Stephen King's 'IT' (2017 film - aka It: Chapter One)*

I'd rather see them adapted as single season cable series with a high budget and great effects. They could cover the entire book in ten or twelve episodes. The Stand might take fifteen, but it would be worth it.

 

Oh gawd, we've seen how well that has worked for Under The Dome...soon to start its third season as a TV series that now more or less resembles the novel its based on in name only...

 

I would never cite Under the Dome as a positive example.

 

I wasn't...

 

We would need an HBO or Showtime network to do it right, otherwise what is the point? Under The Dome was good for 2 episodes then went right down the toilet.

 

How about a Netflix or Hulu original? That's what I'm hoping for eventually.

 

Netflix or Hulu could definitely do It justice. It would probably take someone with deep pockets, like HBO, to tackle The Stand.

 

Netflix, Amazon or Hulu could pull this off.

Netflix spent a little under $4 million per episode on the Daredevil series, I would imagine you could use a similar budget for an adaption of IT.

 

I re-read the book again recently. I am a King fan, but I have to say he was badly in need of an editor. Great set up, some excellent scenes , but the last third of the book was a real slog. I hate to be negative, but remakes like this usually don't turn out well. (The Omen, Psycho )

 

I would darken it up considerably. A rewatched IT a few months ago and a big problem I had with it was that it looked like a TV show - it was brightly lit and starred several well-known TV stars. The best thing about it was Tim Curry. It's also an adaption of a book, so I wouldn't consider it a remake anymore than Peter Jackson's Hobbit is a remake of the Rankin-Bass version.

 

OK, cool...now I have to watch my DVD!

 

http://nerdist.com/cary-fukunagas-it-falls-apart-what-is-going-on-with-studio-horror-films/

So this is completely not happening ? Weird news .

 

Stephen King’s It Movie Casts Bill Skarsgård as Pennywise »

Apparently, this is back on. Although, with a new director and Pennywise. I just hope the end result is much closer to the book than the mini series was (minus that one scene that would give it an NC-17 rating).

 

'It' movie exclusive: Pennywise the Clown seen in terrifying first look »

IT will be released Sept 2017. One change announced is that the movie will take place in the 1980's rather than the 1950's, and will only focus on the group as children. It states, if successful a sequel featuring an adult cast will be made.

 

I predict this ends up bombing badly because it won't be scary, and the fans of the book will be mad at the unnecessary changes to the plot and period setting.

 

One thing the article states is that Skarsgard portrays one of the forms of IT. To me, that is a breath of fresh air. When I first watched the mini-series I didn't think anything of IT only being Pennywise the Clown (excluding the spider). After reading the book and revisiting the the mini-series I was disappointed (not in the performance, just the decision). I will remain optimistic for now. I don't care if it is scary or not, I just hope they tell a good story with this movie. The material is definitely there.

 

Good look for a different film, but I think for It, I'd prefer something like this:

 

What made Tim Curry's Pennywise so terrifying is that he really did look like a friendly, approachable clown.... much scarier than what we've seen of the new Pennywise.

 

I never saw what the point was of having the kids you-know-what at the end. I know what he was trying to say, it just seemed like he could've chosen a different way of doing it.

 

You know, that costume looks just plain stupid. Reminds me of a cross between Little Boy Blue and William Shakespeare. It was never an ostentatious costume that made Pennywise frightening in the book - it was always described as a simple clown costume. The clown costume from American Horror Story: Freak Show is perfectly on the mark:

 

Agreed. I really hated that part of the book, and thought it was totally over-the-top lame.

 

I honestly think he looks fine, but the lighting/pose of the photo detracts. If they wanted to do a creepy photo, they should have taken inspiration from all those clown sightings last year/year before last.

 

The original miniseries was horrible. I watched it again recently on a cable channel, and it has gained a charming camp value, but at the time itwas such a massive disappointment, mostly due to the anticipation built by Curry's Pennywise, which was indeed the best thing about it. The friendship aspect of the story, which is central, would just be so hard to portray on screen, especially using Stephen King's rather hackneyed writing as a guide. It works as a juicy pulp page-turner, but not so much in a teleplay. I really don't think there would be any way to portray these characters as anything but annoying, if following the book. Beep beep, Ritchie.

 

Agreed. It just felt weird and creepy. But in a way I appreciate and miss that crazy dangerous Stephen King of days of olde.

The other thing I never liked in the book was Ben's poem. No way a 12 year old wrote that.

The original mini-series could have been better. I mean...it's no "The Stand"...but I have a soft spot for it as I really liked the cast selections.

I dunno...that EW photo just looks like the same old same old you'd expect from any number modern horror films. Tim Curry certainly gave the character panache. Very entertaining performance. If they are going to do this thing right they've got to make it epic. I want meteors! Vision quests! CGI turtles!