[Movies] Talk about the last movie you saw 2: Electric Threadaloo

Reactions
312 57 0
IT: Chapter 2

Loved it but not as much as the first and I'm particularly conflicted in a few ways.

I think it was too funny and that in being so, it took away from the fear and tension of some parts of the film. Another is that the sources of that humour, Bill Hader as Richie and James Ransone as Eddie, were by far the standouts. So I disliked how the humor lightened parts but loved the delivery? Additionally, it is LONG and feels it, particularly in the middle, but there was no other way to do this without it feeling like that. I didn't like the over-reliance on CGI this time vs the heavy practical effects of the first and the de-aging they do to the kids is really jarring in an uncanny valley way.

Oh! There are some really weird editing choices, in particular, one that stands out is a very oddly placed cut with Angel of the Morning suddenly playing out of nowhere. It's almost similar to the New Kids on the Block blasting in the first after Bev shuts the door to Ben's room but that has context and really works to cement their relationship. The Angel of the Morning part comes outta left field.

They pulled off some stuff I didn't think they would after the first that I was happy to see.

I know the director has said he's doing a supercut of the two movies but I'm kinda thinking I want to take a swing at doing so myself to get the whole thing to flow more like the book now that both have been released, more just to see how it would work.
 
Last edited:
Reactions
1,303 479 6
Frank didn't like It 2, to the surprise of probably no one.

Why put the intensely gross and frightening gay bashing scene from the book (and inspired by real life) into the fucking movie if the rest of it was going to be Tales From the Crypt levels of shitty, goofy clown jump scares. It's so tonally off. They took what I liked about the first movie (the character real life scare stuff like their horrible family stuff amped up) and cut most of it out entirely and really ramped up the shitty clown stuff. Like 3 out of the 47000 Pennywise scenes actually worked for me and usually involved clever camera work and didn't involve terrible cg clown bullshit.

I suppose the only way it's actually true to Steven King's work is the movie is insanely long and needed someone to edit it.
 
Reactions
864 255 0
Always Be My Maybe

This movie is sort of like Crazy Rich Asians, in that it also tries to tackle Asian issues and culture, but only does so on a superficial level. It's also not as good, the characters aren't as charming or memorable, and there's far too much reliance on cringe comedy. Cringe comedy really isn't my thing.
 
Reactions
1,449 393 3
I think my opinion of IT: Chapter 2 falls in the middle of Far and Frank: I didn't love it, but I also didn't hate it. Much like the first part, nothing actually scared me, even the jump scares. I really think that's more about me being so wrapped up in comparing it to the source material and the mini-series that I'm usually thinking, "Are they going to mention this? Oh, they changed that! Hmm, that's not a bad change. Oh, they really should have left that in" etc., and I forget to be scared. I honestly didn't notice the de-aging CGI, and I was looking for it.

Some spoilery thoughts:

-I'm with Frank that I'm not sure they should have brought back the Adrian Mellon part. Yes, I know it was based on something that actually happened up in Maine, and, in some small part, it loops back to Ritchie and Eddie, but the gay relationships ending in tragedy is too often a trope. Eddie died in the book, but between Adrian and the emphasis that Ritchie had feelings for Eddie, it boarders on Gay Fridging.

-I'm glad they gave Mike more to do in the final battle. I read a criticism that in the book, in any group scenes, Mike often faded into the background, which is valid. When he sat out the end battle in the book, it felt unfair to me.

-Bev can't catch a break in these movies, can she? Yes, she got her famous Mrs. Kirsh scene, but it seems like they otherwise didn't know what to do with her except make her a prize for Ben. [Side note: I thought the actress they got for Mrs. Kirch was excellent, but I felt like the miniseries actually made this scene a little creepier. Probably because it had more build-up.] Yes, Bev did get sidelined like Mike in the final battle in the book, but it still felt like she had more agency in the book. Speaking of which...

-I'm not sure I like how they handled Tom and Audra. It was like, "Bill has a wife! Bev has an abusive husband! Annnnddd... forgotten." I mean, I don't really need to see the prolonged Tom-abuse scene again, but part of what was really sinister about the book was that Pennywise wasn't the only threat to the Losers. I think I mentioned this in discussing the first movie, but Henry Bowers seemed more like an annoyance than a credible threat in these movies. Tom was almost laughable. Patrick wasn't a sociopath. King maybe long-winded at times, but he can really get you into the psyche of his characters. It's one thing that I think most adaptations of his work suffer from: the inability to really translate that.

