I Guess I'm The Only One

[MollyLam]

I've read the comments on this movie, and I guess I'm the only one who was disappointed. Yes, it was a well made, well acted movie.
But it bothers me when script writers consider themselves "above" the original material and make major, unnecessary changes to the story line.
This is good original material and was very successful in book and TV forms before these movie people came along. People tend to diss the TV version of this story. I do not. I think the TV version was well acted and as well done as horror fiction can be done within the restrictions of television.
It seems that spoilers are not allowed here (I understand why) so I can't get into the specifics of the changes that bothered me the most. I'll just say that the original story worked the best because at its core was the idea that the belief of young kids in goodness and the magic of silver, can beat any evil thing. That got lost in this latest version of one of my favorite stories of all time.

 

[FlakeNoir]

I've read the comments on this movie, and I guess I'm the only one who was disappointed. Yes, it was a well made, well acted movie.
But it bothers me when script writers consider themselves "above" the original material and make major, unnecessary changes to the story line.
This is good original material and was very successful in book and TV forms before these movie people came along. People tend to diss the TV version of this story. I do not. I think the TV version was well acted and as well done as horror fiction can be done within the restrictions of television.
It seems that spoilers are not allowed here (I understand why) so I can't get into the specifics of the changes that bothered me the most. I'll just say that the original story worked the best because at its core was the idea that the belief of young kids in goodness and the magic of silver, can beat any evil thing. That got lost in this latest version of one of my favorite stories of all time.

Hi Molly, feel free to place specifics behind a spoiler button, then you can share as much as you'd like.
There are some instructions in our User Guide, which you can find here.

 

[mal]

Howdy MollyLam, I've yet to see the theatrical version but I loved the mini-series! If I am even slightly entertained then I have trouble finding fault in anything. I am not very critical or discerning in my tastes. It reminds me of a quote by Mr. King, attributed to another author whose name escapes me, "that movie ruined your book!"..."no...my books are still right here on the shelf". All the best, mal.

 

[king family fan]

 

[Portefoi]

I've read the comments on this movie, and I guess I'm the only one who was disappointed. Yes, it was a well made, well acted movie.
But it bothers me when script writers consider themselves "above" the original material and make major, unnecessary changes to the story line.
This is good original material and was very successful in book and TV forms before these movie people came along. People tend to diss the TV version of this story. I do not. I think the TV version was well acted and as well done as horror fiction can be done within the restrictions of television.
It seems that spoilers are not allowed here (I understand why) so I can't get into the specifics of the changes that bothered me the most. I'll just say that the original story worked the best because at its core was the idea that the belief of young kids in goodness and the magic of silver, can beat any evil thing. That got lost in this latest version of one of my favorite stories of all time.

You are NOT the only one. I grew up reading King's books, and was rather pleased with the "mini series" adaptation of IT. There are a great many things that really upset me about this new movie.
One, and it's a pretty big one, it is set in the 80's, which means that the adults from the book should be kicking around the library in Derry, with Mike, discussing how to kill IT...
Now, if this movie occurs in King's "universe", then every single other story he has written that reference IT, needs to be changed... most recently in my world, 11-22-63, just saying, "beep, beep, Richie".
I grew up with these stories. They helped shape who I am, what I believe in, what I fear, and what it means to be a friend to someone. I've been watching Stephen King let his "universe" crumble, and it hurts me.
My mother introduced King to her father, who LOVED the stories. She then shared her love of reading with her children, and we all love(d) King. We, as a family, had our own tradition of discussing the latest story at holiday gatherings, which, we will have to discontinue, because 1958 is when the story that I know takes place, but the kids in my family will probably only see the movie that takes place in the 80's, and the stories are quite different!! So, because of people being selfish and not telling the story the way it was written, my treasured traditions will cease to be.

