# It



## g5000

If they made a movie true to Stephen King's book, it would be 12 or 14 hours long.

As it is, they are obviously going to have to make a sequel to the one currently in the theaters.

The book takes place during two timelines; the 1950s and the 1980s.  It jumps back and forth in the lives of the same characters as children and as adults as they battle the supernatural force they call _It_.

This movie only follows the characters as children, and it has changed the children's timeline to the 1980s, which makes it obvious the adult character timeline will take place in the present day (2016-ish) when the sequel comes out.

Even if you just stuck to the children's battle with It in the book, it would take a 6 hour movie to cover all the ground.   To slice and dice this down to a 2 hour movie required a tremendous amount of detail and storyline to be ignorned.

If  you have read the book, these details are glaringly absent and take a lot away from it.

But what bothered me the most about this movie is the horrible editing.  This movie had some of the worst editing I have ever seen.  I don't know how anyone who has not read the book would be able to follow along what was happening on screen.

For instance, in one scene the kids are climbing down an old well.  Suddenly, there is just one kid from the group, alone, in an entirely different location, with no explanation how he got there and what is going on.

The editing is so horrible botched I don't think there is going to be lot of word of mouth momentum.

Those of us who went to see it this weekend were the people who read the book and who have been eagerly anticipating this remake.  And sad to say, it was very disappointing.


----------



## strollingbones

part of the absolute terror of the first one...was the terror of the adults when they are called back


----------



## TNHarley

It has great reviews for a horror movie. 
I cant wait to watch it.


----------



## TNHarley

Police 'terrified' by red 'It' balloons tied to sewer grates


----------



## g5000

TNHarley said:


> It has great reviews for a horror movie.
> I cant wait to watch it.


The parts that are supposed to be scary are pretty well done.  I guess people who have not read the book won't know what they are missing.


----------



## g5000

strollingbones said:


> part of the absolute terror of the first one...was the terror of the adults when they are called back


Right.  I suppose they will get into that in the sequel.

And they don't even go into the origins and true nature of _It _in this movie.  They don't have the smoke lodge bit at all.


----------



## TNHarley

g5000 said:


> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> It has great reviews for a horror movie.
> I cant wait to watch it.
> 
> 
> 
> The parts that are supposed to be scary are pretty well done.  I guess people who have not read the book won't know what they are missing.
Click to expand...

I loved the book. I liked most of his work. Him and John Grisham had me addicted in high school.


----------



## Hugo Furst

I don't see any mention of a part 2


----------



## strollingbones

o no will....there will never be a sequel to the most successful opening weekend. of a horror movie...not gonna happen


----------



## g5000

WillHaftawaite said:


> I don't see any mention of a part 2


Anyone who has read the book can clearly see there has to be one.

Just found this: 'It' Movie Sequel Plans Move Forward at New Line


----------



## mdk

Hopefully they left the gang bang part of the book out of the movie.


----------



## Hugo Furst

strollingbones said:


> o no will....there will never be a sequel to the most successful opening weekend. of a horror movie...not gonna happen


bones, the character portraying IT doesn't have it listed on IMDB for at least the next 3 (very busy) years


----------



## g5000

mdk said:


> Hopefully they left the gang bang part of the book out of the movie.


They did leave that out. And the gay sex scene.


----------



## g5000

Everything We Know About the Inevitable 'It' Sequel


----------



## mdk

g5000 said:


> mdk said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hopefully they left the gang bang part of the book out of the movie.
> 
> 
> 
> They did leave that out.
Click to expand...


I wish it was left out of the book as well. lol


----------



## mdk

I wish _The Long Walk_ would be made into a movie. That is one of my favorites he has ever done.


----------



## g5000

mdk said:


> I wish _The Long Walk_ would be made into a movie. That is one of my favorites he has ever done.


People unfamiliar with that story would assume it was a ripoff of _The Hunger Games._

Personally, I'd like to see a remake of _The Stand_.  That's my favorite King novel.


----------



## Hugo Furst

g5000 said:


> WillHaftawaite said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't see any mention of a part 2
> 
> 
> 
> Anyone who has read the book can clearly see there has to be one.
> 
> Just found this: 'It' Movie Sequel Plans Move Forward at New Line
Click to expand...



okayyyy

they just decided on a script for a possible sequel 4 days ago....