-Bill Hader stole every scene he was in. There was a lot of humor, which seems like an odd choice, but at the same time, I think helped things move along. I didn't feel like 3 hours to me. "Angel of the Morning" felt weird and out-of-place, though.

-I loved that they poked fun at the criticisms that Stephen King as bad at endings through Bill.

-I loved that they got the original child actor of Ben from the IT miniseries to make a cameo in the board meeting with current Ben. I recognized him immediately. And of course, Stephen himself, going heavy on the Maine accent.

-I know these movies are already long and they had to keep them moving, but I really do miss Tim Curry's nuance to Bill Skargaard's in-your-face-scary-all-the-time Pennywise. There is no way any of these kids would go near Skargaard's Pennywise. Plus, Curry also had the benefit that it was supposed to be the late 50's and Bozo was popular on tv. I do like how they made the clowns in the fun house look like Curry's Pennywise.
 
Reactions
1,300 262 6
Always Be My Maybe

This movie is sort of like Crazy Rich Asians, in that it also tries to tackle Asian issues and culture, but only does so on a superficial level. It's also not as good, the characters aren't as charming or memorable, and there's far too much reliance on cringe comedy. Cringe comedy really isn't my thing.
I can tell you didn't like a movie when you won't even point out any hot women in it.
 

Dave

Staff member
Reactions
2,338 1,090 23
Yesterday. The movie about the guy who is the only one who remembers the Beatles. It's very predictable and really quite charming. I liked it a lot and, of course, the music is top notch.

My only beef about it is that I am starting to hate, hate, HATE Kate McKinnon. Every part she plays has the same smarmy tone and slurring of words and her delivery is always nails on a chalkboard. She drags the movie down. Replace her and it gets 1000x better.
 
Reactions
1,354 355 2
Saw IT CHAPTER 2 tonight. It's...not very good. Most of the adult actors aren't interesting (especially the actor who plays Ben) or given much to work with. There are some LAUGHABLY bad CG monster effects. And there's a running joke about "bad endings" that becomes foreshadowing. (As in, it's a bad ending, which makes it feels like they KNEW it was bad and just accepted it rather than fix it.)

I went into this hoping it'd be one of those movies I disagree with MovieBob on, but nope. His assessment was pretty spot-on.

The sad thing, there's lot here that, with some tweaking could have worked. Less comically bad CG monsters, more preying on psychological fears. And there were some good things. Like the first one, it's incredibly well shot and there are some really great scenes. But not enough.
 
Reactions
1,233 539 31
And there's a running joke about "bad endings" that becomes foreshadowing. (As in, it's a bad ending, which makes it feels like they KNEW it was bad and just accepted it rather than fix it.)
I haven't seen the movie but isn't IT notorious for having an awful ending? They probably were trying to poke fun st that, while assuming they fixed the problems.
 
Lampshading is still lampshading. They could've changed anything they wanted. It's lazy of them to look at the book, shrug, and have the movie complain about it.

The book's ending can't be done in a movie. It would never work, because unlike both adaptations, the book isn't kid story then adult story, it's kid story WITH adult story, because the adult story is largely a vehicle for telling the kid story. The climaxes happen together, cutting the narrative between past and present, feeding into each other. It's also performed on a cosmic and mental spacial level that isn't properly explained, which is fine for a book where you're immersed in the characters, but is poor storytelling in a movie.

I've heard there was a lot of studio handwringing behind the scenes, where test audiences didn't respond as desired to some scenes, so they were re-edited to be puzzling, comical, or jump scares. Seems to me that the 2017 It was too successful for producers to leave its sequel to chance, and what happened is exactly what always happens when management thinks they know more than the people actually doing the work.

EDIT: I haven't seen It 2 because I don't want to be at the movies that long again this year, so I'll catch it for rent. I'm just speculating on the disappointment I've been hearing.
 
On the subject of Stephen King and bad endings....

Gerald's Game

loved it. Amazing performances all around. Intense, shocking, horrifying in a new way. I love me some Mike Flanagan.

But that ending was DEFINITELY the weakest point of the movie. I get the symbolism of her growing up and all, just think the handling of it could have been better.
 
Top