#I am not plussed about the existence of this movie | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

sophieakatz · 5 years ago

Text

Thursday Thoughts: Yet Another Feminist Movie Test

The people of the internet (myself included) have a lot of fun playing around with the “Bechdel Test” – a simple formula created by lesbian comic artist Alison Bechdel to determine whether a film is worth seeing. This test asks the following three questions:

Are there at least two named female characters in the film?

Do they have a conversation with each other?

And is that conversation about something other than a man?

The Bechdel Test does a good job of illustrating several significant problems in mass media – the lack of named female characters, and the extremely limited range of plots, lifestyles, and character types that these female characters are given. It’s good for pointing out trends that fail to represent the diverse lives of women, and which specifically fail to appeal to lesbians and other wlw (women who like women).

But this little “test” on its own does not actually determine whether an individual film is “feminist.” It’s only three questions, after all.

Since the Bechdel Test took off in internet circles, many netizens have come up with their own media tests inspired by Bechdel’s comic. You can read about a lot of them here, but here are some of my favorites:

The Mako Mori Test: Is there at least one female character, who gets her own narrative arc, which is not about supporting a man’s story?

The Ellen Willis Test: Would this story’s depiction of these two characters still work if the genders of the characters were flipped?

The Topside Test: Does this film have more than one transgender character, who know each other, and who talk to each other about something other than a transition-related procedure?

Deggans’ Rule: Are there at least two people of color in this film, and is the film’s narrative not about race?

The Sexy Lamp Test: If you replaced the female character with a “sexy” lamp, would nothing change about the film?

Today I am adding my own test to the mix. Let’s call it the Want Test.

The Want Test is based on one question: Does what the named female character want matter to the plot?

Of course, this requires that there be a named female character in the movie. I’m taking that as a given. Most films do have one of those, these days. However, this test does not allow a filmmaker to simply point at the presence of a named female character and say that their work is done. This question asks about the relevance of this named female character. Does what she want actually matter to her world? If the answer is yes, give the film a checkmark. If the answer is no, give it a minus sign.

Note that she doesn’t necessarily need to get what she wants, but the movie world around her should react as though her wanting it means something. Villains have desires that drive plots, certainly, but that doesn’t mean that they should succeed. Additionally, many protagonists begin a movie believing that they want one thing and act upon that desire, but along the way figure out that something else is better for them. These stories are all important and I don’t want to bog this test down with the requirement that these characters get what they want, because getting what you want is not always a good thing.

Musicals tend to pass this test pretty easily, especially Disney Princess movie musicals. Cinderella of Cinderella wants to go to the ball – that matters to the plot. Tiana of The Princess and the Frog wants to open a restaurant – that matters to the plot. A main feature of a musical is the “I Want” song – the scene early on where the heroine has a solo about what she wants, setting up the plot of the story. Movies with an “I Want” song consistently get their checkmark from this test.

But this is me we’re talking about, and I’m not going to leave it this simple, now am I? Let’s add some more plusses and minuses to the test.

The titular character of Snow White gets two “I Want” songs (“I’m Wishing” and “Someday My Prince Will Come”). She wants to find love – and she gets it, too. She also spends a lot of time bossing the dwarves out of their slovenliness, for no apparent reason other than that she wants to. That’s enough for a checkmark.

But Snow White is not the only named female character whose wants matter to the plot. The Evil Queen (and yeah, I’m counting that as a name, because it’s how she’s consistently referred to in Disney media) wants to be the fairest of them all, and that want drives her to try to kill Snow White multiple times, launching the entire plot in the first place. If more than one named female characters have wants that drive the plot, then the film gets a check-plus.

However, Snow White does not do as well under this test as it possibly could. Snow and the Queen’s wants directly conflict with each other; they are enemies. Ultimately, for the story to conclude, what one of them wants needs to matter less than what the other woman wants. And that’s not ideal.

Let’s take a look instead at Frozen. Here we have two named female characters, Anna and Elsa, whose wants absolutely matter to the plot. Anna wants to connect with her sister and save Arendelle from the eternal winter, while Elsa wants to protect her sister (and save Arendelle from the eternal winter, but that’s secondary). Ultimately their wants converge, and they help each other get what they want, living happily ever after. If the named female characters help each other get what they want instead of fight against each other, then the film is upped to a check-double-plus.

