover in even 2 normal-length movies, and some of the concepts are essentially unfilmable. My first reaction to the movie was that I understood everything that was cut out (even if I still missed it) and I could fill in the gaps in my mind. The changes that were made, especially moving the story forward 30 years, didn't bother me like I thought they would. And the actors who played the kids were nothing short of incredible. IMO, the single most important thing to capture in the movie was the friendship amongst the losers club, and the movie did just about perfectly at that.

I generally hate to see movie adaptations of my favorite books because I don't like to have my mental image of the characters replaced by the actors onscreen. This is a rare instance where I'm happy because the actors seem to be embodying the characters in the boom rather than just playing a role.

 

[recitador]

it's an A from me. it hit all the right notes, got most of the important themes, had tons of subtle nods to stuff that was left out for time or rearranged, great cast, a great take on It, and was generally entertaining, not just for king fans, but also for a general audience. some small gripes, such as that head vibrating thing that i think they picked up from japanese horror. i think that detracts from a monster more than it adds. obviously, not enough of henry and crew, but time limits and all that - holding out for deleted scenes. mike could have been stronger, but as part of the group i think he still played well.

 

[Mr. Chips]

It's an A for me. It really captured the spirit of the book. My only issues were the lack of focus on mike and the bowers gang. However, articles I've read about part 2 suggest mike's role will be more prominent.

 

[Dana Jean]

it's an A from me. it hit all the right notes, got most of the important themes, had tons of subtle nods to stuff that was left out for time or rearranged, great cast, a great take on It, and was generally entertaining, not just for king fans, but also for a general audience. some small gripes, such as that head vibrating thing that i think they picked up from japanese horror. i think that detracts from a monster more than it adds. obviously, not enough of henry and crew, but time limits and all that - holding out for deleted scenes. mike could have been stronger, but as part of the group i think he still played well.

I wish the jittery jump scare stuff would have been toned down just a bit. I think Pennywise's best moment on screen was the opening sewer scene. Understated and very dangerous. A very subtle deadliness.

 

[recitador]

I wish the jittery jump scare stuff would have been toned down just a bit. I think Pennywise's best moment on screen was the opening sewer scene. Understated and very dangerous. A very subtle deadliness.

i'm not against jump scares in general, because with a cynical, over exposed population, jump scares can be one of the few ways to get a reaction out of people who are viewing something they know is fake. i just think the jittery head shaking thing looks a bit silly.

 

[AchtungBaby]

B-.

 

[Chiana]

Sold A from me with a gold star, a little smiley face and a

 

[chief4db]

That's interesting. I see it the opposite way. As a movie, standing on its own, I'd grade it at about a B or B-. That's based on what I heard from the people I saw it with who were not familiar with the story and some of the reviews and podcasts I've consumed. I have to admit that on its own, the movie feels a little rushed and isn't 100% effective.

Grading it on a curve though, based on what I think the perfect movie-length adaptation of It could be, I give it an A or A+. Let's face it - the novel is far too long to cover in even 2 normal-length movies, and some of the concepts are essentially unfilmable. My first reaction to the movie was that I understood everything that was cut out (even if I still missed it) and I could fill in the gaps in my mind. The changes that were made, especially moving the story forward 30 years, didn't bother me like I thought they would. And the actors who played the kids were nothing short of incredible. IMO, the single most important thing to capture in the movie was the friendship amongst the losers club, and the movie did just about perfectly at that.

I generally hate to see movie adaptations of my favorite books because I don't like to have my mental image of the characters replaced by the actors onscreen. This is a rare instance where I'm happy because the actors seem to be embodying the characters in the boom rather than just playing a role.

Do u think this would have been better suited for a series . Because of the length as u mentioned I think a series would b better to get the details of whole book. Wondering ur thoughts

 

[Steve in WI]

Do u think this would have been better suited for a series . Because of the length as u mentioned I think a series would b better to get the details of whole book. Wondering ur thoughts

Oh, absolutely. If they could have done the whole story - with the same actors - as an 8 or 10 hour series, it would have been great. I would love to see more and would love it if there could be more time spent on character building. I think the director/cast did a great job sketching out the characters in the limited time available on screen but there is so much more that could be added.

 

[mal]

Oh, absolutely. If they could have done the whole story - with the same actors - as an 8 or 10 hour series, it would have been great. I would love to see more and would love it if there could be more time spent on character building. I think the director/cast did a great job sketching out the characters in the limited time available on screen but there is so much more that could be added.

It would have taken away from the communal experience that a theatre brings but I agree that they could have added way more if they did a series.

 

[muskrat]

A from me.