Roll Call
1 members (stile86), 42 Murran Spies, and 3 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Time-Scope
The Non-Legion Comics Trivia Thread Pt 5
by thoth lad - 03/28/24 06:49 PM
Kill This Thread XLIX - We're Getting Old
by Ann Hebistand - 03/28/24 05:28 PM
Recent Legion-verse sightings in DCU proper
by Ann Hebistand - 03/28/24 05:24 PM
Legionnaire Mastermind
by idle - 03/28/24 04:29 PM
Legion Trivia 6
by Gaseous Lad - 03/28/24 01:12 PM
Who's Who in Raz's Legion? *added ALEK ARCANE 4 February*
by Invisible Brainiac - 03/28/24 11:42 AM
Postlo3w stories *LATEST UPDATE 28 MARCH*
by Invisible Brainiac - 03/28/24 11:35 AM
Share more completely random things!
by Invisible Brainiac - 03/28/24 06:23 AM
Omnicom
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Stephen King's "It"
#938076 09/28/17 04:38 PM
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 29,245
L
Time Trapper
OP Offline
Time Trapper
L
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 29,245
Before all of the positive buzz came out, I wasn't so sure that I would go see this attempt to re-make one of King's classics for the silver screen. After all, most King film adaptations, particularly most with overt horror elements, tend to be pretty bad. But as positive word of mouth got out, from both professionals and from the younger folks at work, I decided to see it when I got the chance.

In a nutshell, I really enjoyed it, though the decision to split it into two films, each covering the separate eras, seemed an unusual choice. In fact, my brain was such a hodge-podge of the the book itself, TV miniseries and the current film, that I'm doing my first-ever re-read of the book to see for myself what the movie kept and what it changed or omitted for myself. It's a big time commitment for a fairly slow reader like myself but one I'm finding very rewarding so far.

I'm curious to see if anyone else has seen this new film and what they thought of it. Also curious what background, if any, you brought with you. Have you seen the TV miniseries? Read the book? Only seen the new movie?

I originally experienced the story as the miniseries and read the book years later as I started to get into King's books.


Still "Lardy" to my friends!
Re: Stephen King's "It"
Lard Lad #938083 09/28/17 07:01 PM
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 25,675
space mutineer & purveyor of quality sammitches
Offline
space mutineer & purveyor of quality sammitches
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 25,675
I read the book. Out of respect for others, do I need to put detailed comments about the story itself behind one of those spoiler whatsits?

I think there were a lot of good ideas in there, but they were diluted because the book was overlong. Pared down to 2/3rds or even half its final size, I think the story would've been more powerful.

I remember seeing the miniseries and being relieved more than anything else that prime time TV meant some of the stuff with the kids in the cave had to be bowdlerized.

Last edited by cleome51; 09/28/17 07:08 PM.

Hey, Kids! My "Cranky and Kitschy" collage art is now viewable on DeviantArt! Drop by and tell me that I sent you. *updated often!*
Re: Stephen King's "It"
Lard Lad #938085 09/28/17 07:07 PM
Joined: Jul 2014
Posts: 6,692
Humanoid from the Deep
Offline
Humanoid from the Deep
Joined: Jul 2014
Posts: 6,692
I thought the horror parts were meh, but I loved the cast. The kids killed it! nod


Keep up with what I've been watching lately!

"Where have you gone, Joe DiMaggio? Our nation turns its lonely eyes to you."
Re: Stephen King's "It"
cleome57 #938087 09/28/17 07:40 PM
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 29,245
L
Time Trapper
OP Offline
Time Trapper
L
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 29,245
Originally Posted by cleome51
I read the book. Out of respect for others, do I need to put detailed comments about the story itself behind one of those spoiler whatsits?


I don't think so. Anyone clicking on this thread has probably seen or read the story in one form or another. But if you think something is particularly spoilery, then do so.

Originally Posted by cleome51
I think there were a lot of good ideas in there, but they were diluted because the book was overlong. Pared down to 2/3rds or even half its final size, I think the story would've been more powerful.


I think the parts when they are kids (the majority of the book) are the most powerful, but I find it hard to recommend parts to leave out. In addition to the 2 eras, King really paints a definitive picture of his fictional town of Derry that makes it transcend the relatively simple basic horror concept.