----------



## Billy_Kinetta

It made nearly $200 million worldwide in its opening weekend.  It must have something.

Film adaptations almost never are the equal of the source material.


----------



## Billy_Kinetta

g5000 said:


> mdk said:
> 
> 
> 
> I wish _The Long Walk_ would be made into a movie. That is one of my favorites he has ever done.
> 
> 
> 
> People unfamiliar with that story would assume it was a ripoff of _The Hunger Games._
> 
> Personally, I'd like to see a remake of _The Stand_.  That's my favorite King novel.
Click to expand...


I'd like to see remakes of nothing.  There's a lot of literature out there.

I understand DUNE is up for a third try in 33 years.

Would love someone to tackle "The Mote in God's Eye".


----------



## Billy_Kinetta

mdk said:


> Hopefully they left the gang bang part of the book out of the movie.



They did.  They were determined to avoid the X rating and childporn charges.


----------



## rightwinger

g5000 said:


> strollingbones said:
> 
> 
> 
> part of the absolute terror of the first one...was the terror of the adults when they are called back
> 
> 
> 
> Right.  I suppose they will get into that in the sequel.
> 
> And they don't even go into the origins and true nature of _It _in this movie.  They don't have the smoke lodge bit at all.
Click to expand...


I read the book 30 years ago. As I remember King went to great lengths to explain the backstory and each main character

But the basic story is not that difficult. A killer clown menacing the children of Derry and a group of losers team up to kill it

I thought the TV movie was OK with Tim Curry amazing as Pennywise. But the rest of the acting was subpar

Looking forward to seeing the movie


----------



## rightwinger

mdk said:


> I wish _The Long Walk_ would be made into a movie. That is one of my favorites he has ever done.



Though it was a short story, I always enjoyed "The Long Walk:. Also "The Fog"

Some of his best movies came from his short stories with "The Body" becoming "Stand by me"
and "Rita Hayworth and the Shawshank Redemption"


----------



## strollingbones

have  yall seen the dude that dresses his 3 yr old brother like pennywise....the first photos were cute the one in the fucking water was a wee bit much


----------



## Billy_Kinetta

strollingbones said:


> have  yall seen the dude that dresses his 3 yr old brother like pennywise....the first photos were cute the one in the fucking water was a wee bit much



He got a lot of negative responses.  I suggest he dress him up as Lector next.  In the mask, strapped to the handtruck.


----------



## mdk

Billy_Kinetta said:


> g5000 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> mdk said:
> 
> 
> 
> I wish _The Long Walk_ would be made into a movie. That is one of my favorites he has ever done.
> 
> 
> 
> People unfamiliar with that story would assume it was a ripoff of _The Hunger Games._
> 
> Personally, I'd like to see a remake of _The Stand_.  That's my favorite King novel.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'd like to see remakes of nothing.  There's a lot of literature out there.
> 
> I understand DUNE is up for a third try in 33 years.
> 
> Would love someone to tackle "The Mote in God's Eye".
Click to expand...


_The Mote in God's Eye_ is brilliant. I read the book as a teen and did the book in tape when I drove to Arizona several years ago.


----------



## g5000

strollingbones said:


> have  yall seen the dude that dresses his 3 yr old brother like pennywise....the first photos were cute the one in the fucking water was a wee bit much


Three-year-old transforms into Pennywise clown from It | Daily Mail Online


----------



## g5000

WillHaftawaite said:


> g5000 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> WillHaftawaite said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't see any mention of a part 2
> 
> 
> 
> Anyone who has read the book can clearly see there has to be one.
> 
> Just found this: 'It' Movie Sequel Plans Move Forward at New Line
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> okayyyy
> 
> they just decided on a script for a possible sequel 4 days ago....
Click to expand...

It was obvious there had to be one.

I surmised just from the previews months ago there had to be two movies since the trailers had only kids in them.


----------



## Billy_Kinetta

mdk said:


> Billy_Kinetta said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> g5000 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> mdk said:
> 
> 
> 
> I wish _The Long Walk_ would be made into a movie. That is one of my favorites he has ever done.
> 
> 
> 
> People unfamiliar with that story would assume it was a ripoff of _The Hunger Games._
> 
> Personally, I'd like to see a remake of _The Stand_.  That's my favorite King novel.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'd like to see remakes of nothing.  There's a lot of literature out there.
> 
> I understand DUNE is up for a third try in 33 years.
> 
> Would love someone to tackle "The Mote in God's Eye".
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> _The Mote in God's Eye_ is brilliant. I read the book as a teen and did the book in tape when I drove to Arizona several years ago.
Click to expand...


