Horror Digital Forum  

Go Back   Horror Digital Forum > All Things Horror > General

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 03-13-2009, 11:30 AM   #1
_pi_
Peace, bitch
 
_pi_'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: New York
Posts: 2,632
Stephen King's IT being "reimagined" for the big screen?

This will probably divide people!

Personally, even if I do love the first half of Tommy Lee Wallace's TV movie, I think the second half sucks awfully hard. As a whole, that film simply didn't do the book justice at all.

So I'm actually interested in seeing where this goes. I don't think anyone can top Tim Curry's Pennywise, but even if the new film falls flat, his legendary performance isn't going anywhere.

Read all about it here.

However, I must say, given that this is such a long book, why not just do a big-budget mini-series (again)?

And, while they're at it ('it' meaning whatever they choose to do, eventually), why don't they just go ahead and remake The Stand miniseries as well? Because for all the things they got right in that thing, they got something else terribly wrong.
__________________
"Compared to her I'm just some bland, flappy hausfrau."

Baby, there ain't nothing good about this goodbye.
_pi_ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-13-2009, 03:37 PM   #2
Slackjaw83
Lonely St. Tattooer
 
Slackjaw83's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Lock Haven, PA
Posts: 808
The initial TV mini was, as you stated, REALLY unbalanced. The first half, IMO, was completely amazing, while the 2nd suffered from a plethora of issues. In that respect, having another go sounds like a good idea.

That said, if they DO only focus on the later half and relegate the initial encounter to a shorter prologue/flashbacks/etc., I'll be a bit let down. The story's a great read, and deserves to be brought to the screen reasonably faithfully.

The other issue is Tim Curry's performance in the mini. Seriously, it was perfectly nightmare-enducing and still, to this day, creeps me out a bit. The guy really seemed to enjoy playing "Evil", and doing it in a way that was completely over-the-top but never "winking" at the camera and hamming it up(looking your direction, Mr. Englund....)

Like I said, I'm definitely curious, but I think we'll have to wait and see whaty else comes of this before making any definite, semi-concrete statements about it.
__________________
...And so Charlie Noodles says "I don't know what it is, but it's got my pants and won't give'em back!"
Slackjaw83 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-13-2009, 04:47 PM   #3
NaturesMistake
Stalker
 
NaturesMistake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 498
I'm down. The original, while fine, was a censored made for T.V. movie...


All though I doubt they would get away with six twelve year old boys running a train on a twelve year old girl in a feature film (yes, if you haven't read the book, they all fuck her to "bond."
NaturesMistake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-13-2009, 05:15 PM   #4
j tea
Stalker
 
j tea's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: lawrence, ks
Posts: 357
this would be a series of 'remakes' i would be ok with. i feel like in the rush to make every possible sk adaptation a lot of things were botched. im sure most people would agree. there were certainly some solid pieces of film-making born of the movement, 'the shining' 'stand by me' 'carrie' 'the dead zone' and 'misery' to name a few, but some of the more epic works demand a more sensitive and reverent approach than i think they have gotten.
j tea is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-13-2009, 05:49 PM   #5
dave13
HackMaster
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 4,909
Quote:
Originally Posted by NaturesMistake View Post
I'm down. The original, while fine, was a censored made for T.V. movie...


All though I doubt they would get away with six twelve year old boys running a train on a twelve year old girl in a feature film (yes, if you haven't read the book, they all fuck her to "bond."
yeah....that was.....ummm.....yeah.
dave13 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-13-2009, 06:04 PM   #6
Alan Smithee
Stalker
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: USA
Posts: 426
Quote:
Originally Posted by NaturesMistake View Post
I'm down. The original, while fine, was a censored made for T.V. movie.
My feelings as well. I'm down, but I do hope they keep Tim Curry.
Alan Smithee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-13-2009, 06:08 PM   #7
cjg
Maniac
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: iowa
Posts: 986
Smile It

