IT: An R-rated Goonies Adventure

In preparation for the upcoming release of IT: Chapter 2 on September 9th, and seeing that it was on Netflix, I figured that it was a good time to watch this puppy for a review. I'm unabashedly a massive fan of the book and I enjoyed watching the miniseries, so the question is: Does this modern adaptation of the childhood segments of Steven King's IT stack up to its cult classic predecessors?

The opening scene is one of the many places where a proper R-rating really lets the source material shine.

The story follows the same beats as the book and the childhood portion of the miniseries, and like the miniseries, it cuts out some of the more bleak, mature, and sexual events of the book. It also doesn't go into the cosmic origin of the titular IT, but neither did the miniseries (To be fair it was a very strange portion of the book). However, the timeframe of the film is much different than it was in the other two versions, taking place in 1988 and 1989 respectively, as opposed 1958 in the others. Essentially it's the same story with a few character changes, such as Stan's love of birdwatching never coming into play, and Mike being by far the least present of the Loser's Club. There's no silver bullets, but there is a stun gun (used to euthanize sheep and cows). The final confrontation with Pennywise plays out differently, with the Loser's Club beating the piss out of Pennywise (and thus conquering their fears) and in my opinion this is a change for the better. It gives an appropriate payoff for all the things the kids have endured until now, and gives each a chance to shine (it also makes sense from a film storytelling perspective). There's also a lot of visual storytelling going on in the background, and several events of the book that was never touched upon in the miniseries are referenced in the environment (such as the massacre of a group of gangsters in the twenties). Book details are also present in the action, such as Pennywise's eyes changing from yellow to blue as soon as he meets Georgie, the same color as his brother Bill's.

Eddie was probably the highlight of the film for me, both in character arc and mannerisms, with nearly everything coming out of him being absolute gold.

The casting is great, and these kids do a great job at selling their young ages. Each is distinct, and though all except Mike are white they each have a distinct silhouette, style, and manner from each other. Bill Skarsgard does an excellent job portraying Pennywise the Dancing Clown, and though he didn't carry nearly the same campy-yet-creepy energy or quotability as Tim Curry's portrayal, he brings a previously unseen menace and deeply unsettling element to the character. One of the best examples of this is seen in a scene where through a combination of cgi and contortion he unfolds himself out of a refrigerator and then plays with Eddie (the hypochondriac and general germaphobe), fucking with him just to make him more afraid (and thus tastier). It is an impressive scene both tonally and technically, and Skarsgard really owns every scene he's in, and I wanted nothing less. The dialogue can be a bit hit or miss to some. There's a lot of crude and immature dick, sex, etc. jokes told by the kids (though mostly it's just Richie), which could turn some off to the characters. However, I think this adds a layer of authenticity, because who didn't curse, bicker, and make frequent impressions with their friends as a kid?

Hell, the it's not just the members of the Losers Club that are unique, each of the bullies are also visually and personally distinct, even this Rodrick Heffley looking dude.

Technically, the film is relatively sound. The soundtrack is occasionally rather bland and generic, though whenever the piano or carnival music is broken out you know that some serious shit is about to go down. Of the lighting, I didn't notice anything particularly good or bad, though there are a handful of moments that utilize carnival-like lights (obviously because of Pennywise). These were pretty novel, and in truth I liked it a good deal, and you don't see it much. The cgi in this movie can suck at times though, such as in the opening scene, but other times it can be quite spectacular, such as in the aforementioned fridge scene. The camerawork is amazing in this film, and there's a lot of genuinely cool shots that they were able to pull off. Dutch angles are frequently used here, but they're properly and tastefully used in appropriate areas. There's a scene in the beginning where Stan is passing by a crooked painting in his father's office that creeps him out (I had one of those too!). He begins to leave the room, but then goes back to the painting to straighten it. Until now the scene was shot with a Dutch angle, but in a shot from the painting's view as he straightens the painting he brings back the camera to the standard position, symbolic of him returning to a state of ease. There's a slight sepia filter (I think?), which adds some vintage feeling to the presentation, but apart from that I didn't find it of note. Really, besides the camerawork there's not much to say about this film technically, it does a great job in some aspects, but others are either hit or miss or easily forgettable.

I can't believe the youth today, assaulting an innocent clown, they should be locked up, prosecuted!

In summary I would say that this film stands up to both that of the book and the miniseries. It's a tonally more dark, grimy, and gruesome film, which in and of itself is closer to that of the book (the miniseries had to be appropriate for family audiences when it aired). It's not even truly a horror film in my eyes, being more an adventure film with horror elements, you can easily think of it as The Goonies with a lot more danger and scares, because in a large nutshell that's what it is. Like The Thing, this may also be a great introductory horror film for some, especially young teens. While this isn't by any means an essential horror film, you can do so much worse than 2017's IT. Come for the scares, stay for the adventure.