Review of It (2017) by Layla S — 22 Sep 2017

(1.) Independent (If you had never seen the original):

Acting: 15/20.

Writing: 34/40.

Directing/Editing/Production/Etc: 34/40.

Overall: 83/100 B.

Review: This movie is more of a period piece about what life was like for many kids in Generation X, rather than a "horror story". There is so much negativity and despair without the presence of IT, that IT really only serves as a cherry on top of an already deflated childhood experience. In some ways, IT is just a final manifestation of the horrors that these kids must overcome in their childhood as they are forced to grow up "before their time". IT is more symbolic of how Generation X were left as "latchkey children" while their Boomer parents were "finding themselves" and otherwise not taking full responsibility for themselves and especially not as parents.

As a result of this, there is not too much of a narrative behind the concept of IT. Instead, the story focuses more on the kids and what they're dealing with, rather than focusing as much on IT and the terror IT spreads.

Since the story is more focused on the kids, they are seen much more in this film than IT/Pennywise is. The kids do a decent acting job, they're not awful or "unbelievable" but they definitely weren't trying to win any acting awards in their performances either - except for the kid who plays Eddie Kaspbrak, who does an outstanding job that goes above and beyond all of his peers in this film. This kid definitely has a future in acting ahead of him, he's extremely talented and charismatic. Of all of the child actors, this kid was the most into his character, the most compelling and the most entertaining. While the other kids only did "B" or "C" grade level performances, this kid gave an "A" level performance and in a lot of ways, "stole the show".

From what was seen of IT/Pennywise, the performance was adequate - nothing particularly special in a positive nor negative way. Overall it was a decent performance that didn't really stand out.

*Spoiler Alert!*.

Overall, the film serves as a great representation of Generation X's childhood, as well as representing Boomers and Silent Generationers during this time. The Boomer parents are mostly absent, abusive, overbearing and/or blame the Gen. X kids for perceived problems in their eyes. The Silent Generationers are tough, wise and politically incorrect, saying such things to the kids as "You're either in the sheep pen with the sheep, or you're out here like us." and "A young man should be outside playing with his friends, not cooped up inside all day.".

The film has some comedic Gen. X references, such as the recurring theme of "New Kids On The Block", which may very well go over the head of many Millennials.

That being said, part of the trouble of this film was it's goal to serve 2 Gods: Telling a story about Generation X as well as telling the story of Stephen King's IT. The result was a good telling of Generation X and a decent telling of IT - neither stories were able to reach their full potential and the intertwining added a bit of confusion/inconsistency. One such example includes when the character Bill Denbrough gives a speech about how it's so much harder to walk through his own home door than the perceived home door of IT/Pennywise. While this was an accurate representation of the endeavors of Generation X, this was a bit tough to swallow for this story, considering the fact that Bill's home-life didn't seem like anything worse than IT/Pennywise. Sure, Bill had lost his younger brother and had a hard time accepting he was gone - and his father verbally scolded him for this - but that doesn't seem worse than the entity going after children.

There weren't too many inconsistencies but one that stood out the most, was why some kids were eaten/killed and why others were just kidnapped and sent to float for however long, for whatever reason - but perhaps these things will be explained in Part 2 (which was already filmed at the same time as Part 1).

It was also never really explained where IT/Pennywise came from and why he was there - though this may also come to be explained in Part 2.

The production value of this film was very consistent but there weren't many iconic or extraordinary moments, aside from 2: (1) When a 3-D version of IT/Pennywise comes out of a projector screen and (2) when IT/Pennywise unfolds himself out of a box - though this was a bit exaggerated to the point of not making sense as he "unfolded" too many times.

The performance of IT/Pennywise was also very mediocre. This clown looked like a rejected member of the band KISS - not appealing to children at all. In addition, the first time we encounter him with Georgie is completely underwhelming. Pennywise begins to talk in a child-like voice but then suddenly out of nowhere goes in and out of a demon-like voice. Why any kid would not run away at the immediate change of voice here, makes no sense whatsoever, especially while this clown seems stuck under the drain and the kid is above it. Any other time Pennywise is on screen, aside from the 2 iconic moments, he is usually underwhelming and not very frightening as this film leans more on cliche "jump scares" rather than building any kind of real suspense or dread about the character.