If we don't tell the stories as they were written, how can you say it's the same story? That's like saying "yeah, it's the Bible, but we updated it... Joseph is gay, and Jesus is his whore." That is SO NOT how that story was written!!!
If you think it's ok to change the story, then you value NOTHING about what made you who you are today. Let's just rewrite history, so people feel better about themselves, what would that sound like...?
Slaves?? No, Europeans didn't STEAL African people, they VOLUNTEERED, right?? And Hitler was a HERO, right? He SAVED Jewish people in Germany, and was only holding on to their valuables, jewelry and *teeth* until they found safety elsewhere. Those weren't "gas chambers", they were, storage facilities. Why not? What does it matter HOW we tell the story? It's the same story, right??
I'm sure there are a million people breathing fire right now, but if so, my point has been made.
What made me who I am today is being skewed. King has sold his legacy to fund his family, I can see no other reason for it. Just profit. So amazingly disappointed. Yeah, IT has a clown in it, and the children are afraid. The rest of the story in the movie is different than the book.

 

[Dana Jean]

You are NOT the only one. I grew up reading King's books, and was rather pleased with the "mini series" adaptation of IT. There are a great many things that really upset me about this new movie.
One, and it's a pretty big one, it is set in the 80's, which means that the adults from the book should be kicking around the library in Derry, with Mike, discussing how to kill IT...
Now, if this movie occurs in King's "universe", then every single other story he has written that reference IT, needs to be changed... most recently in my world, 11-22-63, just saying, "beep, beep, Richie".
I grew up with these stories. They helped shape who I am, what I believe in, what I fear, and what it means to be a friend to someone. I've been watching Stephen King let his "universe" crumble, and it hurts me.
My mother introduced King to her father, who LOVED the stories. She then shared her love of reading with her children, and we all love(d) King. We, as a family, had our own tradition of discussing the latest story at holiday gatherings, which, we will have to discontinue, because 1958 is when the story that I know takes place, but the kids in my family will probably only see the movie that takes place in the 80's, and the stories are quite different!! So, because of people being selfish and not telling the story the way it was written, my treasured traditions will cease to be.

If we don't tell the stories as they were written, how can you say it's the same story? That's like saying "yeah, it's the Bible, but we updated it... Joseph is gay, and Jesus is his whore." That is SO NOT how that story was written!!!
If you think it's ok to change the story, then you value NOTHING about what made you who you are today. Let's just rewrite history, so people feel better about themselves, what would that sound like...?
Slaves?? No, Europeans didn't STEAL African people, they VOLUNTEERED, right?? And Hitler was a HERO, right? He SAVED Jewish people in Germany, and was only holding on to their valuables, jewelry and *teeth* until they found safety elsewhere. Those weren't "gas chambers", they were, storage facilities. Why not? What does it matter HOW we tell the story? It's the same story, right??
I'm sure there are a million people breathing fire right now, but if so, my point has been made.
What made me who I am today is being skewed. King has sold his legacy to fund his family, I can see no other reason for it. Just profit. So amazingly disappointed. Yeah, IT has a clown in it, and the children are afraid. The rest of the story in the movie is different than the book.

But, you didn't freeze at becoming "who you are." You are still alive and breathing and you continue to have experiences that make you "who you are." Unless you are stagnant.

 

[mal]

Howdy Portefoi, I hope when you say "really upset" that it's within the context of a fictional tale and a movie made about it. The book is the true story, everything else is just a variation of the theme, nothing to get upset about at all if it changes based on someone else's vision. Your own vision is what counts. All the best, mal.

 

[HedlessChickn]

You are NOT the only one. I grew up reading King's books, and was rather pleased with the "mini series" adaptation of IT. There are a great many things that really upset me about this new movie.
One, and it's a pretty big one, it is set in the 80's, which means that the adults from the book should be kicking around the library in Derry, with Mike, discussing how to kill IT...
Now, if this movie occurs in King's "universe", then every single other story he has written that reference IT, needs to be changed... most recently in my world, 11-22-63, just saying, "beep, beep, Richie".
I grew up with these stories. They helped shape who I am, what I believe in, what I fear, and what it means to be a friend to someone. I've been watching Stephen King let his "universe" crumble, and it hurts me.
My mother introduced King to her father, who LOVED the stories. She then shared her love of reading with her children, and we all love(d) King. We, as a family, had our own tradition of discussing the latest story at holiday gatherings, which, we will have to discontinue, because 1958 is when the story that I know takes place, but the kids in my family will probably only see the movie that takes place in the 80's, and the stories are quite different!! So, because of people being selfish and not telling the story the way it was written, my treasured traditions will cease to be.

