[c/João R.] '"I don't need these. They're GAZEBOS they're bullshit!" [he meant Placebos] (in Portuguese they translated 'gazebos' into 'piaçabas') I died from laughter right there. The Carrie/Shining moment where a geyser of blood tsunamies the bathroom. The upward spiral of trash surrounded by the floating dead kids. Poor Georgie getting snatched +THE best depiction of the late 80s Ever!(Sorry Spielberg) Love ad ∞▽
Other than Beverley, none of the characters register beyond two-dimensional tropes. The film dumps a lot of the historical mystery from the book in favour of CGI kill scenes, sped-up monster effects & every horror movie cliché from the last 30 years. The pop music montages were grating also. Weirdly critics took issue with von Trier's latest but had no problem with the graphic images of children being mutilated here?
'It' is... decent but it could've been more.There are good performances, good laughs, good jump scares, but it's as if the film is scared to go into the darker corners of its own cinematic basement. Like a Harry Potter film in America with buckets of gore but still made for children, 'It' is a good time but it should have been a home run with a story of this narrative pedigree instead of the 1st base hit that 'It' is
Mas pqq retratam asmáticos como malucos sempre a fazer a bomba ?! Basta fazer uma ou duas vezes!! sendo eu asmática fico um pouco ??????
se alguém fizesse a bomba assim tantas vezes morria de ataque cardíaco mt fast with all that amount of cortisona.
Super cool essa vibe 80s kids tho
E a cena da Beverly na casa de banho está qualquer coisa de fantástico
To step into a Stephen King book is to realize that the horror is all around us. Parents in particular. I'm not a purist. I think you can take the source material and make it better. I think this version got a lot right, but leaving out the wolfman means you probably could have left out the leper. For me, Jack Dylan Grazer stole the show as Eddie.
In a way, it makes sense that IT is now the highest grossing horror film of all time in the US, because it's by design more silly/fun/friendly than scary, a crossover hit more for slumber parties than audacious deviants. When it's vague with its mythos and shallow in tying the horror to psychologically resonant ideas, that's a problem. When some of the 13-year-olds are annoying, that may just be verisimilitude.
The first half drags a bit with introducing all the kids, Pennywise and the historical background but then it picks up. While it isn't scary 'per se' it's a triumph for modern horror, the characters are nicely rounded, the surrounding plots (with the hypochondriac mum, abusive dad...) are engrossing, the aesthetics and a nice score along with good acting by everyone involved makes this a winner.
First of all, it's true, the Eighties are the new Fifties. And you can't be 27 on sugar mountain. But beyond that, do you think it was a barrel of laughs for him? Being a balding, middle-aged Elephant clown in a town populated by puerile twerps? We might at least have accorded Pennywise the same pronoun-sensitivity we granted our toy boats. Things might have been different. Anyway, to King cinema, a sleek new king.