*End of Spoiler Alert!*.

Overall, this was a good film with decent acting but mostly stands out for it's symbolism and representation of Generation X, above all else.

(2.) Compared To Original TV Mini-Series:

Acting: 12/20.

Writing: 33/40.

Directing/Editing/Production/Etc: 31/40.

Overall: 76/100 C.

Review: While it was very interesting to place this film in the 1980s and added something new and creative to the story, it also took quite a bit away from the original story and fear of IT, itself.

*Spoiler Alert!*.

Part of the brilliance of the original IT, was the story about the "loss of innocence", and this was best portrayed in a 1950s setting - as in the 1980s, the children didn't start with much innocence to begin with. In addition, the concept of IT/Pennywise is much more frightening to a bunch of innocent kids who are just starting to tackle the bigger issues in life, as opposed to innocent kids who just get insult added to injury with the addition of IT/Pennywise added to their life. This greatly affected the suspense and scariness of Pennywise's character overall, as well as took away from this film being a "horror" film.

In addition, the original IT told a story of kids coming together and finding each other through this new hellish addition in their life. In this remake however, the kids are mostly already together, so we miss out on that experience. This took away from the logic of why it took them all so long to confide in each other about seeing IT/Pennywise.

As far as performances go, most of the kids in this film only did as good or lesser than their previous counterparts. This cast of kids didn't have the same chemistry in this film as those in the original and these kids were certainly less charismatic overall than their previous counterparts. The only kids that did better than their previous counterparts, were the kids who played Eddie Kaspbrak and Stanley Uris (though this is not saying much for the latter, as his previous counterpart was the weakest in the original).

The worst change when it came to the kids, was with the character of Richie Tozier, as he was not funny at all in this film, whereas his previous counterpart was actually witty enough to be believable as a future comedian.

Overall, some changes made were for the better, some for the worst, and some were neutralized by having both positives and negatives (for example, it was better that remake Ben was actually played by a kid who was obese rather than just stocky as in the original; but it was worse in the sense that remake Ben was far less charismatic and compelling than original Ben).

Unsurprisingly though, the change that hurt this film the absolute most, was the change of Pennywise as Tim Curry is so irreplaceable. The thing about Tim Curry, is that he was a Broadway actor and the talent he had with his voice and acting ability is part of what made the character of Pennywise so iconic and memorable. Curry had captured the perfect essence of Pennywise when it came to look, voice and demeanor. His look and voice were perfect and consistent in their imitation of a clown and his behavior was frightening in the most subtle and suspenseful of manners. He was scary much like a crazy person is, the kind of crazy person that you never know what to expect from. In this remake however, Pennywise looked like an obsessed fan of KISS that wasn't enticing to any children at all and looked more like a "loser" than a "monster" or even a "clown". His voice was terribly inconsistent and a dead giveaway that something was wrong with him, logically serving as a HUGE clue for any kid to run away. His behavior can best be described as something between "silly" and "lame" - either way it was not frightening, compelling or memorable. Overall, this Pennywise seemed like a side character whereas in the original, he came off more like the star. (And the kids in this remake didn't have enough "star power" to replace Pennywise in the spotlight.).

Since this movie is such a Hollywood movie and not limited to TV production as the original was, this remake had much more consistent production work when it came to the special effects. That being said though, this lacked a lot of the iconic and memorable scenes, shots and locations that the original had - including the "house" that linked Pennywise to the swamps, as the remake version was much more generic and nowhere near as inherently creepy as in the original. (Go figure.).

*End of Spoiler Alert!*.

Overall, this was an interesting take on IT if it took place in the 1980s as opposed to the 1950s - and worth seeing for that reason, but it clearly didn't reach it's full potential and therefore was more underwhelming than it was impressive.

Independent & Remake Scores Combined:

Acting: 13.5/20.

Writing: 33.5/40.

Directing/Editing/Production/Etc: 32.5/40.

Overall: 79.5/100 C+/B-.

Overall this film was an interesting take on incorporating Stephen King's IT with a Generation X childhood period piece.