Stephen King's "IT" to be adapted into two parts

[Monty_Cristo]

If Harry Anderson, Tim Reid and John Ritter aren't in it, it's not It.

perhaps. i prefered the kid scenes. i just couldn't buy that the adults were still scared of Pennywise.

[Lancerman]

perhaps. i prefered the kid scenes. i just couldn't buy that the adults were still scared of Pennywise.

Pennywise itself was never meant to scare anyone. Even in the first scene Georgie (the youngest kid in the novel) wasn't afraid of Pennywise. It was more of what this thing represented and how powerful it was. It's like ok here's a clown. Then you are informed that this clown kills children. Then you are informed that this clown has supernatural powers to become anything you are afraid of and is some type of eternal god like entity existing from a higher realm. Then you find out that this clown has haunted this town for years causing immeasurable disasters and has basically placed a spell on anyone with any real power in the world from ever noticing it.

Then when you see Pennywise you aren't just looking at a clown. You're looking at a sadistic all powerful monster of the utmost evil that is bent on killing you in the most heinous fashion and you are totally alone in the world with it. And in many cases Pennywise was just there taunting these kids with that knowledge. Thats terrifying even if your an adult.

[JCAll]

perhaps. i prefered the kid scenes. i just couldn't buy that the adults were still scared of Pennywise.

Doesn't matter how old you get, Clowns are still fucked up.
That's why IT defaults to Pennywise, everyone is creeped by Clowns.

[Acecool]

I know they'll have a bigger budget and everything...

But otherwise what will this film include that the original adaptation didn't? Maybe more of Stephen King's Cosmology as Easter Eggs.

I know the Orgy sure as hell isn't getting in there.

Why in the world would they not include an underage orgy to top off the first film?

[Lord Bravery]

When i saw the original as a kid it gave me coulrophobia. Tim Curry was amazing as IT, i don't think he'll be topped.

[Lancerman]

Why in the world would they not include an underage orgy to top off the first film?

I know your being sarcastic, but the entire meaning of the orgy (whether you agreed with it or not) would be lost on screen.

Also I really hope they don't end first film like they did with Part 1 of the mini series by having the kids defeat it. I liked the narrative structure of the book so much better. Both stories being simulaneously being told at the same time. In the book the adults had no idea what happened when they were children and they remembered it slowly as we the readers saw it play out. In fact they didn't even remember the climactic battle they had as children till the moment they entered the monsters chamber as adults. It was more poignant that way. You know the kids are going to have this awesome showdown from the get go and that is the highlite. To show it at what would effectively be the midway point means you have a whole half of the film with adults struggling to remember events we already witnissed and returning to have very much the same conclusion.

To compare it to comics it would almost be like if Watchmen gave us the entire Minuteman backstory with all the crucial revelations such as the Comedian being the Silk Spectre's father and then having that still be a huge shocking plot point. Except in the case of this film thats every single plot point.

Then you probably should factor in that it keeps the child storyline which is really the crux of the entire thing (the whole adult section is really a mirror and retrospect to work parrallel to those events) going which is a plus for the audiance.

[BlackagarBoltagon]

IT is my favorite novel and I look forward to seeing how this adaptation ends up. I just hope they leave in one of my favorite scenes with the hobo under the porch.

[Zero Hunter]

Just bring Tim Curry back. I think he could even make the part more creapy now.

[Monty_Cristo]

Doesn't matter how old you get, Clowns are still fucked up.
That's why IT defaults to Pennywise, everyone is creeped by Clowns.

i love clowns. i've dressed as one the past 6 halloweens.

[Monty_Cristo]

Pennywise itself was never meant to scare anyone. Even in the first scene Georgie (the youngest kid in the novel) wasn't afraid of Pennywise. It was more of what this thing represented and how powerful it was. It's like ok here's a clown. Then you are informed that this clown kills children. Then you are informed that this clown has supernatural powers to become anything you are afraid of and is some type of eternal god like entity existing from a higher realm. Then you find out that this clown has haunted this town for years causing immeasurable disasters and has basically placed a spell on anyone with any real power in the world from ever noticing it.

