Rate it from 1-10, Sup Forums

Rate it from 1-10, Sup Forums.

nogangbang/10

7/10. jumpscares and ugly cgi moments let it down from technical point. story and acting is fine

8.5/10
The first third was a bit disjointed and Richie didn't get enough character moment, but it was one hell of a fun movie

Actually saw it
5.6/10
King just doesn't give them the raw materials to make something great, he never does, although this is the closest they ever got, still mediocre

8/10 I enjoyed it.

There's hardly any CGI in the film

A+

7/10

The bullies' role in the story were minimized, the movie was inconsistent at some points, but the scares were intense and the kids were great.

This, and i personally didn't think there were too many jumpscares either.

But despite the marketing making IT as a straightforward horror film, it really isn't, IT is a horror/coming of age story, like Stand By Me, except with a a creepy horror clown monster.

Solid 8/10

7/10

What Skarsgaard actually got to do was awesome. But most of Pennywise was a wiggling, almost cheap 3D looking, frantic mess. If Pennywise had as much direct interaction with the kids as he did in the opening scene or as much as Tim Curry had in his take the entire film would be a lot stronger.

What we have now is a basic horror film fused with a really good period drama about teens in the late 80's.

I wouldn't say either version of IT are so much better than the other. Hopefully Part 2 is much stronger.

8.5/10

Sup Forums will hate it though. Not enough existentialism or rape.

There's CGI in practically every scene pennywise is in

>5.6/10
That's a weirdly specific number.

I think it was actually a good choice to potray Pennywise like this in the movie, simply because no one could top Tim Curry from the miniseries, so it really wasn't even worth a try, i think the movie would have suffered and Bill would have been compared to Curry even more than he is now.

Granted, the scene with Georgie and Pennywise was fucking magnificent, i thought it was better than the miniseries, simply because you could see the "mask" slipping on Pennywise, he knew he had a tasty morsel of food there, and he could barely restrain and control himself, it was much more menacing than how it played out in the miniseries.

I wholeheartedly agree with this post.

>bringing the evil clown trope to modern audiences after an absence of 100 years isn't enough material to work with
Typical pleb.

The Georgie scene was not any better than the original.

8/10
Really solid movie but the tonal shifts didn't always work plus some effects looked kind of weird. Still, it had great performances from the cast and all the characters were fleshed out.

except for Mike

That isn't what I said at all.

>simply because no one could top Tim Curry from the miniseries

can you please fucking unlodge Curry's dick from your throat for a second and consider that maybe his performance wasn't as amazing as you remembered it to be when you saw it years ago?

Damn, is opinion shifting already? That was fast. Yesterday it was the greatest horror movie in the last ten years. Now it's a 7/10.

Unironically 10/10. Up there with The Shining.

Well i felt it was.
In that particular scene Pennywise acts more like a circus clown, feigning injury when Georgie is being hesitant and so on, Tim Curry, while excellent didn't have the same aura on menace in that scene.
Skarsgaard on the otherhand is fucking salivating at the mouth and is barely able to keep in control, to me it was much more menacing scene than the original, but you know, different strokes.

9.5/10
Loved it to bits, never bored me. The only thing that could have been done better was the ending.

7/10
It's a slightly above average horror film. People are going to act like it's a masterpiece though since the genre has been shit for so long

I want to ____ Beverly.

Mike could've used more screentime but still he wasn't one dimensional. He's going to be the main character of the second part anyway.

6/10

Movie does a fine job until they get to the house on Neibolt street, after which the movie shits itself and becomes a generic horror movie that everyone has seen 1000 times before.

8.5

Best king adaptation of any book.

save

hardly agree, but when these small bits show up, looks VERY dated already.

Hey i watched the miniseries roughly a week ago, out of pure nostalgia, and the fucking thing sucks, the only thing that elevates it from complete trash is Tim Curry.

I'm not saying Skarsgaard was bad at all, i thought he was fucking great, but he does potray a totally different Pennywise, which is a good fucking idea, playing the character more like Curry did would have been a bad idea in my opinion.

>one eye stares at Georgie
>the other stares at you
Spooky

It was better because of the gore alone user. Showing the kid get mangled really got to me.

To have a decent horror film with a great coming-of-age story in the modern horror movie market is a godsend.