Now here’s the disappointing side of this test. Sometimes a named female character wants something, and her wants matter – but her wants directly contrast with the wants of a male character. Perhaps she’s the villain who has locked the male character in a dungeon. Perhaps she’s a prospective love interest who doesn’t want to fall for the male character. In this case, while the female’s character’s wants matter, they only matter insofar as the male character is trying to change what she wants or to make sure she does not get what she wants. These films may depict a woman as having desires, but her desires are not actually important – they are an obstacle.

In Toy Story 2, Jessie wants Woody to come with her to the museum in Japan. Woody doesn’t want to go. The viewer does not want him to go. Her wants certainly matter to the world – Jessie’s backstory is arguably the saddest sequence in all of Pixar history, and she nearly sways Woody to her side – but her wants are an obstacle. The film’s triumphant moment is when Woody gets her to change what she wants and come be Andy’s toy instead. As a result, this film gets a check-minus. It passes – but not in a very positive way.

That got pretty wordy. Here is the tl;dr version of the Want Test:

Does what the named female character want matter to the plot?

Yes – checkmark

Yes, AND this is true of multiple named female characters – check-plus

AND these characters help each other get what they want – check-double-plus

Yes, BUT her wants are an obstacle to a male character’s goal – check-minus

No – minus

Now let’s look at some other movies and see how they fare against the Want Test:

Tangled – check-plus. It’s a musical movie with an “I Want” song, and Rapunzel’s desire to see the lanterns sure as heck matters. So does Mother Gothel’s desire to keep Rapunzel prisoner and stay young forever. They’re opponents, so it doesn’t get a double-plus, but it’s still an excellent film.

Pirates of the Caribbean: Curse of the Black Pearl – check! Elizabeth Swann is a force to be reckoned with, and the world around her recognizes it right from the start. Alas, she is the only one of her kind. There are other named female characters here, but what they want (to slap Jack) is only ever played for laughs.

Toy Story 1 – minus. Bo exists, but she might as well be a sexy lamp (which, you know, she is). Toy Story 4, on the other hand, earns a check-double-plus in the end. As I’ve written before, that film is entirely about a man learning to put his wants second to what the women around him want. Because of this, Toy Story 4 might even deserve a check-triple-plus.

The Social Network – check-minus. Barely. The film begins with Erica Albright getting fed up with fictional-Mark-Zuckerburg’s assholery and dumping him, which implies that she wants to be treated better. The film gets a check because this want is what sets off the entire plot, and Mark spends the rest of the film trying to impress her in one way or another, but since her wants are one hundred percent in opposition to Mark’s wants, it’s a check-minus.

Mad Max: Fury Road – check-double-plus, easily. This film is a group of women’s journey towards freedom. They don’t all make it there, but the fact that they want it and strive for it literally changes the world.

Ocean’s 8 – check-double-plus. If you need to ask why, then we didn’t watch the same film.

Up – check-plus! Surprised? The female presence in this film isn’t obvious at first glance. But there are two named female characters – Ellie and Kevin (yes, the bird counts, this is a world with sentient animals). While Ellie spends all but the first five minutes of the film deceased, the want that she establishes in those first five minutes – to travel with Carl to Paradise Falls – drives literally everything that Carl does in the film. Kevin just wants to live her life as a mama bird, feeding and protecting her babies, and those wants do matter, in sharp contrast to the wants of the villainous Charles Muntz.

Moana – double-check-plus! Moana, Grandma Tala, and Te Fiti’s wants all align. I can’t remember Moana’s mother’s name ever being said in the film itself (according to the credits her name is Sina), but she has a key moment early on of helping Moana get what she wants, even though that means giving up some of what Sina herself wants, and that’s noteworthy too.

Now here’s where the fun continues: you could also replace “female character” with a different minority! Does what the named Asian-American character want matter to the plot? Does what the named disabled character want matter to the plot? Does what the named transgender character want matter to the plot? So you’ve “inserted diversity” into your film – but what are you doing with it? It’s not enough for us to just be there. We need to matter, as people with desires and agency. We need to matter in films, because we matter in reality. And we haven’t mattered for long enough.

Let’s have a conversation! What other films pass - or fail! - the Want Test? What media tests do you like to apply to the films you watch? Reblog, reply, or retweet with your thoughts!

14 notes · View notes

that-shamrock-vibe · 7 years ago

Text

Movie Review: It (Spoilers)

Spoiler Warning: I am posting this review two days after the movie came out in the U.K, so if you haven’t yet seen the movie don’t read on.