Then when you see Pennywise you aren't just looking at a clown. You're looking at a sadistic all powerful monster of the utmost evil that is bent on killing you in the most heinous fashion and you are totally alone in the world with it. And in many cases Pennywise was just there taunting these kids with that knowledge. Thats terrifying even if your an adult.

that's one take on it. but it's not how i saw it, at the time (first viewing). the clown's history was lost on me. i think he would have been just as creepy without any kind of backstory. a clown peeking out from a sewer drain is interesting. you can tell that something's not right from the moment he appears. Georgie was scared of him. his first reaction was to walk away; having completely forgotten about his boat.

[Jared]

You know what can replace the pre-teen gang bang? Just have the kids cut their hands and make a blood pact. That's the sort of thing kids would actually do, anyway. And it can even be the girl's idea.

I'm not sure if the parallel narratives will translate well to a two-part adaptation. Where's the endpoint for the first movie? If you do the kids first, at least there's a natural break, that could feel like a fairly complete story but still have a cliffhanger.

I don't think the book ever explained where the name Pennywise came from. But since it's a big deal that IT doesn't really have a name and Pennywise is just a form its particularly fond of, I think they should make that clear in the movie. I know the original mini had me wondering "Why isn't it just called Pennywise"?

Honestly though, if there's a King book that deserves an extended minisieres, but on premium cable to do it justice, it's IT. That way they could throw in some of the flashbacks and side stories.

[Lancerman]

You know what can replace the pre-teen gang bang? Just have the kids cut their hands and make a blood pact. That's the sort of thing kids would actually do, anyway. And it can even be the girl's idea.

I'm not sure if the parallel narratives will translate well to a two-part adaptation. Where's the endpoint for the first movie? If you do the kids first, at least there's a natural break, that could feel like a fairly complete story but still have a cliffhanger.

I don't think the book ever explained where the name Pennywise came from. But since it's a big deal that IT doesn't really have a name and Pennywise is just a form its particularly fond of, I think they should make that clear in the movie. I know the original mini had me wondering "Why isn't it just called Pennywise"?

Honestly though, if there's a King book that deserves an extended minisieres, but on premium cable to do it justice, it's IT. That way they could throw in some of the flashbacks and side stories.

I'm pretty sure they did the blood pact. Honestly you could just omit the orgy entirely. It won't get the meaning across on screen and will just bring criticism.

[Mike Pothier]

You know what can replace the pre-teen gang bang? Just have the kids cut their hands and make a blood pact. That's the sort of thing kids would actually do, anyway. And it can even be the girl's idea.

Now that is a good idea. And it would make more sense then them taking their clothes off and screwing in a goddamn sewer.

I'm not sure if the parallel narratives will translate well to a two-part adaptation. Where's the endpoint for the first movie? If you do the kids first, at least there's a natural break, that could feel like a fairly complete story but still have a cliffhanger.

There is a good point they could break in the story. The kids actually fought Pennywise twice. First in a haunted house, then in the sewer. The TV mini-series actually combined the two, where the kids went into the sewers, but the actual fight was modeled after the haunted house. Just end the movie with the first confrontation in the haunted house, and it will make a good cliffhanger. Pennywise isn't dead, but they successfully fought it off. They know it can be killed, but IT will now be more aggressive in trying to kill them.

I don't think the book ever explained where the name Pennywise came from. But since it's a big deal that IT doesn't really have a name and Pennywise is just a form its particularly fond of, I think they should make that clear in the movie. I know the original mini had me wondering "Why isn't it just called Pennywise"?

I just hope they drop "Bob Gray", an alias that came out of nowhere and made even less sense.

Honestly though, if there's a King book that deserves an extended minisieres, but on premium cable to do it justice, it's IT. That way they could throw in some of the flashbacks and side stories.

10 years ago, I would have said a movie guarantees a bigger budget and better special effects. But with the success of television dramas today, I really agree.

[marshal99]

I wonder how they are going to do about the true form of Pennywise, King complained about the giant spider in the mini series but then , his novel did described it as a giant spider.

Also , i imagine the movie will also skip the great and powerful cosmic turtle like in the mini series , it would be too silly otherwise.

[Lancerman]

I wonder how they are going to do about the true form of Pennywise, King complained about the giant spider in the mini series but then , his novel did described it as a giant spider.

Also , i imagine the movie will also skip the great and powerful cosmic turtle like in the mini series , it would be too silly otherwise.

Thr turtle was unneccessary, but maybe the symbol of the turtle lying around to allude to a greater power that is on equal terms with IT aiding the kids would work. Also they should just get creative with the Spider. If you make it look crazy and then hit home that this is only what there minds can conceive the true form to be would work much better.