IT (picture) – Review

largeposter

 

It, one of the most anticipated films of the year, is the first big screen adaptation of Stephen King’s 1986 novel of the same name. For those of you who think it’s a remake, you’re wrong. The’ 90 was a television series, not a film. The novel is about 1300 pages long and therefore, rightly, it has been divided into two chapters, the first released in September (October 19 in Italy), and the second is expected to be released in 2019. The story focuses on

seven boys, the famous club of the Losers, who all have contact with a clown, Pennywise, which is nothing but an entity that infests Derry, the imaginary city of Maine in which the story is set, killing mostly children.

I liked the film, but I was expecting better, really. In my opinion, we are faced with another film that is a little too much overvalued. Let’s start point by point. The screenplay. Now, I’m still reading the book, I’m well on track, but I haven’t finished it yet, but I have to admit that it wasn’t very faithful, but not so much different. There are so many things that have changed, especially the encounter between children and Pennywise, but the sense of the book has remained, after all. I preferred the first part, perhaps the least faithful, from the point of view of the novel, but I think it is absolutely the best done. In the book we have a chapter for each of the seven boys, in which everyone is presented to us. In this chapter, we read their encounter with Pennywise, which is different for each of them, as well as in the film. Only later they will talk about it and understand that Derry is infested. Essentially it is the story of the book. What’s more, what is very important is that in the first part we see the formation of this exclusive new club, how friendships were formed, and that, in my opinion, has been done well. If it had lasted five minutes longer that part would certainly not be faulty, but it’s not bad at all. So we are given a complete overview of Derry’s situation and they have done very well. The second part, however, is the one that I found a bit ugly. It’s not boring, but for about half an hour the same thing always happens. This second hour is just full of clichés and clichés of all possible and imaginable horror. The scene, whether they are in a garage or in an abandoned house, is always that: they are in a dark place and It appears from nowhere, to create that surprise effect, that fright that must make you jump from the chair, that jump scare. But it can’t, like all horror movies for two reasons: one, music is a big clue (another big cliché); two, after half an hour you do so, you understand how it works. In addition, this second part is too hasty, the times are very short, it’s something I don’t like, not even in horror. At least, the sense of the novel, then the theme of fear, friendship, union to configure their fears, remained, although I have not seen much come-of-age, because It is a come-of-age novel at the end. It will be because there is still no adult counterpart, but I don’t know. But, in my opinion, the clichés are unforgivable, because the book has nothing to do with clichés.

We move on to directing, which had too many ups and downs. The first scene is also beautiful on a directing level and, in general, all scenes with Pennywise are beautiful. But, at the same time, Muschietti was very permissive with the boys. In the sense that when there are only them, especially in the clue scenes, the direction is so much lower quality. It becomes permissive. Each film has scenes that certainly need to be rebuilt because they could have been made better, and It is no less, and maybe they’re also a bit of a lot. To say, the scene of Bowers and his gang against the Losers. It was made so badly. And some more. But for example, there is a scene where they are always only them, but it’s not so important, on the contrary, it’s funny, but it’s done well. Because Muschietti has guided them well. You want that both because they are only children and therefore they had to have fun, or because the direction is old-fashioned, but there is no excuse. This leads me to another negative note: editing. And I always take the same scene. The editing there, in the fight, is very bad, but also in the scene of the Beverly and Ben meeting. And not just those. Like directing, the editing is old-fashioned. I don’t know if Muschietti and the producers wanted to make a film that seemed to come from the 80’s, the years in which it was set It film, but that doesn’t mean doing things badly. One thing is to implement an old-fashioned direction, another is not to move the camera, or not to say:”boyfriend, you’re acting badly, do so”.

There are very positive things: beautiful cinematography and scenography, especially cinematography. Pictures that really had a great impact. Crazy trick for It, it was really disturbing, with those yellow eyes and big teeth. The costumes are also beautiful. The shorts were horrible, but so clever. It’s nice, but in general, beautiful costumes, not wonderful, but beautiful. However, the visual effects left me a little bit to be desired. That is, there are things that are really well done, but others that could be done better, from the point of view of graphics. Some things were seen to be fake, but I can only accept it for the painting.

I close with the actors. Bill Skarsgard, the actor who played It, was very good, with the capital B. Sophia Lillis was extraordinary and also Finn Wolfhard, in the role of Richie, an actor you’ll already know for Stranger Things. I save also Georgie’s actor Jackson Robert Scott, and Beverly’s father Stephen Bogaert. Jeaden Lieberher, the main protagonist, has made disgust. Same Wyatt Oleff and Jack Dylan Grazer. They too were three of the losers, respectively: Bill, Stan and Eddie. For the other two (Jeremy Ray Taylor and Chosen Jacobs) I have nothing to say: neither very good nor bad. On average.

I am sorry to have said so many bad things, but I couldn’t help but do it. It’s hard to do it, but my expectations have not been met. I repeat, I liked the movie, but I think it’s a horror film that works, just that. It had to be much more.

Rating: 65/100

Well, I finished. But now the fateful question, do I recommend it? Yes and no. To see yes, even waiting for the second chapter that could bring things back on track (hopefully). In the cinema? I do not know. I always recommend going to the cinema, because the cinema experience is always different, but I know very well that nowadays it costs a heresy. So for those of you who are a bit undecided, or maybe it’s not really a big fan of horror, wait a couple of months and rent the dvd.

As always, thank you for reading, I invite you to click like and comment for anything: to tell your opinion about the film, or about my review, to ask me questions, or for anything else that comes to your mind. I also invite you to follow my blog, subscribing to it, either with your wordpress account or email, or clicking like and following my facebook pages, of which you will find a window on the right. Thanks and see you soon. 😉