Someone out there could make a serious ass-kick film out of it, but the studios are not given to taking chances these days,  They like pieces with proven formulas.


----------



## playtime

the TV movie was one of the very few steven king teleplays or theater movies that stayed true to the book.  & tim curry was excellent as pennywise.


----------



## IsaacNewton

g5000 said:


> If they made a movie true to Stephen King's book, it would be 12 or 14 hours long.
> 
> As it is, they are obviously going to have to make a sequel to the one currently in the theaters.
> 
> The book takes place during two timelines; the 1950s and the 1980s.  It jumps back and forth in the lives of the same characters as children and as adults as they battle the supernatural force they call _It_.
> 
> This movie only follows the characters as children, and it has changed the children's timeline to the 1980s, which makes it obvious the adult character timeline will take place in the present day (2016-ish) when the sequel comes out.
> 
> Even if you just stuck to the children's battle with It in the book, it would take a 6 hour movie to cover all the ground.   To slice and dice this down to a 2 hour movie required a tremendous amount of detail and storyline to be ignorned.
> 
> If  you have read the book, these details are glaringly absent and take a lot away from it.
> 
> But what bothered me the most about this movie is the horrible editing.  This movie had some of the worst editing I have ever seen.  I don't know how anyone who has not read the book would be able to follow along what was happening on screen.
> 
> For instance, in one scene the kids are climbing down an old well.  Suddenly, there is just one kid from the group, alone, in an entirely different location, with no explanation how he got there and what is going on.
> 
> The editing is so horrible botched I don't think there is going to be lot of word of mouth momentum.
> 
> Those of us who went to see it this weekend were the people who read the book and who have been eagerly anticipating this remake.  And sad to say, it was very disappointing.



This is certainly the requirement of a screenplay as opposed to a book, every scene has to be the bare minimum to carry the movie forward. Movies are generally 30-40 3-4 minute scenes so you have to put punch in each scene as opposed to a book which can have a lot of 'description' in it. Many books are passed over as stories viable for a screenplay for this reason. Or as you note the book is whittled down to an absolute skeleton of the story with just the most dramatic bits kept in. Hollywood receives about 100,000 screenplays a year and they make maybe 300 mainstream movies. Economy of words is required. 

I haven't read the book and have not seen the first It movie so I'll have to go in cold!


----------



## TNHarley

Went and saw it last night. Totally different but good.
Entire movie was about them as children. There HAS to be a part two for the adults. They even did a blood pact to come back at the end of it. 
The clown didnt have shit on Tim Curry.


----------



## playtime

TNHarley said:


> Went and saw it last night. Totally different but good.
> Entire movie was about them as children. There HAS to be a part two for the adults. They even did a blood pact to come back at the end of it.
> The clown didnt have shit on Tim Curry.



that makes sense to have a part 2 since both the tv movie & book ended with them being grown & coming back to take care of IT.


----------



## Montrovant

g5000 said:


> mdk said:
> 
> 
> 
> I wish _The Long Walk_ would be made into a movie. That is one of my favorites he has ever done.
> 
> 
> 
> People unfamiliar with that story would assume it was a ripoff of _The Hunger Games._
> 
> Personally, I'd like to see a remake of _The Stand_.  That's my favorite King novel.
Click to expand...


I think _The Stand_ might be too much material for what studios would be willing to make.  I think it is probably easier to cut down a horror story like _It_ than a drama like _The Stand_.  Maybe it could work as a trilogy....


----------



## playtime

Montrovant said:


> g5000 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> mdk said:
> 
> 
> 
> I wish _The Long Walk_ would be made into a movie. That is one of my favorites he has ever done.
> 
> 
> 
> People unfamiliar with that story would assume it was a ripoff of _The Hunger Games._
> 
> Personally, I'd like to see a remake of _The Stand_.  That's my favorite King novel.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I think _The Stand_ might be too much material for what studios would be willing to make.  I think it is probably easier to cut down a horror story like _It_ than a drama like _The Stand_.  Maybe it could work as a trilogy....
Click to expand...


i remember the stand on  tv movie with 2 or 3 parts.   that was my favorite book.