If we don't tell the stories as they were written, how can you say it's the same story? That's like saying "yeah, it's the Bible, but we updated it... Joseph is gay, and Jesus is his whore." That is SO NOT how that story was written!!!
If you think it's ok to change the story, then you value NOTHING about what made you who you are today. Let's just rewrite history, so people feel better about themselves, what would that sound like...?
Slaves?? No, Europeans didn't STEAL African people, they VOLUNTEERED, right?? And Hitler was a HERO, right? He SAVED Jewish people in Germany, and was only holding on to their valuables, jewelry and *teeth* until they found safety elsewhere. Those weren't "gas chambers", they were, storage facilities. Why not? What does it matter HOW we tell the story? It's the same story, right??
I'm sure there are a million people breathing fire right now, but if so, my point has been made.
What made me who I am today is being skewed. King has sold his legacy to fund his family, I can see no other reason for it. Just profit. So amazingly disappointed. Yeah, IT has a clown in it, and the children are afraid. The rest of the story in the movie is different than the book.

I might be wrong here, but hasn't King repeatedly said that the movies are their own thing and that the books are his "official" story line?

(I'm unsure of the status of The Dark Tower movie, admittedly.)

Very, very few books can be made in to movies that are exactly like the books. It just can't happen. I'm not even talking about the psychological aspects (interior monologues.) I'm talking about the practicalities of filming.

I read in an interview with one of the principals about how they couldn't end the film like the did in the books (at least at the end of the kids part) because of budget constraints. They could have, but it would have cost the movie dearly everywhere else.

They don't have unlimited funds. Not to mention, I'm not sure the The Ritual of Chüd would have made for compelling viewing.

As for moving the story into the 80s is concerned, again, it's not the "official" story. It made no difference in terms of the plot. It could have been moved to the 2000s or this decade and not made a difference as long as the plot was there.

This movie, on it's own merits, was sublime. I honestly don't think they could have done a better job with the resources they had available.


And as far as The Bible is concerned, how do you know Joseph wasn't gay (or bi, whatever) and THAT was edited out for whatever reason?

You might consider toning down your rhetoric, especially when it comes to fiction and interpretations thereof.

 

[not_nadine]

Well, that post had a little bit of everything in it.

 

[kingricefan]

All I can think of is the scene in Misery where Annie is yelling 'He didn't get out of the cock-a-doodie car!!!!!!!!!!!' Has there ever been a film that was a literal interpretation of a book? The move to the 80's was most probably done to cut down on the cost of production because now Part II will be filmed in the present, which won't have the high production values of filming two movies in the past- one in the 50's and one in the 80's. I'm sorry that you feel that King has let his empire crumble and that he did this to get money. Really? King sure doesn't need money. He has been financially set for life, and the life of his children and grandchildren, since the 80's and doesn't need the money. I'm sorry that this has hit you so very personally and hope that you can overcome your hurt and anger to go back to enjoying King's works like you have in the past.

 

[GNTLGNT]

Well, that post had a little bit of everything in it.

...was gonna say "Hi" to the new folks, but I is afeared of being hellfired....

