"It" director leaves project

  • This message board permanently closed on June 30th, 2020 at 4PM EDT and is no longer accepting new members.

GNTLGNT

The idiot is IN
Jun 15, 2007
87,651
358,754
60
Cambridge, Ohio
Yeah. Wasn't Pennywise a sorta middle aged clown in the novel?

I've come to think Tim Curry did such a terrific job that he ruined any chance of someone else trying to fill those clown shoes.
...few actors "own" a role, but Tim made that one his own...the maniacalness was palpable without being cartoonish....
 

misery chastain loves co.

MORE Count Chocula please.....
Jul 31, 2011
2,642
15,099
48
Brewer,ME
And the hits just keep on coming...
IT Remake Lives On - But Without Cary Fukunaga

I really loved the TV version while many others didn't. I thought Tim Curry was amazing as Pennywise. That being said, I was/am looking forward to this if only to see if they do better justice to the book. Understandably lots of things were left out and/or changed for the mini series and if this project ever comes to fruition and they do the two separate movies that they originally planned I think it could be good. And I am normally not a remake fan.
The casting on the other hand gives me cause to pause. A kid is supposed to be watching the creepy clown at a birthday party not playing one!
 

stormsiren801

Member
Apr 1, 2017
10
27
42
Ohmygosh I was thinking about him too! I was thinking Benedict Cumberbatch or Clancy Brown might could follow Curry successfully :) Poulter is way too young and innocent looking imho.

I love Clancy Brown, I think he would have made a badass Pennywise, but I'm afraid Tim Curry will always be best. I'm really skeptical about the idea that the character should be played by a younger person to make a more "child-like" Pennywise, as it has been described, but I'm willing to give it a chance.
 

Robert Gray

Well-Known Member
The actor they selected has the chops. I've never been concerned about a good portrayal of Pennywise. I'm more concerned with the shift in temporal setting. They have done exactly what I speculated they would have to do, i.e. change up the forms Pennywise takes because that generation had a different set of boogeymen. Sadly, I don't think that will be as effective. I honestly think a return to the 50s monsters done in the old world style, rather than the hipster mode would have been far more terrifying that a redo of the 80s monsters. The problem is that the 80s monsters are still in comedy mode. They don't scare us anymore. Freddie Vs. Jason should be ample evidence of that. I hope to be impressed, but I just don't see how they are going to overcome the burnout factor.

I actually thing just enough time has passed for the classics redone right, i.e. with a touch by the King, would have been far more terrifying to today's audiences. Werewolves and vampires that are Twilight superheroes would be unsettling. The stories of these guys as they were told in the old days would be almost new and painful. I suppose that was just a road too far for Hollywood. I hope to be proved wrong and eat some crow. I will gladly do it for a good rendition, but there is just too much being lost, not the least of which is the simultaneous storytelling of the book. Breaking it into two films, one with kids and the other adults (or mostly so) loses that unique magic.

In short, I have absolute faith in the actors they have chosen. They are all good choices. The story was never about Pennywise. He has always been just the situation, the storm on the horizon, the trouble. The story is (and will always be) the Losers. If they get that right, the rest will follow. The problem is catching that is lightning in a bottle without good writing. Hollywood's tendency to focus on the monster rather than the characters will always cause them to fail when it comes to a story like It.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GNTLGNT