Originally Posted by cleome51
I remember seeing the miniseries and being relieved more than anything else that prime time TV meant some of the stuff with the kids in the cave had to be bowdlerized.


The main part you're thinking of was also (wisely) omiitted from the new film. That part has always given me uncomfortable pause as something that probably shouldn't have been in there, so I'm glad the "R" rating didn't embolden the filmmakers to include it.


Still "Lardy" to my friends!
Re: Stephen King's "It"
Kappa Kid #938088 09/28/17 07:42 PM
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 29,245
L
Time Trapper
OP Offline
Time Trapper
L
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 29,245
Originally Posted by Kappa Kid
I thought the horror parts were meh, but I loved the cast. The kids killed it! nod


They really did! I think one major problem the sequel will have is that it will have its work cut out trying to equal those performances. I've always thought that the part of the story involving the characters as kids was superior in every way.


Still "Lardy" to my friends!
Re: Stephen King's "It"
cleome57 #938099 09/28/17 08:28 PM
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 40,314
Trap Timer
Offline
Trap Timer
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 40,314
Originally Posted by cleome51

I think there were a lot of good ideas in there, but they were diluted because the book was overlong. Pared down to 2/3rds or even half its final size, I think the story would've been more powerful.


I've always had mixed feelings about Stephen King in general, in that I tend to like his ideas more than his actual writing. I'm definitely glad they left out that particular scene with the kids that it seems like everyone other than King himself acknowledges was hugely problematic.

As far as the movie goes, I thought the kids' acting was definitely the highlight, and I thought it did a great job of capturing the 80s feel. As an adaptation, it was good, but not great. One thing that really bugged me is that, at least as I remember it, the kids in the book seemed to spend *a lot* of time researching and preparing to face Pennywise, whereas in the movie they just sort of foolishly rush in to face him with almost no prep, which definitely lessened the story for me. Anyway, I'm definitely in for the sequel, and will be satisfied if it's as least as good as the first part.

Re: Stephen King's "It"
cleome57 #938107 09/29/17 06:04 AM
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 4,188
Legionnaire!
Offline
Legionnaire!
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 4,188
Originally Posted by cleome51

I think there were a lot of good ideas in there, but they were diluted because the book was overlong. Pared down to 2/3rds or even half its final size, I think the story would've been more powerful.


I had the same reaction to the Shining. I understand his method of meticulous world building so that there's a bigger impact when he tears it all down, but felt it made the book about 1/3rd longer than it needed to be to garner a similar impact. Whereas Pet Sematary spent a similar amount of time with the family and in the protagonist's head before things cut loose but I enjoyed that much more. Maybe his character work evolved over time, or my reading maturity changed.

Re: Stephen King's "It"
Eryk Davis Ester #938108 09/29/17 06:13 AM
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 29,245
L
Time Trapper
OP Offline
Time Trapper
L
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 29,245
Originally Posted by Eryk Davis Ester

I've always had mixed feelings about Stephen King in general, in that I tend to like his ideas more than his actual writing. I'm definitely glad they left out that particular scene with the kids that it seems like everyone other than King himself acknowledges was hugely problematic.


I've read 5 or 6 of his books and enjoyed all of them. Some of these were definitely over-long, but I like that all of them are immersive experiences with memorable and believable protagonists. The human villains, though, tend to be mostly one-dimensional.

Originally Posted by EDE
As far as the movie goes, I thought the kids' acting was definitely the highlight, and I thought it did a great job of capturing the 80s feel. As an adaptation, it was good, but not great. One thing that really bugged me is that, at least as I remember it, the kids i the book seemed to spend *a lot* of time researching and preparing to face Pennywise, whereas in the movie they just sort of foolishly rush in to face him with almost no prep, which definitely lessened the story for me. Anyway, I'm definitely in for the sequel, and will be satisfied if it's as least as good as the first part.


As said above, I definitely enjoyed the kids. Child actors can often be a crap-shoot, but most of these kids did very well. As a child of the '80, I felt a lot of it rang really true.