----------



## Billy_Kinetta

The 1979 "Salem's Lot" TV version was two parts.

Pretty good adaptation, except they turned Mr. Barlow into a large bipedal rat.


----------



## playtime

& king's own tv version of the shining was better than the damn movie.....  that was multi parted.  

i'm going to see  IT today.


----------



## strollingbones

saw it today and it sucked....didnt care for it at all..the first one scared a whole generation and made them afraid of clowns..this one makes you sad for the clown/shark hybrid


----------



## rightwinger

strollingbones said:


> saw it today and it sucked....didnt care for it at all..the first one scared a whole generation and made them afraid of clowns..this one makes you sad for the clown/shark hybrid


I just saw it a couple hours ago...

It was OK.......Horror was more jump out and go Booga Booga

Pennywise makeup was scary......but he lacked the wit and humor of Tim Curry

Kids were OK. Bev was sexy and provocative the kids were also older than in the TV version


----------



## strollingbones

all of the gotcha' shit was easy to see coming....pennywise was sad not scarey...taking the adult part out lessened the terror....


----------



## playtime

3 outa 5 stars.  not as good as i thought it was gonna be.  hopefully chapter 2 will be better.


----------



## Peach

I liked the book, will wait for the movie to view at home.


----------



## playtime

Peach said:


> I liked the book, will wait for the movie to view at home.



did you ever see the original made for TV movie?


----------



## Peach

playtime said:


> Peach said:
> 
> 
> 
> I liked the book, will wait for the movie to view at home.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> did you ever see the original made for TV movie?
Click to expand...


The mini series, but an infant was in the room, took my attention away.


----------



## playtime

Peach said:


> playtime said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Peach said:
> 
> 
> 
> I liked the book, will wait for the movie to view at home.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> did you ever see the original made for TV movie?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The mini series, but an infant was in the room, took my attention away.
Click to expand...


yep...that would present a problem; but it's available on youtube, vimeo & netflix if you ever wanted to see it again..


----------



## Peach

playtime said:


> Peach said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> playtime said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Peach said:
> 
> 
> 
> I liked the book, will wait for the movie to view at home.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> did you ever see the original made for TV movie?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The mini series, but an infant was in the room, took my attention away.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> yep...that would present a problem; but it's available on youtube, vimeo & netflix if you ever wanted to see it again..
Click to expand...



I might if the remake is any good; I enjoyed The Stand.


----------



## Billy_Kinetta

playtime said:


> Peach said:
> 
> 
> 
> I liked the book, will wait for the movie to view at home.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> did you ever see the original made for TV movie?
Click to expand...


I did not like the TV miniseries adaptation.  Tim Curry was the high point, but I don't consider him to have the monopoly on Pennywise.

I plan to see the new one Wednesday.


----------



## Montrovant

Billy_Kinetta said:


> playtime said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Peach said:
> 
> 
> 
> I liked the book, will wait for the movie to view at home.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> did you ever see the original made for TV movie?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I did not like the TV miniseries adaptation.  Tim Curry was the high point, but I don't consider him to have the monopoly on Pennywise.
> 
> I plan to see the new one Wednesday.
Click to expand...


I've never watched the whole mini-series.  I started it, but didn't think it was good enough to watch it all.


----------



## featherlite

playtime said:


> 3 outa 5 stars.  not as good as i thought it was gonna be.  hopefully chapter 2 will be better.



Sometimes they build new movies up too much beforehand...then it falls flat. I still want to see it but will probably wait for it on Amazon or something.


----------



## rightwinger

featherlite said:


> playtime said:
> 
> 
> 
> 3 outa 5 stars.  not as good as i thought it was gonna be.  hopefully chapter 2 will be better.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sometimes they build new movies up too much beforehand...then it falls flat. I still want to see it but will probably wait for it on Amazon or something.
Click to expand...


