It

I absolutely loved the new 'IT' movie and didn't expect it to be that good. It is a perfectly paced and beautifully shot movie that captures some of the love for 80's horror movies.

But 'IT' is actually much more than just a rehash of a plain-old horror movie: The characters are all interesting and the kids' acting skills are surprisingly convincing and moving. You really do feel for them and you want them to succeed, which is really what makes a horror movie be a hit or a flop. The emotional subplots are not too shallow as well—the love story does not feel haphazardly attached onto everything else; the interactions between the characters feel meaningful and real.

The new clown is also quite well done with some very creepy acting and a compelling voice. What's more: I didn't even mind the CGI of the horror effects. Usually CGI puts me off, but here, everything was done rather well with some really suspenseful moments.

In the end, what really got me to love the new 'IT' is that this is a movie for people who love movies. The cinematography is just like true movie fans like it: Lots of stunning landscape and wide shots, perfect lighting and atmosphere, and on top of that a great score! What do you want more?

So I went and saw IT, and came back unimpressed. I mean it was a good movie, no doubt about that. A bunch of kids, outcasts in their own right, being terrorized by an ancient demon that plays upon the fears of its victims is pretty much the standard in Hollywood horror movie territory. All the kids are well cast, the script is funny and tight, and there are plenty of monster shots. The cinematography is great, the pace is even and the CGI is flawless. But is more funny than terrifying- it's R rating more a justification of teenage slang in the script, rather than for true scares.

But that is what typically Stephen King is all about. His stories are studies on relationships rather than all out horror. In IT, King reversed Spielberg's E.T, and explored everyday monsters of childhood- abuse, violence and neglect. Juxtapose that with an eternal evil shape-shifting entity who wakes up every 27 years to prey, and you have a shawarma of a plot. The book is scary, the movie isn't. Probably so because today, we are used to Stranger Things.

We are used to kids doing stupendous stuff these days- whether running billion dollar companies, or bringing back lost souls from other dimensions. It all seems very easy for today's generation to figure things out- most of IT establishes this narrative. A wonderful group of actors face off against Bill Skarsgard's Pennywise the Dancing Clown, and they all nail their parts. The movie takes place in a town where all the adults are essentially villains- so its not just the kids versus the clowns everyone else. But for sheer impact, IT never reaches the highs it achieves in its first sequence.

It is a great example of how strong marketing can make mediocre movies look a billion bucks. Other reviewers are putting IT right up there with other Stephen King adaptions such as The Shining and The Thing. Oh please, that would be laying it too thick. Director Andy Muschietti's earlier take on the genre- Mama, is a far better contender.

No good horror movie can get away by being light on scares, however good the characters and the script are. So look at IT as an extension of Goonies or Stranger Things, a PG-13 romp, not an iconic horror movie. 7/10

It (2017)

*** (out of 4)

A small town has a strange history with various disasters that strike every twenty-seven years and more times than not it's children that are harmed. One summer a group of friends realize that they are all being stalked by the vision of a sinister clown known as Pennywise. They soon realize that if they don't try to kill it then he will kill them one by one.

Stephen King's IT was originally made for television in 1990 and it was a hugely successful film that scared the crap out of people. The film had all sorts of hype going into it and it actually lived up to it. The film carried on a cult following for years and then news broke that a new adaptation was coming. This film really try to create the same type of hype and it ended up being a massive box office hit. People were eating it up and it's easy to see why. With that said, as much as I loved certain parts of it there's no question that there are some major flaws as well.

The great stuff includes the drama aspect of the story. The real terror comes from the bullying, the girl's sexual abuse by her father, the blame you place on yourself for your brother's death and of course there's the building of friendships that kids do during the summer. All of this is perfectly done and director Andy Muschietti does a wonderful job with the development of the characters. He also does a terrific job at capturing the mood and setting of a small town. The 1988/89 settings were perfectly captured and you can sit there and feel that you're in a real town with real characters.

All of the performances by the kids are simply wonderful with Sophia Lillis and Jeremy Ray Taylor really standing out. The adult performances are just as great even though they're all basically small supporting roles. Tehn there's Bill Skarsgard as Pennywise. I thought the actor was terrific in the park and I enjoyed how much more sinister this clown was. I also loved the line delivery and thought the actor was terrific at bringing this character to the screen.

With that said, there are some major, major flaws that pretty much kill the horror elements of the film and that's the CGI. The CGI effects are so fake looking that I couldn't help but be taken out of the drama that was going on. This isn't a Marvel movie or some sort of fantasy. Why build up the setting so much just to throw it all away with cheap effects? And I ask you this.... Was this CGI, fake looking clown that rushes towards the camera or floats around really as creepy as the actor and his make-up? Why they had to throw these cheap, fake looking effects is anyone's guess but it really hurts the film.

Overall, I'd say that the original was better but there's still a lot of great stuff here. It's really too bad that there really aren't any scares due to the fake looking effects and it's even worse that everything was there for a much better movie. As it stands, IT is good but not a classic.

I love horror and I loved Stephen King's original IT film. I wanted to really love this movie, but I just wasn't feeling it. I think I watched 75% of it then got bored and never finished. (I'm watching this as a rental, though, so I may finish it tonight). It was a little bit different than the original...they added dialogue for the kids that was more "current' so they brought up references to sex more...which in my opinion added nothing to the movie. There was more special effects and a bit more gore...I don't think these added anything to the movie either.

The clown didn't really scare me. I thought some of the scenes with the clown were just weird and over done. I'm disappointed. I'll give it a 6, though, because it wasn't an awful movie...it just didn't live up to my expectations.

For a younger audience, unjaded by so many horror and suspense flicks, this movie will probably be creepier. This version of the story is somewhat a victim of itself. So many derivatives have occurred over the years, many from King novels, including this one, that this remake suffers as somewhat less of the same. At my 55 years of age, it just never hit a fear climax. Sure, some great scenes, just not enough impact. For the younger audience, I expect it would be great. Also, perhaps by the edit- down for the screen play, the story seemed to leave a lot of plot holes uncompleted, and seemed to violate its own plane of existence. Appropriate for Netflix, or a young couple on a date.