 

[Steffen]

You are NOT the only one. I grew up reading King's books, and was rather pleased with the "mini series" adaptation of IT. There are a great many things that really upset me about this new movie.
One, and it's a pretty big one, it is set in the 80's, which means that the adults from the book should be kicking around the library in Derry, with Mike, discussing how to kill IT...
Now, if this movie occurs in King's "universe", then every single other story he has written that reference IT, needs to be changed... most recently in my world, 11-22-63, just saying, "beep, beep, Richie".
I grew up with these stories. They helped shape who I am, what I believe in, what I fear, and what it means to be a friend to someone. I've been watching Stephen King let his "universe" crumble, and it hurts me.
My mother introduced King to her father, who LOVED the stories. She then shared her love of reading with her children, and we all love(d) King. We, as a family, had our own tradition of discussing the latest story at holiday gatherings, which, we will have to discontinue, because 1958 is when the story that I know takes place, but the kids in my family will probably only see the movie that takes place in the 80's, and the stories are quite different!! So, because of people being selfish and not telling the story the way it was written, my treasured traditions will cease to be.

If we don't tell the stories as they were written, how can you say it's the same story? That's like saying "yeah, it's the Bible, but we updated it... Joseph is gay, and Jesus is his whore." That is SO NOT how that story was written!!!
If you think it's ok to change the story, then you value NOTHING about what made you who you are today. Let's just rewrite history, so people feel better about themselves, what would that sound like...?
Slaves?? No, Europeans didn't STEAL African people, they VOLUNTEERED, right?? And Hitler was a HERO, right? He SAVED Jewish people in Germany, and was only holding on to their valuables, jewelry and *teeth* until they found safety elsewhere. Those weren't "gas chambers", they were, storage facilities. Why not? What does it matter HOW we tell the story? It's the same story, right??
I'm sure there are a million people breathing fire right now, but if so, my point has been made.
What made me who I am today is being skewed. King has sold his legacy to fund his family, I can see no other reason for it. Just profit. So amazingly disappointed. Yeah, IT has a clown in it, and the children are afraid. The rest of the story in the movie is different than the book.

Man, I can't wait to see your reaction when you read the original Grimm's fairy tales then see what Disney's being doing to them for the last several decades.

On a lighter note: as a King fan, I appreciate your passion for the source material. However, things that work well in written form don't always translate the same in film. The best you can hope for is that the tale is well-told and the heart & soul of the story is captured. But this is entertainment. If there's a bad movie or play or song, we'll be upset sure, but real life will go on.

 

[muskrat]

I'm usually the nitpickingest one of all about changes to the sacred text, but not this time. Nope. I'm ready to pop the damn champagne and celebrate. Haven't felt this good since the Colts whupped the Bears in super bowl XLI.

 

[recitador]

I've read the comments on this movie, and I guess I'm the only one who was disappointed. Yes, it was a well made, well acted movie.
But it bothers me when script writers consider themselves "above" the original material and make major, unnecessary changes to the story line.
This is good original material and was very successful in book and TV forms before these movie people came along. People tend to diss the TV version of this story. I do not. I think the TV version was well acted and as well done as horror fiction can be done within the restrictions of television.
It seems that spoilers are not allowed here (I understand why) so I can't get into the specifics of the changes that bothered me the most. I'll just say that the original story worked the best because at its core was the idea that the belief of young kids in goodness and the magic of silver, can beat any evil thing. That got lost in this latest version of one of my favorite stories of all time.

saying the film makers think they're above the source material is a bit of an over the top claim. they clearly have respect for the material, based on a lot of subtle things they did. they're trying to tell a bit more than half of an 1100 page book to us in movie format. which means they have to set it up, get people interested, provide all the information needed, and resolve the story, all in a couple hours. they don't have the luxury of endless time to tell the story like king did - in book format you can just make it as long as you feel like. but sure, i guess go ahead and assign them the worst motives you possibly can for the changes, if it makes you feel better.