At this point, over a third thru the book, I wouldn't say they did a lot of prep (though they haven't gotten to the final stages yet, obviously), but they're clearly learning from each other's encounters and figuring stuff out, like what's working and what isn't. I'm sure there was some pressure to keep the run-time here manageable, so some things had to go. I'll be curious to see if we get a longer cut at some point and what it may add to the story.


Still "Lardy" to my friends!
Re: Stephen King's "It"
Lard Lad #938127 09/29/17 12:01 PM
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 25,675
space mutineer & purveyor of quality sammitches
Offline
space mutineer & purveyor of quality sammitches
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 25,675
[snip]

Originally Posted by Paladin
Originally Posted by cleome51
I think there were a lot of good ideas in there, but they were diluted because the book was overlong. Pared down to 2/3rds or even half its final size, I think the story would've been more powerful.


I think the parts when they are kids (the majority of the book) are the most powerful, but I find it hard to recommend parts to leave out. In addition to the 2 eras, King really paints a definitive picture of his fictional town of Derry that makes it transcend the relatively simple basic horror concept.


What irritated me most was the (over)emphasis on Bill (especially adult Bill) being King's self-insert/stand in. I don't actually think such characters are inherently bad, but here it was just too much. (Yeah okay... you're rich and famous, with a beautiful movie star wife AND you told off all your petty critics in college AND you saved your awesome wife who you couldn't stay faithful to because you're just TOO awesome with a hokey, er-- magical bicycle ride. Fine. [rolleyes] Etc.)

The flashback to the Derry of an earlier century was also aggravating and obvious padding, to me. Especially coming where it did. Could've been dealt with hundreds of pages earlier in about 1 1/2 paragraphs.

Still, let me grudgingly say that the story's stuck with me for a couple of decades. So that's testament to King's powers of storytelling and tapping into our zeitgeist-ing gestalt or whatever.

Oh, and about that ending:

I tend to prefer horror stories where the worst of us... comes from us, not from a giant spider from another planet, etc. But you could argue that's my problem, not King's. But my peevish brain considers Pennywise's origins, well... a cop-out.


Hey, Kids! My "Cranky and Kitschy" collage art is now viewable on DeviantArt! Drop by and tell me that I sent you. *updated often!*
Re: Stephen King's "It"
Eryk Davis Ester #938128 09/29/17 12:03 PM
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 25,675
space mutineer & purveyor of quality sammitches
Offline
space mutineer & purveyor of quality sammitches
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 25,675
[snip]

Originally Posted by Eryk Davis Ester
Originally Posted by cleome51

I think there were a lot of good ideas in there, but they were diluted because the book was overlong. Pared down to 2/3rds or even half its final size, I think the story would've been more powerful.


I've always had mixed feelings about Stephen King in general, in that I tend to like his ideas more than his actual writing. I'm definitely glad they left out that particular scene with the kids that it seems like everyone other than King himself acknowledges was hugely problematic.


Same on all counts. nod Gotta' wonder if a fledgling or lesser-known writer would've gotten away with all this without an editor putting his/her foot down. sigh


Hey, Kids! My "Cranky and Kitschy" collage art is now viewable on DeviantArt! Drop by and tell me that I sent you. *updated often!*
Re: Stephen King's "It"
Dave Hackett #938130 09/29/17 12:09 PM
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 25,675
space mutineer & purveyor of quality sammitches
Offline
space mutineer & purveyor of quality sammitches
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 25,675
Originally Posted by Dave Hackett
Originally Posted by cleome51

I think there were a lot of good ideas in there, but they were diluted because the book was overlong. Pared down to 2/3rds or even half its final size, I think the story would've been more powerful.


I had the same reaction to the Shining. I understand his method of meticulous world building so that there's a bigger impact when he tears it all down, but felt it made the book about 1/3rd longer than it needed to be to garner a similar impact. Whereas Pet Sematary spent a similar amount of time with the family and in the protagonist's head before things cut loose but I enjoyed that much more. Maybe his character work evolved over time, or my reading maturity changed.


Interesting. hmmm

I think it was Steve Bissette who admired how King opened some doors with Pet Sematary that almost no one else did in English-language horror, but S.B. was also frustrated because he felt King wouldn't walk all the way through, so to speak. For that reason alone, I've always meant to read it. But I'm a chronic procrastinator.


