It (2017)

It (2017)

GENRESHorror
LANGEnglish,Hebrew
ACTOR
Bill SkarsgårdJaeden MartellFinn WolfhardSophia Lillis
DIRECTOR
Andy Muschietti

SYNOPSICS

It (2017) is a English,Hebrew movie. Andy Muschietti has directed this movie. Bill Skarsgård,Jaeden Martell,Finn Wolfhard,Sophia Lillis are the starring of this movie. It was released in 2017. It (2017) is considered one of the best Horror movie in India and around the world.

In the Town of Derry, the local kids are disappearing one by one. In a place known as 'The Barrens', a group of seven kids are united by their horrifying and strange encounters with an evil clown and their determination to kill It.

It (2017) Reviews

  • Not so much a movie, as IT is an intangible collection of scenes.

    EndeAbgrunds2017-09-08

    IT truly is the scariest movie of all time... If you're 10 years old or younger, maybe. I honestly am shocked by all the positive reviews and high rotten tomatoes score. Did I see a completely different movie? IT starts off very well with a genuinely good opening scene. Great cinematography, atmosphere, lighting, a likable child whom you connect with easily, and an interesting encounter takes place between this kid and a very creepy clown. The dialogue is good, there is an eerie sense of dread, and a moment where IT aka Pennywise goes from being a friendly-ish clown to a terrifying villain in an instant through a very well placed awkward stare. It was a moment I wasn't expecting and gave me hope for the rest of the film, then... It's all downhill from there, after an almost laughable use of CG. This movie has big issues. IT isn't scary. IT's story is weak, if you can even call it a story. IT has too many underdeveloped characters. And IT is a counterproductive villain with no concrete rules for what IT can or can not do. The overuse of CG ruined any sense of tension or fear and Pennywise's tactics didn't make sense. If he feeds off fear, why reveal himself to each of the kids within a close time period? Why not concentrate on each child individually, causing far more mental torment and making them an easier kill? Pennywise also just randomly manifests himself anywhere at anytime, and disappears randomly. I don't find it scary when the antagonist manifests itself, attacks a character and right before doing damage IT vanishes.. The story is a mess and there are far too many characters. I swear the first 40 minutes is the longest montage in film history. A montage of each child's development and exposure to Pennywise. It was predictable and monotonous. As for the story, I don't know what to say, besides there really isn't one. Character motivations are weak, Bill is the only one who makes sense. Where were the parents at? Not a single parent seemed to care about their missing children. The few on screen parents there were, came off as caricatures. And there were a few scenes that felt completely pointless within context of the story. The school bully and his dad, being the oddest. So in closing, IT is an uneven movie or more accurately a collection of scenes that don't flow well in a tangible story. There are some good laughs, and a few entertaining scenes. But all in all it's just an average movie. Which should've been an evident sign, when the original attached director Cary Fukunaga jumped ship.

    More
  • A scary movie that isn't scary.

    bha0992017-09-08

    The opening scene is good. From there on...not as much. I guess this movie will please those not familiar with the book much more than those who are. That being said, I don't think it is possible to make a satisfying adaption of "It" without doing it the Game of Thrones way. More time is needed to dwell on each of the novel's parts to create the feel the book gave us. To tell the story as it was told on paper. So I guess I'll forgive the filmmakers for that. The kids are okay. They've managed to portray the losers and the relationship between them decently enough- considering the running time. Again: more time is needed for better development. Much of what actually happened between the kids and It has been cut, but again - running time. They had to. That they've changed the setting from the 1958 to the 80s was a bad choice, and so are the other changes. They're creating scenes that aren't in the book. They're changing things that are there. The biggest problem I have with the film is the execution of the horror. Constant jump scares, way too much CGI, and a complete lack of understanding of the fact that less is more. Waiting for a scare is the scary part of horror, and this movie just throws everything at you constantly. It just isn't terrifying. At all. I didn't find myself bored, though. Besides the poor performance when it came to being scary, it is an okay movie. It just isn't a good adaptation.

