# Stephen King's IT Remake



## Sinister (Apr 18, 2004)

I am not against the original mini series being remade, but I think it would be best served being done on some place like HBO or Showtime as a mini series leaving in more material from the book. A big screen adaptation will lose even more in translation that was meant to be there. Alas, what I think doesn't matter worth a squat, because if it did, that is _exactly_ the way I would pitch the story.

From Bloody Disgusting:

Warner Bros. is bringing Stephen King's landmark horror novel It to the big screen in an adaptation being produced by Lin Pictures and Vertigo Entertainment. Dave Kajganich (The Invasion) has been hired pen the script, which follows a group of kids called the Losers Club that encounter a creature called It, which preys on children and whose favorite form is that of a sadistic clown called Pennywise. When the creature resurfaces, the kids are called upon to regroup again, this time as adults, even though they have no memory of the first battle. The novel is set in 1958 and 1985, though the feature version will be set in the present day. "It" was the best-selling book of 1986 and in 1990 was turned into an ABC miniseries that starred John Ritter, Harry Anderson, Tim Reid, Annette O'Toole and Richard Thomas. Tim Curry played Pennywise.


----------



## DeadDudeintheHouse (Jul 23, 2008)

Already heard this news. Regardless of what I'm about to say, I basically feel indifferent about it.

I don't care about the book, when it comes to movies I have never and will never care about the book adaptation. Actually, that's not entirely true. If someone did an adaptation of something like Bony Legs (the House That Stood on Chicken Feet) or Where the Wild Things Are (short stories for children that are classics) and made a bad movie, I would complain. But, with novels- you just have to accept from the very beginning that there's no way it's probably going to work out the way you think it should be.

The original movie worked as well as it could have, in my opinion. You have to see it for the style and what was effective about it. No matter what anyone thinks, Tim Curry is Pennywise. And without Pennywise, there is no It, no movie, no story, no horror, no fear. No nothing, honestly. The original movie was terrifying. It traumatized people and gave people nightmares. No horror movies today are that potent. Nobody's getting nightmares from the films coming out now. And all I'm getting, even at the notion of just more pointless remakes and adaptations, is a _damn_ headache.

However, like I said up top, I am more indifferent than I sound right now. Because, if there is a single image that can hopefully bring horror back to being scary, it's a clown. I haven't seen We All Scream for Ice Cream yet, but that clown is definitely scary. And kudos to those people for managing to accomplish that much. Right now, I'm just begging for horror filmmakers to pull out some kind of new concept. Even if it's just an image and nobody bothers to fix the music and production design problems in horror.


----------



## skeletonowl (Aug 8, 2006)

DeadDudeintheHouse said:


> Already heard this news. Regardless of what I'm about to say, I basically feel indifferent about it.
> 
> I don't care about the book, when it comes to movies I have never and will never care about the book adaptation. Actually, that's not entirely true. If someone did an adaptation of something like Bony Legs (the House That Stood on Chicken Feet) or Where the Wild Things Are (short stories for children that are classics) and made a bad movie, I would complain. QUOTE]
> 
> ...


----------



## DeadDudeintheHouse (Jul 23, 2008)

skeletonowl said:


> hopefully the where the wild things are movie coming out you like


I'm sure it will stink. It'll no doubt be just another Disney-like Narnia production. A complete snoozefest, overloaded with ultra-loud crashes and bangs and CGI blobs to lure in the low-brow masses of middle-American boobs.



skeletonowl said:


> I agree with you that a clown can bring back nightmares again. I'm intersted to see how this turns out


Technically, though I sound pretty down on this project, I'm a wee bit interested myself. That said, I don't want to sit down for another 3 hour epic if it rehashes most of the stuff from the first movie and then, gives us an actor who does not rise to Tim Curry's performance, which is simply unequaled in his field. I swear to you- Robert Englund's Freddy Krueger was never *half* as scary as Tim Curry! Those eyes, those teeth! _That music!_ He didn't even have to be seen carving someone up onscreen to be bone-chilling. That character, that costume, Tim Curry's performance... He is a pure staple of fear.


----------



## Sinister (Apr 18, 2004)

Rated R Pennywise:

http://www.dreadcentral.com/news/31149/exclusive-more-it-remake-rated-r


----------

