The miniseries from 1990 is way too better than this new garbage

The miniseries from 1990 is way too better than this new garbage

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=DeFDFJNJ-c8
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

And that's how you trigger the autismo in the board

youtube.com/watch?v=DeFDFJNJ-c8
does the new one appear and disappear like 48 seconds in this vid

The new one is better in pretty much every way. It's a legitimately good coming of age film with horror sprinkled in. The first half of the mini-series isn't bad but the second half is fucking awful

huh?

OP, I know it may seem like everyone's lost their mind and is inexplicably praising the new movie as though it were better than Tim Curry IT, but keep in mind most of the anons here just want to get (you)s and they know an easy way to do that is by posting an obviously horrible opinion.

With the shitty muted dirty costume you probably couldn't even see nu-It in that scene

Tim was genuinely better than the new clown, but otherwise the new movie is better.

>way too better
Why are 3rd worlders allowed to post?

Why you are so fat?

>3rd worlder in charge of bantz

t.I'm15yearsoldandhaveneverwatchedahorrormovieinmylifeotherthanparanormalactivity

Nothing about it looks scary at all, nothing.
It looks comedic at best.

Fatty fatty

Are you implying the mini-series is in any way scary? I need a serious answer here

the movie has Finn Wolfhard, this alone already makes it better

I was 9 years old when i watched the miniseries so imo yes, but I'm not the user who called you

Some parts are. The opening scene, mirror scene and the library scene were pretty damn scary in my opinion.

Maybe if you're 7 years old.

I'm way too better than you

...

Part 1 was kino
Part 2 was shit

Tim curry was the only good thing about the mini series and you know it.

Pretty much this. Kid actors were great. The Swede CGI IT was shIT

The library scene is not scary, are you fucking stupid? If anything it's more comedic than anything, watching the scene you're laughing and smiling more than you are being scared

>miniseries

Can you autists please just call it the 90s movie. It wasn't a mini series. It was 2 episodes. Shut the fuck up already, it wasn't fucking twin peaks or something.

This. The only scary parts of IT were the mirror scene, the tea scene and of course the confrontation with It in the sewers as kids

He does not

>I'm 12

>calls others autists
>acts autistic
what did he mean by this?

The library scene is literally slapstick

not an argument

it was part 1 and part 2, niggas acting like it was 5, 15 episode seasons of dawsons creek or something

user, I dont know why this triggers you so much but you are acting autistic.

Part 2 sucked

it's triggering me because until this shitty new movie came out, everyone thought of the original as a movie, but then wikipedia has gotten out that it was a 'mini-series'. And kids literally think now that there was a movie, AND some long series called IT.

It was a movie, split into two parts that went straight to TV. That is all. Gramps out. Now cunt up.

It was a made for TV movie

>gets called autistic
>responds by acting fucking autistic
what did he mean by this?

t. Autist

thanks mr parrot

>Checked

>straight to TV
had to correct your lameness faggot

>movie, split into two parts
>six hours long
pick one

it's not six hours long

The problem with the new movie is that its the opposite of the miniseries because the kids make this movie and pennywise only detracts from it. There were a few horror concepts in the new movie that looked like they where going somewhere but never actually hit their mark and most of the "scares" were either from jump scares or monsters running at the screen. The CGI was cartoonish AF and there wasn't enough dialogue between penny and the kids. And when there was dialogue between the two it was over the top and often bad.

>tfw we'll never get the new one with Tim Curry

>Tim was genuinely better than the new clown
Tim hammed it up and was just having fun, but Bill is brilliant, seriously as a being pretending to be human, with unnatural movements, ticks and quirks, drooling all the time and what he did with his voice i wont understand, he was absolutely fantastic

t. havent even fucking seen it

Wow. Fucking this

his voice is the worst part of the entire movie. it was a fierce race between that and his dialogue

No movies are actually scary though.

The 90' made for tv movie has way more overt slapstick. It fails to be either scary or funny though.

You nostalgia fags are really something else

I would think, after millions of years of existence,it would know how to "act human" enough that it doesn't have to put in effort to pretend.

Curry's performance is hammy, yes, but it fits well. He's having fun terrorizing people.

Bill's strikes me as trying too hard and the directors not knowing how to make things scary -- or scarier. inb4 projector scene which is just a jumpscare.

I'm not seeing any marked improvement over the original. At best, it might be as good; at worst, it's well below.

The shuckin' and jivin' scene doesn't help, either.

Bill striked me very well as an animalistic creature trying its best to imitate humans' behaviour and movements, and then when hurt in the Neibolt house fight, clearly dropping the pretense, its' straight animal-like instincts took over and it tried to get the fuck out of there

Pennywise is in the movie for like 25 mins total

>kids can't swear
>adults can't swear
>can't show child murder in a story all about child murder
>can't show child abuse in a story about child abuse
>can't show transformations with terrible sitcom budget
>lift clunky dialogue straight from the book instead of weaving it into something natural
I know Sup Forums is super contrarian but this is an especially faggoty thread. nothing but autists shitting on something they haven't seen soley because it's popular and that just eats them up inside. congrats OP you're the head of the losers club.

its so cringey how faggots like you come out of the woodwork to go "_____ WAS BETTER", no matter what. you are the sme person to say this about anything that comes out and has different source material.

he literally said that is has horror sprinkled in. not that it was a scary horror movie, are you retarded?

Thats like 20 percent of the movie, thats actually quite a lot by horror standards.

Do you mean like a generalized "the autismo" or is there a specific person known as The Autismo?

That's our IT.

btfo tbphwyfs

I disagree, having seen both.
Tim Curry saves the 90s movie. He is legendary at what he does. He saves movies like Clue and Rocky Horror injecting so much personality through his acting.
The rest of the actors are pretty wooden, some of the kids and one or two adult actors do a good job though. But the biggest flaw is its pacing. The film has some very very slow parts full of exposition. It was designed for TV so thats a large part of why its there, but it's something that doesn't translate too well from a book.

The new It is a pretty solid film all round. The child actors all (except one I argue), all do a pretty good job. The visual effects are pretty good, and the actor that plays It does a pretty good job of making him feel otherworldly.

shit with a gold speck doesnt change it being a pile of shit