CAAAAAAM RIIIIP????

I actually thought most of the child actors in the original did a serviceable job, the most standout being Seth Green as Richie Tozier.

>She'll let you do her, just ask her nicely.
what did he mean by this???

8.5/10
Anyone saying the miniseries is better is absolutely lying to you

>Showing the kid get mangled really got to me.

And then there was no more gore at all! No, the bathroom scene doesn't count. We don't even see Patrick Hockstetter die!

They were ok, sure, i guess my oppinion is tainted by the fact that i (naturally) watched the second part after the first, and the adult actors are kind of terrible.

>The adult actors are kind of terrible.

Understatement of the fucking century right there, dude. I don't even watch the second part.

We see a teenage girl that has been cut in half suspended in a closet, i'd say that's pretty gory.

Henry Bowers and Greta Keene are assholes

I'm actually kind of worried about the second part of this new IT, because the adult part of the story simply does not have the same charm and warmth as the kid part.

I give it a strong 5. TRAN-

0/10
leftist propaganda made by a notorious Trump hating nobody who apparently write books no one reads but uses his political viewings as leverage to advertise himself amongst reddit cuckerinos.

Yeah, but it might as well be a spooky skeleton in a closet because it doesn't mean anything to us the audience. It's just some girl.

Holy hell fuck off

beep beep

Yeah, big mistake splitting the book in two like that. Honestly, there's too much story there to cram into a movie or two.

I've always said you could squeeze 2-4 seasons of good television out of It, easy.

As long as the people making horror dont interject their politics I dont care what they believe

ftfy kys

It's a solid 8/10 for me. The CGI is oddly bizarre at times, but I guess you could make it a case that it's still unnerving if unintentionally. Although some scenes seem almost inexcusably bad with effects.

The kids were actually really decent actors, if a bit hammy like Georgie's actor during the flooded basement part.

I might see it again tonight.

>that no one reads

lol.

Nice bait, go cry and false flag in some other thread fucking faggot

replying to bait is just as bad as taking it.

Solid 8.

Yeah while splitting the book like this might be a mistake, it is also a natural way to do it, because there are 2 stories, the Losers' Club as kids, and the Losers' Club returning as adults.
The biggest problem for me is that the tone of those two narratives is quite different, and when people get pulled in with the coming-of-age/horror story of part 1, they might be dissapointed by the story of part 2.

If the movies would follow the structure of the book you would get loads of flashbacks and thematic repeats.
A well made tv series would work best, would give the material time to breathe.

Fuck off cunt

>but I guess you could make it a case that it's still unnerving if unintentionally

IT could have really worked well as a television series, but instead we got The Mist and even that is barely based on the book aside from spooky mist.

Still, this was a nice adaptation and I hope they're careful with the sequel.

Are you seriously this fucking retarded?
She's the same girl they mention several times, and they found one of her shoes in the sewer (and they even joke about how that means she's still alive).

I can't tell if this is mocking or supporting my post.

Don't waste your breath, user is either an idiot or just trolling..

It's obvious it's not just some girl, and apparently gore is not gore unless it happens to a main character, which is a bizarre way of thinking.

The director said he wants to make a super cute of the two films and splice them together for flashbacks and whatnot. I don't have the interview and I am at work, but I'm kinda hyped.

Exactly. She's just some fucking girl they keep talking about. We don't know her. Was she a bitch? Was she their friend? Did she have it coming? She's had no time on screen, we only "care" because we're told we're supposed to. It's bullshit. What are we supposed to feel in that moment besides "oh, a dead body. That's scaaaaaary?"

Strong 3/10

the entire Georgie scene is CGI. even the rain falling down is fake, along with him getting dragged away.

I can see that working, assuming part 2 does well enough for the studio to let him do this director's cut supercut thingy.
But yeah, would definately buy if that comes out some day.

Not even joking, the only people I see saying this movie is bad or being nitpicky fucktards, are complete morons. I'm thinking that this movie is just too high brow for 90% of people.

>gangam style.webm

camrip where

I get the feeling that some people, like your "Gore-user" were expecting a more typical slasher horror film, which just means they had no idea what kind of film IT is, i don't know if that's studio marketings fault, or user just being an idiot.

HAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA JESUS CHRIST HAHAHAHAA

I'm the gore user, and I wasn't expecting a slasher film. Nor did I want one. Though, I felt the movie went through all the trouble of establishing itself early on as a "brutal" picture that wasn't going to shy away from violence, only to totally shy away from violence from there on out.

Funny you should mention though, the movie did completely turn into a slasher movie at the end. That confrontation was straight out of a Nightmare on Elm Street movie.

I knew they weren't going to go the book's route of metaphysical combat via the Ritual of Chüd, but I wasn't expecting the kids just beating it with blunt objects.

Looks fine for a shot that is on screen for a fraction of a second

>Pause movie when an actor is making a dumb face
>AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH
Come on now, user. I know you can come up with better criticisms than that.

Well i can't say i agree, it had some fairly gory stuff happening to teenagers/kids.
If you know the Ritual, then i assume you were familiar with the book, so then you would also know the Losers' Club survives, so what fucking gore were you expecting? Like i can't wrap my head around your complaint, it just makes no sense to me.
The end bit is the climax of both the horror and the coming-of-age bit,the kids metaphorically grow up, get past their fears and kick the shit out of an entity that is centered solely around the concept of fear.

How about Henry Bowers' whole gang? Eddie Corcoran? Veronica Grogan? 8 kids died that summer and only 1 is on screen.

9/10

Some of the CGI could have been better, but that aside the acting was top-notch and Bill Skarsgard was tremendous as Pennywise.

The clown says beep beep without establishing that Richie's friends do that to shut him up in the book.

Surprisingly you have to cut out some stuff from 1000+ page book.
Most of those deaths are there for extra gore and establishing mood, the movie had to cut out stuff to keep most of the story beats for the Losers' Club while still maintaining decent pace and not turn into a bloated mess.
I just get the feeling your missing the forest for the trees.

They wasted Bowers and his gang. Worst aspect of the film by far. Bowsers killing his father and being manipulated by Pennywise was so great and then they just have him thrown down a well by Mike. All of the bullies should've been present at the ending. With this film's strong R rating I was excited to see Pennywise kill off Belch and Vic

Post yfw

>And now.. I'm going to have to kill this fucking clown.

>Surprisingly you have to cut out some stuff from 1000+ page book.

So... Instead they added pointless bullshit like the kids breaking up during the 3rd act? Because I totally believed that they weren't ever gonna come back together.

3-5
meh

Huh, it's almost as if this was CHAPTER ONE and we'll see that little homeschool hater in the next movie.

One gripe I have with this movie is when Pennywise says "beep beep, Richie", that line doesn't make sense since none of Richie's friends ever said it to him so people don't know what it means.

9/10, only complaint was a few awkward scenes that felt way out of tone.

The burning hands coming out of the door and Pennywise fucking a goat or whatever behind the curtain was probably my favorite scene.

It's a shame because that scene had some neat elements to it and could've been genuinely horrifying if it didn't look like a fucking video game cutscene

Shit was cringey as fuck.

8.5

Now you're just nitpicking, even if you would take that scene and the montage after it out, you wouldn't have enough minutes to kill all the people you wanted to see die.

Seriously, your complaint seems to be "not enough people died!" When those scenes were replaced with scenes that build up the story and relationships between the Losers' Club.
Also, that clearly hit a story beat and gave us a little break from the action for pacing reasons.

Do you even kino?

It's almost entirely likely there was a cut scene showing the gang using *beep**beep*.
I really get the feeling this movie was originally like close to 5 hours long before they cut out a ton of scenes.

No it wasn't

That's your opinion.

This movie was running well over two hours so it's believable they had to cut a few scenes for time. I hope there's an extended cut on the home release.

It looks pretty fucking dumb in motion too, don't bullshit

It looked like a color corrected to hell Blum House generic horror film with light hearted comedy elements and a villain that can taunt and act with the children giving the audience something to enjoy more than your average movie. The pacing and tone was more like a horror movie than a high fantasy adventure, like the book.

It, felt like it was trying to appeal to what they thought horror movie fans like, and I guess that's what they got, it's not my cup of tea. 7/10

The movie did fine as a coming of age story. I liked the characters enough, I guess; and they pretty much felt like friends.

But the movie fell flat as a horror movie for me; and what I wanted was a good horror movie.