You probably won't be hurt to wait for it to show up on Netflix

Pennywise was scary looking but he was not as good an actor as Tim Curry
Many of the scenes are well filmed....especially the opening scene with Georgie and the boat at the sewer

The movie is somewhat different than the TV movie but not spectacular
I'd go three out of five stars


----------



## Montrovant

rightwinger said:


> featherlite said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> playtime said:
> 
> 
> 
> 3 outa 5 stars.  not as good as i thought it was gonna be.  hopefully chapter 2 will be better.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sometimes they build new movies up too much beforehand...then it falls flat. I still want to see it but will probably wait for it on Amazon or something.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You probably won't be hurt to wait for it to show up on Netflix
> 
> Pennywise was scary looking but he was not as good an actor as Tim Curry
> Many of the scenes are well filmed....especially the opening scene with Georgie and the boat at the sewer
> 
> The movie is somewhat different than the TV movie but not spectacular
> I'd go three out of five stars
Click to expand...


I hated Bill Skarsgard in Hemlock Grove.  I thought his acting was terrible.


----------



## playtime

Billy_Kinetta said:


> playtime said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Peach said:
> 
> 
> 
> I liked the book, will wait for the movie to view at home.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> did you ever see the original made for TV movie?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I did not like the TV miniseries adaptation.  Tim Curry was the high point, but I don't consider him to have the monopoly on Pennywise.
> 
> I plan to see the new one Wednesday.
Click to expand...


i thought the tv version was closer to the book than many others that were made into film.


----------



## Montrovant

playtime said:


> Billy_Kinetta said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> playtime said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Peach said:
> 
> 
> 
> I liked the book, will wait for the movie to view at home.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> did you ever see the original made for TV movie?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I did not like the TV miniseries adaptation.  Tim Curry was the high point, but I don't consider him to have the monopoly on Pennywise.
> 
> I plan to see the new one Wednesday.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> i thought the tv version was closer to the book than many others that were made into film.
Click to expand...


Do you mean closer than many other King adaptations?  There have only been 2 versions of _It_ that I know of.


----------



## playtime

Montrovant said:


> playtime said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Billy_Kinetta said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> playtime said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Peach said:
> 
> 
> 
> I liked the book, will wait for the movie to view at home.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> did you ever see the original made for TV movie?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I did not like the TV miniseries adaptation.  Tim Curry was the high point, but I don't consider him to have the monopoly on Pennywise.
> 
> I plan to see the new one Wednesday.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> i thought the tv version was closer to the book than many others that were made into film.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Do you mean closer than many other King adaptations?  There have only been 2 versions of _It_ that I know of.
Click to expand...


ya- i meant other books that were turned into movies.  too many deviations. alot of his books were so good,    they should have stayed more true to what he wrote-  the first 'shining' strayed from the book too much & the ending sucked.


----------



## Montrovant

playtime said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> playtime said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Billy_Kinetta said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> playtime said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Peach said:
> 
> 
> 
> I liked the book, will wait for the movie to view at home.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> did you ever see the original made for TV movie?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I did not like the TV miniseries adaptation.  Tim Curry was the high point, but I don't consider him to have the monopoly on Pennywise.
> 
> I plan to see the new one Wednesday.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> i thought the tv version was closer to the book than many others that were made into film.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Do you mean closer than many other King adaptations?  There have only been 2 versions of _It_ that I know of.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> ya- i meant other books that were turned into movies.  too many deviations. alot of his books were so good,    they should have stayed more true to what he wrote-  the first 'shining' strayed from the book too much & the ending sucked.
Click to expand...


I thought the Nicholson Shining was an excellent adaptation.


----------



## playtime

Montrovant said:


> playtime said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> playtime said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Billy_Kinetta said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> playtime said:
> 
> 
> 
> did you ever see the original made for TV movie?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I did not like the TV miniseries adaptation.  Tim Curry was the high point, but I don't consider him to have the monopoly on Pennywise.
> 
> I plan to see the new one Wednesday.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> i thought the tv version was closer to the book than many others that were made into film.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Do you mean closer than many other King adaptations?  There have only been 2 versions of _It_ that I know of.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> ya- i meant other books that were turned into movies.  too many deviations. alot of his books were so good,    they should have stayed more true to what he wrote-  the first 'shining' strayed from the book too much & the ending sucked.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I thought the Nicholson Shining was an excellent adaptation.
Click to expand...


to each his own- but imo, the ending fell real short....  steven king remade the shining himself & put it on TV because hef didn't like the original.