At least this one wont have to put up with John Boy Walton in this one
cjg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-13-2009, 06:53 PM   #8
shockwave
Stalker
 
shockwave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Joplin, MO
Posts: 203
I agree, the original movie which I own, the first half with the kid actors(many of whom went onto success afterwards) was great, the 2nd with the adult not so much. I think with a book like this the best thing would be to split it up over two movies, you could have the kids in part 1 and the adults in the 2nd with a bit of flashbacking or interspersing thrown in, I think especially with a novel that size would be the only way to really tackle it intelligently. And I'm gonna guess the kiddie gang bang will be left out of this one as well, unless they're all 20 year olds casted to play teens ala every movie in the past 10 years.
shockwave is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-13-2009, 06:55 PM   #9
X-human
I ate my keys
 
X-human's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Illinois
Posts: 6,921
Quote:
Originally Posted by NaturesMistake View Post
All though I doubt they would get away with six twelve year old boys running a train on a twelve year old girl in a feature film (yes, if you haven't read the book, they all fuck her to "bond."
What the hell was with that? And it was literally the only thing the girl was there for wasn't it? That's probably the first thing I'd throw out if I were adapting the book, regardless of censorship concerns.

A book's a book, I'm OK with them adapting it as many times as they want. I don't see it the same way as I see remakes.
__________________
The combined weight of the horrors I have authored wrought would crush your carbon hearts into perfect diamonds of terror!

A Few Ants Short. And what the hell, check out my DVD Collection won't you?
X-human is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-13-2009, 07:01 PM   #10
_pi_
Peace, bitch
 
_pi_'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: New York
Posts: 2,632
Quote:
Originally Posted by X-human View Post
A book's a book, I'm OK with them adapting it as many times as they want. I don't see it the same way as I see remakes.
If filmmakers/producers/money whores would remake movies for a reason - to further explore certain themes; fix old errors; because the old film is relevant in some way today - I'd be perfectly fine with it. But when they're trying to cash in on well known titles, and basically not really caring what the hell they're doing with the new stuff, then I feel angry.

Same goes with books - if they see a relevant point in refilming it, the best of luck to them.
__________________
"Compared to her I'm just some bland, flappy hausfrau."

Baby, there ain't nothing good about this goodbye.
_pi_ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-13-2009, 07:18 PM   #11
maybrick
HackMaster
 
maybrick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Keene, NH
Posts: 9,618
Quote:
Originally Posted by X-human View Post
A book's a book, I'm OK with them adapting it as many times as they want. I don't see it the same way as I see remakes.
Totally. The way I see it, there are a million and one interpretations of a book that you could adapt into a good movie. However, when you remake a movie (particularly a classic) there isn't much you can do with it that could make it better. Remaking a classic film is about as blasphemous as rewriting a classic novel. Nobody ever reads Moby Dick and says afterward, "That book was fantastic! I think I can write it a little better. It's so old fashioned now." You don't see that, do you? And why not? It's the same basic principle.
maybrick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-13-2009, 07:40 PM   #12
X-human
I ate my keys
 
X-human's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Illinois
Posts: 6,921
Pride and Prejudice and Zombies: The Classic Regency Romance - Now with Ultraviolent Zombie Mayhem!
__________________
The combined weight of the horrors I have authored wrought would crush your carbon hearts into perfect diamonds of terror!

A Few Ants Short. And what the hell, check out my DVD Collection won't you?
X-human is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-13-2009, 07:49 PM   #13
maybrick
HackMaster
 
maybrick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Keene, NH
Posts: 9,618
I stand corrected!
maybrick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-13-2009, 08:09 PM   #14
geeare
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
I've always hated Tim as Pennywise. He just looks nothing like I pictured in my head. Anyway, I'd love to see a re-make since I was so diappointed in the TV series. It will be reduced to practically nothing on the big screen but I don't care. I'm ready for it.
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-13-2009, 09:03 PM   #15
snowbeast323
Maniac
 
snowbeast323's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Rhythm Nation 1814
Posts: 596
At least if its on the big screen it won't take three hours to geth through the entire story
__________________
Don't be afraid, I'm gonna hurt you real good, baby..
Close your eyes, not your mind.....let me into your soul....

La Toya Jackson fan and proud!
snowbeast323 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:44 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

Copyright 1999-2014 Horrordvds.com

No text or images from this site may be reprinted or used elsewhere without express consent from Horrordvds.com