Hey, Kids! My "Cranky and Kitschy" collage art is now viewable on DeviantArt! Drop by and tell me that I sent you. *updated often!*
Re: Stephen King's "It"
cleome57 #938133 09/29/17 12:54 PM
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 4,188
Legionnaire!
Offline
Legionnaire!
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 4,188
Originally Posted by cleome51
Originally Posted by Dave Hackett
Originally Posted by cleome51

I think there were a lot of good ideas in there, but they were diluted because the book was overlong. Pared down to 2/3rds or even half its final size, I think the story would've been more powerful.


I had the same reaction to the Shining. I understand his method of meticulous world building so that there's a bigger impact when he tears it all down, but felt it made the book about 1/3rd longer than it needed to be to garner a similar impact. Whereas Pet Sematary spent a similar amount of time with the family and in the protagonist's head before things cut loose but I enjoyed that much more. Maybe his character work evolved over time, or my reading maturity changed.


Interesting. hmmm

I think it was Steve Bissette who admired how King opened some doors with Pet Sematary that almost no one else did in English-language horror, but S.B. was also frustrated because he felt King wouldn't walk all the way through, so to speak. For that reason alone, I've always meant to read it. But I'm a chronic procrastinator.


Not trying to hijack the thread, but it is a very good book, if extremely dark, even for King. Most of it works because you are so tuned into Louis by the time the supernatural is introduced, that you buy into his mindset when he does things that are obviously not going to turn out well. The movie is extremely faithful, but not very good, mostly because what makes the book effective is in Louis' mind.

Re: Stephen King's "It"
cleome57 #938145 09/29/17 05:58 PM
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 40,314
Trap Timer
Offline
Trap Timer
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 40,314
Originally Posted by cleome51


What irritated me most was the (over)emphasis on Bill (especially adult Bill) being King's self-insert/stand in. I don't actually think such characters are inherently bad, but here it was just too much. (Yeah okay... you're rich and famous, with a beautiful movie star wife AND you told off all your petty critics in college AND you saved your awesome wife who you couldn't stay faithful to because you're just TOO awesome with a hokey, er-- magical bicycle ride. Fine. [rolleyes] Etc.)


I'd forgotten about that, but completely agree. It's just so incredibly cheap and transparent.

Re: Stephen King's "It"
Lard Lad #938163 09/30/17 05:35 AM
Joined: Sep 2013
Posts: 31,399
Tempus Fugitive
Online Confused
Tempus Fugitive
Joined: Sep 2013
Posts: 31,399
It took me two attempts with It. I put the book down after an early scene showed a homophobic attack. I looked at the pointless brutality and at the tone of the writing. Then I looked at the length of the remainder of the book. I thought that if it was going to be anything like that, then I'd not bother.

I couldn't have read many King novels before that, and would have read It not long after it was released. I saw a rerun of Salem's Lot. The vampires would have been terrifying had I not already seen a picture of Nosferatu, giving me a hint of context. I'd have seen more movies of his work than read the books, thanks to those great trips to video stores. I was too young for the Shining when I saw it. But I'd have seen Firestarter, the Deadzone around this time. Creepshow was the favourite for me as it was for lots of kids. Every now and again, my dad would rent it out (quite a thing for a film we'd already seen). This was years before I knew he had comics as a kid, and even longer before I knew he liked the EC comics in particular. smile

I mention all that, having seen those films, had started reading It wanting to enjoy it. It was a bit of a disappointment that I couldn't. Actually, it was a bit of a jolt. I'm not sure if I'd put many books down before. I'd go through a pile of King books a few years later. It was one of those, but definitely not the first I went for in my folks' bookcase. I'd have gone back to It towards the end.

Like so many of the King books, the character and world building in It is excellent. But I always think of those EC comics that my dad liked and that King undoubtedly read growing up. They also had lots of strong characterisation (often of desperate people) and build up. They would lead to the villains getting their just deserts* and there was frequently a tongue in cheek approach alongside the horror. King had managed to take the first part, but had been unable to find any alternative to come close to replacing the latter. So, the ending in It was a disappointment, even if the grown ups throughout had often seemed like cut outs (which was one of the things that I couldn't have put my finger on, but had bothered me about that early scene. It's something that becomes clearer the older I get). More than a disappointment, it simply felt thrown in, and undermined a lot of the good work that had gone before it. The same problem affects a lot of his books that I've read. Not all of them, but enough that I stopped reading them after Needful Things/ the Third Dark Tower book.


