1. New to the board or trying to figure out how something works here? Check out the User Guide.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Hot Topics is open from 8:30 AM - 4 PM ET Mon - Fri.

    Dismiss Notice
  3. The message board is closed from 4pm ET Friday to 8:30am Monday.
    As always, the Board will be open to read and those who have those privileges can still send private messages and post to Profiles.
    Dismiss Notice

I finally saw the miniseries

Discussion in 'IT (1990)' started by Steve in WI, Dec 1, 2017.

  1. Steve in WI

    Steve in WI Active Member

    So I've read the book at least half a dozen times, saw the new movie in the theater four times, but never saw the miniseries until a couple weeks ago. I watched it alone and then watched it again with my wife. My random thoughts:

    No offense at all to anyone who loves it, but how was this considered scary? I get the constraints of a made-for-TV movie and why the violence was minimized, but I didn't even find Tim Curry's Pennywise to be scary. (And I didn't see why his performance is considered to be so iconic, either).

    The acting ranged from solid to bad. I thought young Bill, Beverly, and Ben were the best...in fact, I would rank Emily Perkins's Beverly very close to Sophia Lillis's performance in the new movie. The adults...well, I guess John Ritter and the actor who played Mike were okay. I couldn't get past Bill's stupid ponytail and poor Beverly had the most cringe-inducing line with "why is It so mean?"

    Given that they changed adult Richie into a comedian, maybe they could have actually made him funny either as a child or an adult? This to me was one of the biggest contrasts with the new movie.

    All that said, I didn't think it was terrible. Cutting down the source material into a little more than 3 hours of content that had to be suitable for network TV pretty much guaranteed that it wouldn't be great, and there were scenes that I did like. But I can guarantee I'll watch the new movie and upcoming sequel about ten times as often as I'll go back to the miniseries.
     
    AnnaMarie, Paddy C, Doc Creed and 4 others like this.
  2. GNTLGNT

    GNTLGNT The idiot is IN

    ...other than Tim's performance, I thought it was lame myself.....as far as his role being "Iconic", he completely buried himself in the part and ran with what he had-did a "killer job"(pun intended)....in the pantheon of movie monsters, he deserves top shelf recognition....scary as hell without sfx.....
     
  3. grin willard

    grin willard Grin. Boasting a profile u could cut cheese with.

    I watched It (the miniseries) recently too, and I really liked Ritter in it. But after he's died it's hard for me to be objective. I tend to like anything he did. He was a very tough loss. Tim Curry's Pennywise scares the bejesus out of me! Even now. And as many here can attest, I like clowns! This time around it bothered me that 'it' chose Pennywise as a manifestation, when it could have chosen anything. Like The Tardis chose to be a police box. :) 'It' could have chosen a puppy! It's like it wants to have to work for it. Sorry if all the it's get confusing. There seems no way around it.
     
  4. Doc Creed

    Doc Creed Well-Known Member

    It was distracting having Richard Thomas play Big Bill. I kept thinking of him as older John Boy with a ponytail. Although he looked nothing like I pictured as Bill he did a great job, the stutter was very realistic, I thought. The miniseries is dated but Tim Curry is reason enough to watch it again. The part I hated most? Nope, not the ending special effects but...
    when Beverly and Ben are outside the hospital and Beverly (back to Ben) shakes and cries, "Why is it so mean?" :culpability:
     
  5. Steve in WI

    Steve in WI Active Member

    I guess what it boils down to for me is that Curry’s Pennywise is creepy at times, but I never feel like he’s portraying a supernatural evil. The scene with Georgie is a case in point. In the new movie, I think Skaarsgard does an awesome job of portraying Pennywise as something inhuman pretending to be human; in the miniseries it feels like Curry is a man in a clown suit standing in a sewer talking to a kid.

    And of course that’s creepy in and of itself; it just doesn’t measure up to the scope of Pennywise from the book for me.
     
    kingricefan, Paddy C and GNTLGNT like this.
  6. Paddy C

    Paddy C All Hail The KING...

    Haven't watched the mini-series in years but just remember being delighted that another SK epic had been adapted.
    Of it's time it stood up well and was a decent version of the story.
    Maybe not that scary but Tim's Pennywise did have his moments.
    In fairness, the latest incarnation is nigh on incomparable to the original filmed version but, as stated, IT the mini-series was good at the time imho.
     
    kingricefan and GNTLGNT like this.
  7. AnnaMarie

    AnnaMarie Well-Known Member

    I’m with you Steve in WI

    I have never really understood why Curry’s Pennywise is so iconic. I didn’t hate it, but I just didn’t think it was all that and a bag of potato chips.

    The ponytail looks silly.

    But, all in all, I did enjoy the original. New one is better. Skaarsgard is better.
     
    kingricefan, GNTLGNT and Paddy C like this.
  8. Alan_Sefton

    Alan_Sefton Member

    I think the new version is strong - no cheap scares (red herrings where the sudden hand on someone's shoulder is just a friend's rather than the monster's - you know the kind) and very enjoyable. I'm looking forward to the next part. But I would say I prefer the 1990 mini-series - the kids seem genuinely scared in it, as they should be. In the new one, everyone seems to take facing a monster in their stride most of the time. Without that emotion and depth of character there is nothing memorable except the funny lines and the scares.
     
    Doc Creed, kingricefan and GNTLGNT like this.
  9. Paddy C

    Paddy C All Hail The KING...

    Welcome to the SKMB :encouragement:

    The fact that the mini-series was based on the original source material i.e. the kids storyline was set in the 50s may go some way towards explaining how the new movie version differed.
    I was a teenager in the 80s and, at that stage, was well acquainted with the idea of monsters and the like and wouldn't have blinked an eye if one crossed my path. At least I don't think I would have.
     
  10. Alan_Sefton

    Alan_Sefton Member

    [​IMG]
     
  11. Alan_Sefton

    Alan_Sefton Member

    And thank you :)
     
    kingricefan, Paddy C and GNTLGNT like this.
  12. Paddy C

    Paddy C All Hail The KING...

    On second thoughts... lol
     
    kingricefan, Alan_Sefton and GNTLGNT like this.
  13. BillFan2003

    BillFan2003 Well-Known Member

    Everyone is entitled to have their own opinions.

    I personally enjoy the both of them. I will admit overall I prefer the new one. I like the way the story was told best with having the adult and kids portions seperate. I still have a soft spot for Tim Curry's Pennywise. Grant it, I think that Skarsgard did a wonderful job. But I thought he was most effective when he was actually there, and the use of CGI was either not there, or very minimal. That could just be me prefering the in camera special effects of the 80s and 90s.
     
    GNTLGNT and KittensScareMe like this.

Share This Page

Sleeping Beauties - Available Now