----------



## Montrovant

playtime said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> playtime said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> playtime said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Billy_Kinetta said:
> 
> 
> 
> I did not like the TV miniseries adaptation.  Tim Curry was the high point, but I don't consider him to have the monopoly on Pennywise.
> 
> I plan to see the new one Wednesday.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> i thought the tv version was closer to the book than many others that were made into film.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Do you mean closer than many other King adaptations?  There have only been 2 versions of _It_ that I know of.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> ya- i meant other books that were turned into movies.  too many deviations. alot of his books were so good,    they should have stayed more true to what he wrote-  the first 'shining' strayed from the book too much & the ending sucked.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I thought the Nicholson Shining was an excellent adaptation.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> to each his own- but imo, the ending fell real short....  steven king remade the shining himself & put it on TV because hef didn't like the original.
Click to expand...


As I understand it, King didn't like the diversion the movie took from the book.  The movie was great, though, so changing the story worked.  Many of the adaptations of King's horror have been fairly crappy, so I'll take a divergent good film over a bad one that sticks to the novel.


----------



## Billy_Kinetta

Montrovant said:


> playtime said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> playtime said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> playtime said:
> 
> 
> 
> i thought the tv version was closer to the book than many others that were made into film.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Do you mean closer than many other King adaptations?  There have only been 2 versions of _It_ that I know of.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> ya- i meant other books that were turned into movies.  too many deviations. alot of his books were so good,    they should have stayed more true to what he wrote-  the first 'shining' strayed from the book too much & the ending sucked.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I thought the Nicholson Shining was an excellent adaptation.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> to each his own- but imo, the ending fell real short....  steven king remade the shining himself & put it on TV because hef didn't like the original.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> As I understand it, King didn't like the diversion the movie took from the book.  The movie was great, though, so changing the story worked.  Many of the adaptations of King's horror have been fairly crappy, so I'll take a divergent good film over a bad one that sticks to the novel.
Click to expand...


I had serious problems with the climax, and with Shelly Duvall as Wendy.  Nicholson was perfect, as was Scatman Crothers.  The adaptation worked up to the point Scatman returned to the hotel, then it completely collapsed.

That said, Kubrick was a bonafide genius.  He's entitled to a screw-up or two.


----------



## Montrovant

Billy_Kinetta said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> playtime said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> playtime said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> Do you mean closer than many other King adaptations?  There have only been 2 versions of _It_ that I know of.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ya- i meant other books that were turned into movies.  too many deviations. alot of his books were so good,    they should have stayed more true to what he wrote-  the first 'shining' strayed from the book too much & the ending sucked.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I thought the Nicholson Shining was an excellent adaptation.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> to each his own- but imo, the ending fell real short....  steven king remade the shining himself & put it on TV because hef didn't like the original.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> As I understand it, King didn't like the diversion the movie took from the book.  The movie was great, though, so changing the story worked.  Many of the adaptations of King's horror have been fairly crappy, so I'll take a divergent good film over a bad one that sticks to the novel.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I had serious problems with the climax, and with Shelly Duvall as Wendy.  Nicholson was perfect, as was Scatman Crothers.  The adaptation worked up to the point Scatman returned to the hotel, then it completely collapsed.
> 
> That said, Kubrick was a bonafide genius.  He's entitled to a screw-up or two.
Click to expand...


I thought Duvall added to the creepiness of the movie.  Those wide, bugged-out eyes just made things that much scarier.


----------



## playtime

Montrovant said:


> Billy_Kinetta said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> playtime said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> playtime said:
> 
> 
> 
> ya- i meant other books that were turned into movies.  too many deviations. alot of his books were so good,    they should have stayed more true to what he wrote-  the first 'shining' strayed from the book too much & the ending sucked.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I thought the Nicholson Shining was an excellent adaptation.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> to each his own- but imo, the ending fell real short....  steven king remade the shining himself & put it on TV because hef didn't like the original.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> As I understand it, King didn't like the diversion the movie took from the book.  The movie was great, though, so changing the story worked.  Many of the adaptations of King's horror have been fairly crappy, so I'll take a divergent good film over a bad one that sticks to the novel.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I had serious problems with the climax, and with Shelly Duvall as Wendy.  Nicholson was perfect, as was Scatman Crothers.  The adaptation worked up to the point Scatman returned to the hotel, then it completely collapsed.
> 
> That said, Kubrick was a bonafide genius.  He's entitled to a screw-up or two.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I thought Duvall added to the creepiness of the movie.  Those wide, bugged-out eyes just made things that much scarier.
Click to expand...


did you know that the scene when he was axing the door & said 'here's johnny' was ad libbed?