*those getting their just desserts would spend some time at the Nine Planets Ice Cream Parlour smile



"...not having to believe in a thing to be interested in it and not having to explain a thing to appreciate the wonder of it."
Re: Stephen King's "It"
Lard Lad #938164 09/30/17 06:42 AM
Joined: Jul 2013
Posts: 530
Active
Offline
Active
Joined: Jul 2013
Posts: 530
My favorite King novel was the full-on fantasy book he did. Eye of the Dragon? Something else else like that? I haven't read it in about 30 years, so I'd be afraid to. It has a kind of magical place in my memory, and I don't want to ruin that if it's not actually that good. It's certainly not one I ever hear people talk about.

Re: Stephen King's "It"
Eryk Davis Ester #938213 10/01/17 03:00 PM
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 29,245
L
Time Trapper
OP Offline
Time Trapper
L
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 29,245
Originally Posted by Eryk Davis Ester
Originally Posted by cleome51


What irritated me most was the (over)emphasis on Bill (especially adult Bill) being King's self-insert/stand in. I don't actually think such characters are inherently bad, but here it was just too much. (Yeah okay... you're rich and famous, with a beautiful movie star wife AND you told off all your petty critics in college AND you saved your awesome wife who you couldn't stay faithful to because you're just TOO awesome with a hokey, er-- magical bicycle ride. Fine. [rolleyes] Etc.)


I'd forgotten about that, but completely agree. It's just so incredibly cheap and transparent.




I'm getting a little bit of a Mary Sue vibe from this re-read I'm doing, sure. I don't think it's overpowering, though. He's the one of the seven who lost someone to It. Of them all, he's the one who most has something to avenge. Like all the others, he is well-developed, nuanced and flawed. He happens to be a writer, and that makes him a valid Mary Sue suspect. But I think Bill rises above that and is a wonderful character.

BTW, Mike Hanlon is a writer himself in the story, authoring each of the Derry interludes that end each of the five Parts. You could argue that it's him who is narrating much of the book. He's a bit of a know-it-all and in some ways the bravest and least flawed of them all. While the others go on to fame and great success, it is Mike that stays behind and bears the cross of what happened to them and acting as watchman against the whole thing happening again.


Still "Lardy" to my friends!
Re: Stephen King's "It"
Lard Lad #938369 10/04/17 03:11 PM
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 25,675
space mutineer & purveyor of quality sammitches
Offline
space mutineer & purveyor of quality sammitches
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 25,675
To each their own, Friend. To me a lot of the padding came via all the TMI about Bill.

Hanlon was the one who made the most long-term sacrifices for sure. It doesn't seem quite fair that his main reward was getting to continue to bear witness as the town itself (presumably in a slow, peaceful fashion) ceased to be.


Hey, Kids! My "Cranky and Kitschy" collage art is now viewable on DeviantArt! Drop by and tell me that I sent you. *updated often!*

Link Copied to Clipboard
ShoutChat
Forum Statistics
Forums14
Topics21,012
Posts1,044,300
Legionnaires1,729
Most Online53,886
Jan 7th, 2024
Newest Legionnaires
Mimi, max kord, Duke, CBSutherland2000, Arumidden
1,729 Registered Legionnaires
Today's Birthdays
There are no members with birthdays on this day.
Random Holo-Vids
Who's Who in the LMBP
Renly Fox
Renly Fox
Captain's Cabin
Posts: 282
Joined: September 2003
ShanghallaLegion of Super-Heroes & all related proper names & images are ™ & © material of DC Comics, Inc. & are used herein without its permission.
This site is intended solely to celebrate & publicize these characters & their creators.
No commercial benefit, nor any use beyond the “fair use” review & commentary provisions of United States copyright law, is either intended or implied.
Posts made on this message board must not be reproduced without the author's consent.
The Legion World Star
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5