We would like Sup Forums to weigh in here. Thoughts?

We would like Sup Forums to weigh in here. Thoughts?

90 looked like actual spooky clown
17 is straightforward monster, killing clown buzz

is that the royal we?

user #1: NAILS it.

5 stars.

2017 is trying way too hard to be spooky and intimidating

Both worthless
Ooo spooky clown
Get fucked

careful son, edges.

90s looked like a clown, which is the point.

Tim Curry's portrail of pennywise was that of a clown that happened to kill kids, while the new one is a killer that happened to be a clown. The difference being, Tim Curry's Pennywise seemed to try and entertain before he killed.

I like both versions actually.

Why don't you swallow glass
Mind the edges

trouble with edges on the internet is only the user tends to get cut. take care, there, son.

Exactly, over the tongue and past the gums champ

1990 looks like an uncanny clown monster, 2017 looks like deviantart. The old series sucks though. Haven’t seen the new movie.

Wheres the version of this set to gangam style

He was dopey looking at the beggining, too bad they always had him looking scary from then on.

Yeah this. Curry was a far better spooky clown. Skargardavar does a shit job and the kids save the film
>UHB PEDDYWIZE THU DANSEEN CLOWD ROOBY ROOBY ROOO!!

So what you're saying is the 2017 is more accurate.

1990 was actually scary with a very creepy clown, however it was too long. 2017 is a meaningless stupid remake riding on the 80s nostalgia train, yes it looked like some JJ Abrams fuckery. The clown looked stupid in every way.

Curry is the better Pennywise, but he's pretty much the only redeeming quality of the 90s miniseries. IT 2017 is a decent movie all around.

>film
you mean flick right?

Watched IT last night with the korsubs

honestly, looked like a comedy to me

what gives?

Why not both?

Forgotten until part 2

Skarsgard's Pennywise felt like a monster that took the form of a clown while Curry's is a clown that likes to kill.

Literal rephrase.

I like this post better though Sounds less autistic. Also IT 2017 > that old shti no one watched

So you're saying Skarsgard's was better and more accurate.

The 2017 version is clearly more competent on a technical level including far superior performances for most of the characters.
The TV special suffered from budgetary constraints and some bad dialogue but succeeded through mood and immersive quality.
Both are 'popcorn films' in the most positive sense - competent Entertainment that is neither pretentious nor insultingly stupid.

Both are contenders for King Adaptation bronze after Shining and Shawshank, though there are plenty.

>before he killed
You mean never? Because it was constantly cut because lol made for daytime television.

Tim Curry was just a clown. Skarsgard gets a lot closer to what IT really is.

>Ranking the Shining above The Green Mile

>2017 pennywise does not have a long nose

I like the one that didn't have loads of gay fanfiction made about him from tumblr.

we wouldn't know, we don't go to tumblr

could be either for all we know, and it would still be irrelevant, as we at Sup Forums don't determine what we like based on what other websites do