IT film

[BigShadow]

Just got back from seeing the movie and I was really disappointed.  There were some good horror scenes, and I really like the nostalgic feel, but there was a lot missing.  The story was just a combination of events, no real story line, plots, or twists.  I think it was more on the humorous side that scary.  The jump-scare scenes were lackluster and would probably only work for a younger audience.  In my opinion, this movie could have been a whole lot better.  I'll just stick with the original.

[zombiehorror]

Thought It was great and my 11 year old daughter enjoyed It as well.

[Sean]

I took my 13 year old daughter and her friend to see it.  We all had a great time.  It was good fun.  I liked the TV edition better, but I thought they did a good job.  Glad I saw it.   

[Wolfman]

Haven't seen IT yet. Never seen any of the other incarnations either. Not a clown fan, be them funny or scary. Doubt I'll ever see IT.

JP

[Big Bad Wolf]

I enjoyed IT for the most part. The way Bev was depicted was a little weird at times, and I could have done without the repetition of "Pennywise charges at the camera" jump scares, but overall I'd say it was great.

[YoungestMonsterKid]

I still haven't seen this.
Which is why I wanted to see if someone could convince me to see this. And I don't want to just hear "it's really good" I want to hear something that will really convince me.

And this isn't even that I don't want to see it. So much as I don't want the hassle. I just don't see it as having any difference from the Tim Curry one.
And I just am getting a little irritated that everyone's calling this "the most original horror movie" and crap like that. I mean, again, I'm not saying anything good or bad about the movie because I haven't seen it. But MY GOD this movie already came out. (was on TV, but so what?)

But really I think I'm rambling a lot. The real point I was getting at was that I haven't seen anything about it that makes it seem any different in any way. All I know is that there are no movie monsters in this one and Pennywise is designed like an 1800's clown. Which doesn't make sense because he's supposed to appear as what THESE kids are afraid of. He's supposed to go into THEIR MINDS. Not just appear as a clown from hundreds of years ago simply because he's hundred's of years old.

Sorry, rambling.
But that's really all I know. I really like Tim Curry. This one doesn't have monsters. And the clown is all old timey.

[Anton Phibes]

I still haven't seen this.
Which is why I wanted to see if someone could convince me to see this. And I don't want to just hear "it's really good" I want to hear something that will really convince me.

And this isn't even that I don't want to see it. So much as I don't want the hassle. I just don't see it as having any difference from the Tim Curry one.
And I just am getting a little irritated that everyone's calling this "the most original horror movie" and crap like that. I mean, again, I'm not saying anything good or bad about the movie because I haven't seen it. But MY GOD this movie already came out. (was on TV, but so what?)

But really I think I'm rambling a lot. The real point I was getting at was that I haven't seen anything about it that makes it seem any different in any way. All I know is that there are no movie monsters in this one and Pennywise is designed like an 1800's clown. Which doesn't make sense because he's supposed to appear as what THESE kids are afraid of. He's supposed to go into THEIR MINDS. Not just appear as a clown from hundreds of years ago simply because he's hundred's of years old.

Sorry, rambling.
But that's really all I know. I really like Tim Curry. This one doesn't have monsters. And the clown is all old timey.

No one can convince you to see it. I have seen it. I certainly cannot convince you as I actually preferred the Curry version.

You're right. it is NOT the most original horror movie, blah, blah, hype, hype.....it's a retread on a 90's tire.  It's worth a view....but don't believe the hype. It's over inflated. Much like Wonder Woman was in the realm of superhero films. The main difference: gore. You actually see what happens to poor cute little Georgie. Whereas its all implied or described in dialogue in the 90's version. This one does have monsters. Just not mummies and Teenage werewolves. It's worth a view. It ain't the best thing since sliced bread. There's also tons of potty mouth talk from the kids vs. the 90's version.  Get a red box and you'll be ok.

[the_horror_man]

I saw this film and really liked it. Let me say that I really did not care for the original IT. It was tough to get through. From what I remember, it was kind of boring.
(Spoilers ahead for the original) Also, the ending was possibly one of the worst endings in a horror movie. I mean they killed the thing with a bunch of sling shots. I liked the remake much better, which is something I don't think I have ever said.

I really liked the special effects in the remake and thought the kids did a fantastic acting job. It was a great horror movie over all, imo.

thm

[YoungestMonsterKid]

I saw this film and really liked it. Let me say that I really did not care for the original IT. It was tough to get through. From what I remember, it was kind of boring.
(Spoilers ahead for the original) Also, the ending was possibly one of the worst endings in a horror movie. I mean they killed the thing with a bunch of sling shots. I liked the remake much better, which is something I don't think I have ever said.

I really liked the special effects in the remake and thought the kids did a fantastic acting job. It was a great horror movie over all, imo.

thm

It's really not fair to compare the ending of the original when you haven't seen the ending of this movie yet. I mean, I haven't seen this version yet, but I know for a fact that this was only part one. They're doing the story in two movies just as the Tim Curry one did it in a two part mini series.