----------



## Montrovant

playtime said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Billy_Kinetta said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> playtime said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> I thought the Nicholson Shining was an excellent adaptation.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> to each his own- but imo, the ending fell real short....  steven king remade the shining himself & put it on TV because hef didn't like the original.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> As I understand it, King didn't like the diversion the movie took from the book.  The movie was great, though, so changing the story worked.  Many of the adaptations of King's horror have been fairly crappy, so I'll take a divergent good film over a bad one that sticks to the novel.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I had serious problems with the climax, and with Shelly Duvall as Wendy.  Nicholson was perfect, as was Scatman Crothers.  The adaptation worked up to the point Scatman returned to the hotel, then it completely collapsed.
> 
> That said, Kubrick was a bonafide genius.  He's entitled to a screw-up or two.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I thought Duvall added to the creepiness of the movie.  Those wide, bugged-out eyes just made things that much scarier.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> did you know that the scene when he was axing the door & said 'here's johnny' was ad libbed?
Click to expand...


I think I have read that at some point or another.  

I sometimes get sucked into those lists that pop up on Facebook, like "10 scenes that were unscripted, but too good to cut!"  One of those told me that in Guardians of the Galaxy, when Peter Quill is handing the orb with the Infinity Stone to the Collector and drops it, that was accidental.  It worked well in the movie, though.  

From what I have read, a good deal of Thor: Ragnarok was ad-libbed.  Apparently, the director likes that kind of movie making.


----------



## Bonzi

I don't even understand how this movie received good ratings.

It was very average, not scary, and felt a bit like Stranger Things...

Very bland and so so at best


----------



## rightwinger

Bonzi said:


> I don't even understand how this movie received good ratings.
> 
> It was very average, not scary, and felt a bit like Stranger Things...
> 
> Very bland and so so at best



Had the same kid as Stranger Things

Maybe they should have gotten Eleven to play Beverly Marsh


----------



## Bonzi

rightwinger said:


> Bonzi said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't even understand how this movie received good ratings.
> 
> It was very average, not scary, and felt a bit like Stranger Things...
> 
> Very bland and so so at best
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Had the same kid as Stranger Things
> 
> Maybe they should have gotten Eleven to play Beverly Marsh
Click to expand...

Dorky kids riding bikes, arguing and trying to be superheroes, sorry, no sale


----------



## rightwinger

Bonzi said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bonzi said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't even understand how this movie received good ratings.
> 
> It was very average, not scary, and felt a bit like Stranger Things...
> 
> Very bland and so so at best
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Had the same kid as Stranger Things
> 
> Maybe they should have gotten Eleven to play Beverly Marsh
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Dorky kids riding bikes, arguing and trying to be superheroes, sorry, no sale
Click to expand...


Wasn't that ET?


----------



## Montrovant

Bonzi said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bonzi said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't even understand how this movie received good ratings.
> 
> It was very average, not scary, and felt a bit like Stranger Things...
> 
> Very bland and so so at best
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Had the same kid as Stranger Things
> 
> Maybe they should have gotten Eleven to play Beverly Marsh
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Dorky kids riding bikes, arguing and trying to be superheroes, sorry, no sale
Click to expand...


Did you not know anything about the movie before watching?


----------



## Bonzi

Montrovant said:


> Bonzi said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bonzi said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't even understand how this movie received good ratings.
> 
> It was very average, not scary, and felt a bit like Stranger Things...
> 
> Very bland and so so at best
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Had the same kid as Stranger Things
> 
> Maybe they should have gotten Eleven to play Beverly Marsh
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Dorky kids riding bikes, arguing and trying to be superheroes, sorry, no sale
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Did you not know anything about the movie before watching?
Click to expand...

Nope! I did read the book about 25 years ago!


----------



## GHook93

Billy_Kinetta said:


> playtime said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Peach said:
> 
> 
> 
> I liked the book, will wait for the movie to view at home.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> did you ever see the original made for TV movie?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I did not like the TV miniseries adaptation.  Tim Curry was the high point, but I don't consider him to have the monopoly on Pennywise.
> 
> I plan to see the new one Wednesday.
Click to expand...