    More
  • Where was the tension?

    mr_bickle_the_pickle2017-09-08

    I think the film was good, but didn't really live up to expectations. I didn't find it that scary. Admittedly, one of the jump scares worked on me but otherwise I never felt any dread looming in the pit of my stomach. The film is gorier than the mini series. That's for sure. And I liked that updated aspect, but nothing particularly shocked me. There was quite a bit of special effects that just were not very good. And I think that's a big reason why I just wasn't very scared. The other dumb thing I want to mention is that sometimes the characters fell into predictable horror movie tropes. Its just kind of silly when they've already been scared by Pennywise many times. Knows this all "isn't real" and yet will wander off by one of the missing kids going "Come here". I mean, really? You're going to fall for that? I think what does save this film are the performances. Bill does a good job with Pennywise. However, he does lack the charm that Tim Curry had. But those were always going to be big shoes to fill. (Clown pun not intended). The kids though were amazing. In particular Jaeden Lieberher (who played Bill) and Sophia Lillis (who played Bev) were the standouts. I also want to give a shoutout to Nicholas Hamilton (who played Henry) for managing to make me feel empathy for a bully. Finn Wolfhard (from Stranger Things) plays Richie who is meant to be the jokester of the group. And Finn does well with that character. I just wish the writers had laid off from the jokes some of the times. You're supposed to be building tension and it kind of gets ruined when he opens his mouth to make a joke about period blood or whatever. I see the potential in this film. And I think it could have been really good. I just think they spent too much focus on "shock value" rather than building on an atmosphere.

    More
  • Writer and Director CLEARLY NEVER READ THE BOOK

    nels7822017-09-16

    It has become ritual for me to read the novel "It" once a year every year since it was released in 1986. The story is more than a gore-fest, it's a story about love and hope and friendship that is still meaningful to me to this day. The only thing this movie has in common with the beloved book, is its name and the characters names. IT is a literal disaster and a slap in the face to anyone who actually read and cherishes the book. There are NO character backstories, nor character development at all. You are literally thrust into the movie expecting to know everything about everyone and why they are the way they are. IE: Henry Bowers and why he hates the "Losers Club" - He LITERALLY starts the movie trying to kill them. This is sad, because a large portion of the novel was meticulously spent doing quite the opposite and made you relate to and fall in love with the characters. Editing? What editing? This is the worst edited movie I've ever seen in my life and I've seen a lot in 41 years. It was literally like the film makers shot 100 scenes, put the film in a hat, and took out said scenes and spliced them together at total random. I can't describe it any other way than saying, at one point, one of the characters (I can't tell who, because they all share the EXACT same personality) says, "I banged your mom last night", or something similar, and before the audience can even react, the scene changes to a jump scare happening in ANOTHER PART OF TOWN INSTANTLY and with no rhyme or reason. You don't have time to laugh at jokes, because they aren't funny (unlike Stephen King's jokes in the book) - and you don't have time to be scared, because you're still trying to process the dick joke that was still being told when the scene abruptly ended. While the filming location for the town of Derry was suitable, having the movie take place in the 1980's instead of the 1950's JUST TO APPEASE the "Stranger Things" crowd was simply a terrible decision. The 1950's were a totally different time, and much of the characters' reasoning and mannerisms that you need to make this movie work are lost to a time and cultural difference. These guys call themselves "THE LOSERS SQUAD" in this movie for god's sake! Kids didn't start calling themselves a "squad" until the 1980's (IE "The Monster Squad) So, you love the book like me and are still reading? Thank you! Now let me list just SOME things that we both LOVE about the book that you will NOT find anywhere in this movie: The Deadlights, The Ritual of CHUD, The Mummy and the bridge, The Loser's Club Dam in the Barrens, the moving picture book (now its a slide machine), The Smokehouse, "This is battery acid", The Werewolf, Making the silver bullet after a game of monopoly, The stand pipe, Bower's hair turning white, "beep beep Richie", the giant bird, the 50's racism against Mike (actually Mike Hanlon himself is missing. The writers just made arguably the most important character an afterthought in this movie), character backstories, "Hi Ho Silver-AWAY!", Haystack... I could go on and on and on. With god awful editing, absolutely no character backstories, cheap teen jump scares, not being faithful to the book, and too much CGI usage: Simply put - if you want to know how this movie is like the book, read the first 10 pages of "IT", and burn the other 1077 pages because that is exactly what the screenwriter and director did to this failed abortion.

    More
  • Terrifyingly brilliant. You'll float too.

    MovieGuy_abc1232017-08-31

    What persuaded me to watch this movie was the blessing bestowed upon it by the stories original creator, Stephen King, who claimed: "I wasn't prepared for how good it really was". He's not wrong. "IT" is quite extraordinary. The attention to detail, the subtle but effective comedic undertone and the exquisite cinematography not only do the original title proud, they make this re-imagining of the original classic even better than its predecessor. It's a very scary film but what impressed me was how true the film sticks to the original's tricks; it isn't filled with loud in-your-face jump scares, in fact, a lot of what makes this film scary is the slick cinematography and intricate shadow play. The use of lighting and creation of atmosphere is what makes this film so tense, which is why it's perfectly suited for those who like Horror movies but without the obnoxious gore. Watched the pre-release as a critic - August 28th.

    More

Hot Search

Related Search