You guys DO know that the kids from part 1 had a say in who plays them as adults, right? That's probably a big reason for all the unknowns. They were picking their adult counterparts themselves.
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Who gave the child actors a voice? I have not heard that one before. |
It was something Mr D read about the movies. Might have been on IMDb, or Entertainment Weekly. But yes, the idea was for the kids to have a hand in choosing their adult counterparts for a better "fit" to who the kids were. I think it's an interesting idea- why spend tons on famous actors, if they don't fit the bill? These aren't just kids, they are playing a role where the two parts HAVE to make sense and fit together. So maybe they SHOULD habe a say.
|
http://www.darkhorizons.com/jessica-...filming-on-it/
So Jessica Chastain has filmed all of her scenes and has gone home, while everyone else is still filming. Seems like the theory that they blew all their budget on her (and McAvoy) is probably true. You know, schedule all of the scenes involving the most expensive actress into the beginning most days (even if they're out of order) to get them done faster and out the door to reduce their going fee. Seems sound. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Sorta feels like they received their budget for Chapter Two before they even realized the first one was a hit. |
Quote:
|
Saw it. It was OK. It kind of goes through and checks the minimum number of boxes of everything you would expect to see in it and that's about it.
Not as funny as the first one. We see bits with the kids (creepily de-aged with CGI, as they've admitted, voices too which are just a little bit "off"... and I'm pretty sure they even gave Young Ben some prosthetic cheeks) but I didn't laugh one time this time. Couple of scary moments gave me the chills, but just briefly. I expected more from It's final form. Too tame. The It final form in the mini-series was creepier than what we get here, though that hasn't aged well in motion. |
What was the point of making Richie gay for Eddie? Eddie is the one that may or maybe not. Was it to cater to modern audiences and make bi-sexuality clear and tag it on to one that survives instead of the one that may be is dead? It just takes away from what Bill Hader was doing and adds nothing to it. I felt like it was political and "modernizing" and was unresolved.
Overall some of IT was better while some was worse like being in there for the sake of it like Bowsers presence or adding something like Bev killing her father in self-defense. I do like the 1990 mini-series better. Yes, its chessy,but I like one-liners that this adaptation lacks. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
The miniseries has not aged well, i'll take the new movies over the cheesy miniseries which felt cheap |
I look forward to renting this when it comes out digitally. May even cave and buy it if my patience is low. I would have seen it in theaters if the word was that it’s creepier than the first, but it sounds like the opposite. As it is, I’m still looking forward to it based on other aspects.
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
I went in thinking instead of drifting towards Ben and a little Mike I might pick Richie out as the one I could relate to or thought was hilarious based on the non-spoiler feedback. Nope. Just an agenda that set me up. Too bad Stephon could not give us the top scary places to go in Derry.:lol: Come on, SNL do it!
The mini-series budget was limited which is why the special effects were not to mention the special effects at that point were more mechanical than CGI. I was glad to see the ritual part in the 2017/2019 adapation since it was a part of the book and not just thrown in for the sake of it being in the book so it had to be there. Its hard to interpret. Aside from the whole made for movie Richie is closet gay for his friend bit the ending is the same as the T.V. two parter though Stan narrates. Was it just me or was it stating his choice or chickening out by suicide was heroic? That was the other thing that did not sit well with me.:ohwell: Trying to make statements, but falling flat. |
Quote:
|
Saw it over the weekend. I'm of two minds here. I liked some aspects- the Chinese restaraunt scene was well-done, for one- but others.... Was sorely disappointed by the removal/changing of some MAJOR plot piints from the book. Beverly's husband and Bill's wife, for starters. Neither played much part in the story here, unlike in the book, where both were fairly important. Also- the biggest detail of all, namely regarding the monster itself .
Spoiler:
Such a huge let-down that both this version and the original tv movie left out such a HUGE part of the story! Spoiler:
|
Quote:
|
I'm still really interested in seeing it, but cutting two major characters from the story is a bit of a drag for me.
Also, the final twist regarding Pennywise and what happens to Derry... those are pretty key bits, too, that really add a lot to the story. |
I am glad that Mike was not seriously injured, but it cuts Henry's role pun unintended. What would have worked was if Richie was the one that Henry injured. Richie would not be able to participate in the showdown with the Spider form and make him feel worse than the others about Eddie's sacrifice. No gay for Eddie necessary, Mike plays a role in the final confrontation and Henry's role is not for nothing.
|
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:53 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.