Wow you people are a tough crowd. I loved the book, I loved the TV miniseries and the movie. 


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com


----------



## featherlite

playtime said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> playtime said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Billy_Kinetta said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> playtime said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Peach said:
> 
> 
> 
> I liked the book, will wait for the movie to view at home.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> did you ever see the original made for TV movie?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I did not like the TV miniseries adaptation.  Tim Curry was the high point, but I don't consider him to have the monopoly on Pennywise.
> 
> I plan to see the new one Wednesday.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> i thought the tv version was closer to the book than many others that were made into film.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Do you mean closer than many other King adaptations?  There have only been 2 versions of _It_ that I know of.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> ya- i meant other books that were turned into movies.  too many deviations. alot of his books were so good,    they should have stayed more true to what he wrote-  the first 'shining' strayed from the book too much & the ending sucked.
Click to expand...


Is there another version besides the J Nicholson one?
The Shining was so well done. Practically every scene in that movie was perfectly creepy.


----------



## featherlite

Montrovant said:


> Billy_Kinetta said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> playtime said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> playtime said:
> 
> 
> 
> ya- i meant other books that were turned into movies.  too many deviations. alot of his books were so good,    they should have stayed more true to what he wrote-  the first 'shining' strayed from the book too much & the ending sucked.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I thought the Nicholson Shining was an excellent adaptation.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> to each his own- but imo, the ending fell real short....  steven king remade the shining himself & put it on TV because hef didn't like the original.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> As I understand it, King didn't like the diversion the movie took from the book.  The movie was great, though, so changing the story worked.  Many of the adaptations of King's horror have been fairly crappy, so I'll take a divergent good film over a bad one that sticks to the novel.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I had serious problems with the climax, and with Shelly Duvall as Wendy.  Nicholson was perfect, as was Scatman Crothers.  The adaptation worked up to the point Scatman returned to the hotel, then it completely collapsed.
> 
> That said, Kubrick was a bonafide genius.  He's entitled to a screw-up or two.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I thought Duvall added to the creepiness of the movie.  Those wide, bugged-out eyes just made things that much scarier.
Click to expand...


For real...everything about her appears to be teetering off some edge. Then there is Nicholson, who IS the edge. lol


----------



## playtime

featherlite said:


> playtime said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> playtime said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Billy_Kinetta said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> playtime said:
> 
> 
> 
> did you ever see the original made for TV movie?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I did not like the TV miniseries adaptation.  Tim Curry was the high point, but I don't consider him to have the monopoly on Pennywise.
> 
> I plan to see the new one Wednesday.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> i thought the tv version was closer to the book than many others that were made into film.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Do you mean closer than many other King adaptations?  There have only been 2 versions of _It_ that I know of.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> ya- i meant other books that were turned into movies.  too many deviations. alot of his books were so good,    they should have stayed more true to what he wrote-  the first 'shining' strayed from the book too much & the ending sucked.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Is there another version besides the J Nicholson one?
> The Shining was so well done. Practically every scene in that movie was perfectly creepy.
Click to expand...


yep.  a 1997 tv mini series that king produced himself that it is based solely on his take of what the book was.

the 2nd video goes into king & the actor's thoughts about making it.


----------



## featherlite

playtime said:


> featherlite said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> playtime said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> playtime said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Billy_Kinetta said:
> 
> 
> 
> I did not like the TV miniseries adaptation.  Tim Curry was the high point, but I don't consider him to have the monopoly on Pennywise.
> 
> I plan to see the new one Wednesday.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> i thought the tv version was closer to the book than many others that were made into film.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Do you mean closer than many other King adaptations?  There have only been 2 versions of _It_ that I know of.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> ya- i meant other books that were turned into movies.  too many deviations. alot of his books were so good,    they should have stayed more true to what he wrote-  the first 'shining' strayed from the book too much & the ending sucked.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Is there another version besides the J Nicholson one?
> The Shining was so well done. Practically every scene in that movie was perfectly creepy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> yep.  a 1997 tv mini series that king produced himself that it is based solely on his take of what the book was.
> 
> the 2nd video goes into king & the actor's thoughts about making it.
Click to expand...


I knew there were ill feelings between Kubrick and Jack Nicholson...not sure how I missed knowing about the first Shining.


----------

