I watched a movie and it was called
It, directed by Andy Muschietti, starring Jaeden Lieberher and Bill Skarsgård,
released in 2017. It is an adaptation of the 1986 novel by Stephen King. The
movie follows 5 kids who are terrorized by a malevolence in a small town, Derry
after one of their own, Bill’s brother Georgie gets killed by It. It is a
complicated story to synopsize without revealing too much of the plot. Though
to be fair, this is the second adaptation of the classic horror novel, the
first being in 1990, as a tv movie and that one was more or less a condensed
version of the book. Here, the 2017 version, focuses solely on the kids and how
they navigate through the town. All of the kids are terrorized by 3 bullies AND
their parents in different ways (Bev’s dad is sexually abusive though it is
mostly implied and not shown so explicitly and Eddie’s mother is a hostile hypochondriac)
as well as the adults in town avoiding helping Ben when he is getting abused by
the bullies. There is something off about Derry, that is very conveyed through
the style choices that Muschietti uses, as I mentioned earlier. There are some
differences, as Ben is now the historian of Derry rather than Mike though in
one scene Mike mentions his grandfather knowing something was not right about
the town and even calls out the It curse.
Bill Skarsgård does an amazing job as It. Even from the first scene with Georgie, you can tell there is something most definitely wrong. However Bill adds a childlike voice to It that just feels off as well. The effects of It and everything surrounding it are really spot on, the jumpiness of the character when it attacks the children, the manic change of faces and the way everything just escalates was frightening. The kids all sold on their performances, sounding like kids, rather than Adult kids. It helps that they were all age appropriate so that there was some realism there, as with the dialogue overlapping in certain scenes and really terrified looks on their faces and in their actions. It has a weird air to it too since it rides the line on winsome tween coming-of-age story to terrifying clown horror. Ive read some of the book (online and it was hard to follow as I am distracted by school and life in general) and I felt that there was enough in this adaptation to see that it was adapted really well. A lot of what I imagined was on screen which is pretty rare and it also changed enough, not in 1958 rather in 1988 setting the story this time, that it could be relatable. Additionally, the terror comes from both ends which really has meaning and was not really conveyed in the first tv movie adaptation. I am sure that a lot people will have mixed feelings about it but I would recommend it. Something that is interesting here is the adaptation of two films and using the same source material; what gets cut? What gets saved? How does one adapt such a thick book into a different medium? How does one make it fresh for new audiences while there is another version that is 27 years old? Overall, it is a great adaptation to King’s work which has been called hard to adapt many times. Little things have changed but the message is still there overcoming fear both as a child and an adult.
Bill Skarsgård does an amazing job as It. Even from the first scene with Georgie, you can tell there is something most definitely wrong. However Bill adds a childlike voice to It that just feels off as well. The effects of It and everything surrounding it are really spot on, the jumpiness of the character when it attacks the children, the manic change of faces and the way everything just escalates was frightening. The kids all sold on their performances, sounding like kids, rather than Adult kids. It helps that they were all age appropriate so that there was some realism there, as with the dialogue overlapping in certain scenes and really terrified looks on their faces and in their actions. It has a weird air to it too since it rides the line on winsome tween coming-of-age story to terrifying clown horror. Ive read some of the book (online and it was hard to follow as I am distracted by school and life in general) and I felt that there was enough in this adaptation to see that it was adapted really well. A lot of what I imagined was on screen which is pretty rare and it also changed enough, not in 1958 rather in 1988 setting the story this time, that it could be relatable. Additionally, the terror comes from both ends which really has meaning and was not really conveyed in the first tv movie adaptation. I am sure that a lot people will have mixed feelings about it but I would recommend it. Something that is interesting here is the adaptation of two films and using the same source material; what gets cut? What gets saved? How does one adapt such a thick book into a different medium? How does one make it fresh for new audiences while there is another version that is 27 years old? Overall, it is a great adaptation to King’s work which has been called hard to adapt many times. Little things have changed but the message is still there overcoming fear both as a child and an adult.
No comments:
Post a Comment