IT
Movies; It: Chapter One, 2017, R; It: Chapter Two, 2019, R
Premise - In the small, rural town of Derry, Maine, children disappear at a rate far beyond the national average. Every 27 years is typically marked by a catastrophic event and a surge of child deaths. When Bill's little brother Georgie goes missing one summer, he and his friends band together to discover the mystery of who (or what) is haunting Derry and unleash the terror of a devilish clown who can morph into the metaphorical manifestation of anyone's worst fears.
Review - To date, I have yet to read a Stephen King novel. He is one of the most famous novelists alive today (second only to J.K. Rowling herself) and has written countless classics. Better yet, he has a reputation for writing smart, creative, and iconic horror stories rich with wonderful protagonists and villains. Ironically, I have read nearly all of Joe Hill's novels, Stephen King's son and the lesser known writer of the family. But the modern adaptations of the It franchise are my first leap into the world of Stephen King and I was not the least bit disappointed. Now I must read the original novel someday.
I truly believe this to be some of the best storytelling I have come across in the past few years. It literally hits upon every possible storytelling trope I crave. What I found most appealing about the first movie (It: Chapter One) is the group of characters. I initially saw the first film in theaters because of Finn Wolfhard as Richie (Mike from Stranger Things) and stayed for the entire child cast. Jack Dylan Grazer as Eddie was particularly humorous, and I have since seen his fantastic child acting in both Beautiful Boy and Shazam! and continue to be impressed by his star potential. Similarly to my appeal to Stranger Things, I am particularly fond of the adolescent age range. Teenagers from 11+ are so overwhelmingly fascinating, heartwarming, and hilarious, and I loved seeing this particular group of young tweens (The Losers' Club) ultimately form, fight, and reunite to defeat the clown.
Speaking of hilarity, these movies are outrageously funny. Because I was so attached to the characters in tween form, I wasn't sure if I would be as sentimental about them as middle-aged adults in Chapter Two, but the adult casting was SO good in that they matched the spirit and camaraderie of the child cast perfectly. Bill Hader made a great adult Finn Wolfhard. What I love most about Joe Hill's novels (i.e. Horns with Daniel Radcliffe) are the absurdity and the balance of light and dark genres. I now see where he gets it from.
The madness of the film is largely due to the iconic villain Pennywise the clown. Pennywise manages to be scary and amusing in an absurd way. Pennywise is not an actual clown, but a monster that can morph into the manifestation of anyone's worse nightmare. His reasons for defaulting as a clown are twofold, 1) clowns are seemingly innocent and allow him to gain the trust of children and 2) he's still incredibly creepy. He targets children because their fears tend to be more physical/substantial than adult fears (how would Pennywise morph himself into student debt??). He also tends to scare his victims before he eats them because "scared flesh tastes better" (or at least that's what I read in an analysis video - this is not in the film itself so I cannot validate). But what I think is most symbolic and substantive about Pennywise as a well-written monster is how he ultimately gets defeated. Spoilers - he cannot be stabbed, shot, or beaten to death. He must be made to feel small, humiliated, and unable to instill fear in his opponent. He's very much like a Boggart in Harry Potter and I am HERE for that comparison. It's also why it's thematically important that the characters and the films themselves are funny - laughter trumps fear.
There are a plethora of ways in which the film is highly symbolic (which is like candy for narrative junkies like me). Even though children tend to have more simplistic fears than adults, Pennywise tends to morph himself quite metaphorically for these adolescents. Beverly, for example, is (sexually?) abused by her father and frightened of her own femininity, so Pennywise shows itself as long hair and blood (calling to menstrual blood I would suppose) when she's younger, and an ugly stark naked lady when she's older. It's not as simple as "oh this kid is afraid of spiders, so let's turn into a spider." Pennywise can tap into much more psychological fears than that.
Personally I don't find the It films to be particularly scary. The moments that do scare me have less to do with substantial fears and more to do with simple (but effective) jump scares. Not being too scary is a good thing - I can just enjoy the films for the wonderful storytelling. I do personally have an intense revulsion to clusters of circles/holes/bumps (trypophobia), so seeing Pennywise's excessive teeth scare me more than anything else. Actually, I take that back - what scared me most was when the power went out and the movie theater went pitch black during a thunderstorm right when the naked grandma was running out on Beverly. Real-world fears are scarier than this film.
I take plenty of issues with plot holes or plot devices that are not entirely explained, but I do not hold this against the films. Every time I walk into a bookstore and see the It book I am stunned by how long it is. They turned a 1,000 page, 45-hour book into two 2.5 hour films. Of course details were lost and if I don't understand them, it's on me to read the book. We are talking about very complex storytelling here.
Without having read the book yet, I am incredibly satisfied with the film adaptations. The directing, music, and cinematography were all beautiful and highly memorable. The use of color in the film helps make certain props and costumes iconic - much is desaturated, which makes Georgie's yellow jacket, Pennywise's red balloon, or any other uses of bright color so alluring. Magnificent filmmaking. (97/100)
Quote - There are so many great Richie and Eddie one-liners, how do I choose?? How about:
"Can only virgins see this stuff? Is that why I'm not seeing this shit?"
"I can't believe I picked the short straw. You're lucky we're not measuring dicks."
"Go get my bifocals. They're hidden in my second fanny pack." "Why do you have two fanny packs?"
"They're GAZEBOS!"
"Is it ever going to end? Bill seeing Georgie... or the woman I keep seeing..."
"Is she hot?"
"...No Richie. She's not hot."
"Go blow your dad you mullet-wearing asshole."
And plenty, plenty more I could add from both chapter one and two.
What to watch for - Clearly I'm a Richie/Eddie fan, both in child and adult form.
Based on the novel by Stephen King
Directed by Andy Muschietti
Distributed by Warner Bros.