You are NOT the only one. I grew up reading King's books, and was rather pleased with the "mini series" adaptation of IT. There are a great many things that really upset me about this new movie.
One, and it's a pretty big one, it is set in the 80's, which means that the adults from the book should be kicking around the library in Derry, with Mike, discussing how to kill IT...
Now, if this movie occurs in King's "universe", then every single other story he has written that reference IT, needs to be changed... most recently in my world, 11-22-63, just saying, "beep, beep, Richie".
I grew up with these stories. They helped shape who I am, what I believe in, what I fear, and what it means to be a friend to someone. I've been watching Stephen King let his "universe" crumble, and it hurts me.
My mother introduced King to her father, who LOVED the stories. She then shared her love of reading with her children, and we all love(d) King. We, as a family, had our own tradition of discussing the latest story at holiday gatherings, which, we will have to discontinue, because 1958 is when the story that I know takes place, but the kids in my family will probably only see the movie that takes place in the 80's, and the stories are quite different!! So, because of people being selfish and not telling the story the way it was written, my treasured traditions will cease to be.

If we don't tell the stories as they were written, how can you say it's the same story? That's like saying "yeah, it's the Bible, but we updated it... Joseph is gay, and Jesus is his whore." That is SO NOT how that story was written!!!
If you think it's ok to change the story, then you value NOTHING about what made you who you are today. Let's just rewrite history, so people feel better about themselves, what would that sound like...?
Slaves?? No, Europeans didn't STEAL African people, they VOLUNTEERED, right?? And Hitler was a HERO, right? He SAVED Jewish people in Germany, and was only holding on to their valuables, jewelry and *teeth* until they found safety elsewhere. Those weren't "gas chambers", they were, storage facilities. Why not? What does it matter HOW we tell the story? It's the same story, right??
I'm sure there are a million people breathing fire right now, but if so, my point has been made.
What made me who I am today is being skewed. King has sold his legacy to fund his family, I can see no other reason for it. Just profit. So amazingly disappointed. Yeah, IT has a clown in it, and the children are afraid. The rest of the story in the movie is different than the book.

you make some rather odious claims about people's values here. your point has definitely been made, but i think it's not the point you think it was, because the point you made reflects more on you than others.

 

[recitador]

You are NOT the only one. I grew up reading King's books, and was rather pleased with the "mini series" adaptation of IT. There are a great many things that really upset me about this new movie.
One, and it's a pretty big one, it is set in the 80's, which means that the adults from the book should be kicking around the library in Derry, with Mike, discussing how to kill IT...
Now, if this movie occurs in King's "universe", then every single other story he has written that reference IT, needs to be changed... most recently in my world, 11-22-63, just saying, "beep, beep, Richie".
I grew up with these stories. They helped shape who I am, what I believe in, what I fear, and what it means to be a friend to someone. I've been watching Stephen King let his "universe" crumble, and it hurts me.
My mother introduced King to her father, who LOVED the stories. She then shared her love of reading with her children, and we all love(d) King. We, as a family, had our own tradition of discussing the latest story at holiday gatherings, which, we will have to discontinue, because 1958 is when the story that I know takes place, but the kids in my family will probably only see the movie that takes place in the 80's, and the stories are quite different!! So, because of people being selfish and not telling the story the way it was written, my treasured traditions will cease to be.

If we don't tell the stories as they were written, how can you say it's the same story? That's like saying "yeah, it's the Bible, but we updated it... Joseph is gay, and Jesus is his whore." That is SO NOT how that story was written!!!
If you think it's ok to change the story, then you value NOTHING about what made you who you are today. Let's just rewrite history, so people feel better about themselves, what would that sound like...?
Slaves?? No, Europeans didn't STEAL African people, they VOLUNTEERED, right?? And Hitler was a HERO, right? He SAVED Jewish people in Germany, and was only holding on to their valuables, jewelry and *teeth* until they found safety elsewhere. Those weren't "gas chambers", they were, storage facilities. Why not? What does it matter HOW we tell the story? It's the same story, right??
I'm sure there are a million people breathing fire right now, but if so, my point has been made.
What made me who I am today is being skewed. King has sold his legacy to fund his family, I can see no other reason for it. Just profit. So amazingly disappointed. Yeah, IT has a clown in it, and the children are afraid. The rest of the story in the movie is different than the book.

sorry, i didn't make it to the end of your rant the first time to see your assertion about king funding his family. i think you might want to look into his net worth. he and his family have been funded for a long time. and of course, there's the little known (/s) fact that he writes the books, not the movies. maybe you should practice your reasoning.

 

[Chiana]

I don't think anyone will ever be able to truly capture a book in a movie form. When I read a book, my imagination takes over and interprets and builds how the characters look, sound, etc. as well as other details. I think it is perfectly okay for there to be differences, omissions and additions in order to capture the essence of the book within a movie format.

I didn't care for the TV miniseries that was made of IT, but loved the movie. My first love will always be reading King's books and if an enjoyable movie comes out of a story he told, that's an added bonus in my view.

 

[doowopgirl]

No film adaptation of any book is exactly like the book. You get thought s and more back story that only a really well made film can infer and give you hints of. You need good acting and music to put these things across. It came very close in these things. Stand By Me was better at it, but nothing wrong with It.

 

[Portefoi]

First and foremost, these are my opinions. They really shouldn't matter to you, as your opinions really don't matter to anyone else. That's part of what I like about opinions.

I joke a great deal, and that is lost in text. I also think I was unloading a little (lot) in that rant/comment. meh. Terribly sorry.
What gets me upset is that fewer and fewer people actually read books, I guess I was voicing my disgust with that, and how it changes the information conveyed... having a conversation with someone who has only seen the movie and thinks that the movie IS what was written is terrible.

And, yeah, actually, his earlier books to movies did a pretty fantastic job of conveying the story pretty darn close to the way it was written. Salem's Lot, Pet Semetary, amongst others. Even the mini series of IT was done phenomenally well (cheesy as it was), with only minor differences, so, it CAN be done, LOL!

And, the whole Bible thing... there isn't a story in the Bible where anyone is homosexual, that was the point. Otherwise, the Bible would *approve* of homosexuality, and we wouldn't be dealing with "who gets to use which bathroom" and "you can't marry someone of the same sex", and all of that nonsense. If ya didn't get that, I guess I'm sorry...? Thought that was easy to pick up.

Now, I am quite aware of what his family has and is worth, and that his children are doing quite well, so bravo to them. We should all hope our offspring learn to be as self reliant.

I also know that if you write a book, you own that story. If someone wants to make it into a movie, they NEED to have your permission. If you don't want a movie made of your book, there will be no movie. SO, then, what would the motivation be in making a movie of your book that changes the story YOU wrote and own? To confuse people that don't read? Probably not. To tell your story a different way? Maybe. Most likely? Profit. I mean, sure, there could be a million and one other reasons, and I'm sure I will never know the truth, but there it is.

Yeah, I have as many(or more) issues as everyone else. If you think you don't, you're fooling yourself, lol.
I probably gave people an incorrect impression of who I am; again, these are my opinions, and mine alone, thankfully.

I appreciate the hilarious comments and replies, though.
Please don't rip my head off, haha!

 

[Portefoi]

I

Man, I can't wait to see your reaction when you read the original Grimm's fairy tales then see what Disney's being doing to them for the last several decades.

On a lighter note: as a King fan, I appreciate your passion for the source material. However, things that work well in written form don't always translate the same in film. The best you can hope for is that the tale is well-told and the heart & soul of the story is captured. But this is entertainment. If there's a bad movie or play or song, we'll be upset sure, but real life will go on.

I absolutely LOVE Grimm's fairytales and have read them to children in my family... the stories are quite twisted.
Grimm had no input in bringing a more acceptable version of the stories to the screen with Disney. King actually did... so... I guess it matters a little bit in the decision making processes if the actual author is deceased... maybe... I dunno. I'm sure he/they (Grimm) would have been pissed about the absolutely absurd changes to the Princess and the Frog... my favorite!!! Don't make promises you never intend to keep. Even for a gold ball.

 

[Portefoi]

...was gonna say "Hi" to the new folks, but I is afeared of being hellfired....

Run, haha! I certainly am!