Premise - In the small, rural town of Derry, Maine, children disappear at a rate far beyond the national average. Every 27 years is typically marked by a catastrophic event and a surge of child deaths. When Bill's little brother Georgie goes missing one summer, he and his friends band together to discover the mystery of who (or what) is haunting Derry and unleash the terror of a devilish clown who can morph into the metaphorical manifestation of anyone's worst fears.
Review - To date, I have yet to read a Stephen King novel. He is one of the most famous novelists alive today (second only to J.K. Rowling herself) and has written countless classics. Better yet, he has a reputation for writing smart, creative, and iconic horror stories rich with wonderful protagonists and villains. Ironically, I have read nearly all of Joe Hill's novels, Stephen King's son and the lesser known writer of the family. But the modern adaptations of the It franchise are my first leap into the world of Stephen King and I was not the least bit disappointed. Now I must read the original novel someday.
I truly believe this to be some of the best storytelling I have come across in the past few years. It literally hits upon every possible storytelling trope I crave. What I found most appealing about the first movie (It: Chapter One) is the group of characters. I initially saw the first film in theaters because of Finn Wolfhard as Richie (Mike from Stranger Things) and stayed for the entire child cast. Jack Dylan Grazer as Eddie was particularly humorous, and I have since seen his fantastic child acting in both Beautiful Boy and Shazam! and continue to be impressed by his star potential. Similarly to my appeal to Stranger Things, I am particularly fond of the adolescent age range. Teenagers from 11+ are so overwhelmingly fascinating, heartwarming, and hilarious, and I loved seeing this particular group of young tweens (The Losers' Club) ultimately form, fight, and reunite to defeat the clown.
Speaking of hilarity, these movies are outrageously funny. Because I was so attached to the characters in tween form, I wasn't sure if I would be as sentimental about them as middle-aged adults in Chapter Two, but the adult casting was SO good in that they matched the spirit and camaraderie of the child cast perfectly. Bill Hader made a great adult Finn Wolfhard. What I love most about Joe Hill's novels (i.e. Horns with Daniel Radcliffe) are the absurdity and the balance of light and dark genres. I now see where he gets it from.
The madness of the film is largely due to the iconic villain Pennywise the clown. Pennywise manages to be scary and amusing in an absurd way. Pennywise is not an actual clown, but a monster that can morph into the manifestation of anyone's worse nightmare. His reasons for defaulting as a clown are twofold, 1) clowns are seemingly innocent and allow him to gain the trust of children and 2) he's still incredibly creepy. He targets children because their fears tend to be more physical/substantial than adult fears (how would Pennywise morph himself into student debt??). He also tends to scare his victims before he eats them because "scared flesh tastes better" (or at least that's what I read in an analysis video - this is not in the film itself so I cannot validate). But what I think is most symbolic and substantive about Pennywise as a well-written monster is how he ultimately gets defeated. Spoilers - he cannot be stabbed, shot, or beaten to death. He must be made to feel small, humiliated, and unable to instill fear in his opponent. He's very much like a Boggart in Harry Potter and I am HERE for that comparison. It's also why it's thematically important that the characters and the films themselves are funny - laughter trumps fear.
There are a plethora of ways in which the film is highly symbolic (which is like candy for narrative junkies like me). Even though children tend to have more simplistic fears than adults, Pennywise tends to morph himself quite metaphorically for these adolescents. Beverly, for example, is (sexually?) abused by her father and frightened of her own femininity, so Pennywise shows itself as long hair and blood (calling to menstrual blood I would suppose) when she's younger, and an ugly stark naked lady when she's older. It's not as simple as "oh this kid is afraid of spiders, so let's turn into a spider." Pennywise can tap into much more psychological fears than that.
Personally I don't find the It films to be particularly scary. The moments that do scare me have less to do with substantial fears and more to do with simple (but effective) jump scares. Not being too scary is a good thing - I can just enjoy the films for the wonderful storytelling. I do personally have an intense revulsion to clusters of circles/holes/bumps (trypophobia), so seeing Pennywise's excessive teeth scare me more than anything else. Actually, I take that back - what scared me most was when the power went out and the movie theater went pitch black during a thunderstorm right when the naked grandma was running out on Beverly. Real-world fears are scarier than this film.
I take plenty of issues with plot holes or plot devices that are not entirely explained, but I do not hold this against the films. Every time I walk into a bookstore and see the It book I am stunned by how long it is. They turned a 1,000 page, 45-hour book into two 2.5 hour films. Of course details were lost and if I don't understand them, it's on me to read the book. We are talking about very complex storytelling here.
Without having read the book yet, I am incredibly satisfied with the film adaptations. The directing, music, and cinematography were all beautiful and highly memorable. The use of color in the film helps make certain props and costumes iconic - much is desaturated, which makes Georgie's yellow jacket, Pennywise's red balloon, or any other uses of bright color so alluring. Magnificent filmmaking. (97/100)
Quote - There are so many great Richie and Eddie one-liners, how do I choose?? How about:
"Can only virgins see this stuff? Is that why I'm not seeing this shit?"
"I can't believe I picked the short straw. You're lucky we're not measuring dicks."
"Go get my bifocals. They're hidden in my second fanny pack." "Why do you have two fanny packs?"
"They're GAZEBOS!"
"Is it ever going to end? Bill seeing Georgie... or the woman I keep seeing..."
"Is she hot?"
"...No Richie. She's not hot."
"Go blow your dad you mullet-wearing asshole."
And plenty, plenty more I could add from both chapter one and two.
What to watch for - Clearly I'm a Richie/Eddie fan, both in child and adult form.
Based on the novel by Stephen King
Directed by Andy Muschietti
Distributed by Warner Bros.
Comments
Post a Comment