General Reaction:

Something is seriously wrong with me because the anxiety and nervousness I have had in trying to psyche myself up for seeing this movie has genuinely led me to believe I would have a heart attack while watching it, yet when the end credits started and the lights came up I was actually left feeling very happy with what I had just seen. Yes it was horrific in places and two maybe three scenes in particular I never want to see again which I’ll talk about further down when I talk about the jump-scares but when considering the movie as a whole I even thought those scenes were needed in order to make the parts I loved even better.

I would go so far as to say this is possibly my favourite horror movie, I’ve seen the 1990 miniseries with Tim Curry and I even had to psyche myself up to see that because of the fact I am someone, like Ritchie, who suffers from coulrophobia also known as the fear of clowns. Ever since I was a child I have hated clowns and when I was 12 or 13 I heard a quote that helped me realize why and that is “Beware of people who wear smiles as masks” which is a great life lesson in general but for me at the time when I heard that then thought about my fear of clowns who on the whole have painted on smiles. I think the only clowns that don’t particularly scare or creep me out are The Joker with maybe the exception of Cesar Romero from the 60s series who was made to look like a traditional clown as well as Jack Nicholson’s version because that guy just creeps me out anyway, and also animated clowns don’t scare me because they’re hand-drawn or computer generated so I know they’re not real, live-action clowns there’s an element of realness because they’re really there. It’s not my greatest fear but my greatest fear is the reason I’ll never see Annabelle.

This is actually quite a sophisticated horror movie much like A Nightmare on Elm Street in that it’s not just trying to bring a fear factor it is actually handling hard-hitting real-world issues and Pennywise is on the level of Freddie Kruger in terms of horror movie villains particularly in this iteration, in the 1990 version it felt like he was more an old pervert who had to wear a clown costume whereas here “It” was a performer, not just Pennywise but a Leper, a living painting, exorcist-looking zombie kids, this villain wore many masks and all in the name of him getting what he wanted which I feel is just survival.

1990 vs 2017:

So as I’ve mentioned, I have seen the 1990 miniseries starring Tim Curry. I was born in 1992 so since being very young I knew of the film’s existence but even the DVD cover and posters scared me because despite being a brilliant actor, Curry can be quite terrifying even in roles where it’s just him looking like him. But when it was announced that this more faithful version of the book was coming out I decided it was time to see it just so I could contrast and compare, also two of my friends had spent some time trying to decinsitise me to horror showing me movies like The Exorcist, the Final Destination movies, The Omen, Halloween and then the original It. Also it’s now been about a year since my friends started this mission which has actually been a great education. I’m nearly 25 years old and the only horrors I had seen prior to last year starred Johnny Depp or were musical-horrors.

I like the original It quite a lot, once you know what’s coming in terms of the lackluster jump-scares, because it is still a 1990 miniseries budget, then it is actually a lot of fun and quite funny in places. I haven’t read the original book because I have seen it and it’s the thickest book I’ve ever seen and I barely read novels. However as I mentioned above, this 2017 movie did scare me quite a bit but the scariest part going in was how intrigued I was to see it even though I knew it would scare me.

Characters:

So I’m going to talk about the characters in categories of story-significance and in the order of how much I liked them.

The Losers Club:

This movie may have been called It but as the film closes and the title comes up saying “It Chapter One” the subheading should be “The Losers Club” or “Losers” because the second movie is sub-headed “Pennywise” so will focus on Pennywise and this movie will focuses on the Losers Club.

Beverly Marsh:

The only main girl in the movie and she is the standout of the kids for me and I think a lot of people, I’m a guy and I can say that so I imagine in a similar vein to how Wonder Woman and Belle has spoken to a lot of female fans this year that Beverly will have the same affect particularly for young girls coming of age.

Firstly I couldn’t quite believe just how hard-hitting her solo story was, the school bullying was one thing but the fact they went full-book and tackled the father preying on her was so disturbing and in some ways scarier than a killer clown because while people can dress as clowns and kill people this sort of thing does happen and to show it in a horror movie is very apt.

Her cutting her hair was also a genuine flow because of what was happening and how she felt, although I did see it coming considering in the original she has short hair and her ponytail did look like extensions but again it was a very organic turn and kind of sadistically funny when you consider her hair is the same colour as Pennywise’s so when she was cutting it off and it was going down the plughole I did think Pennywise would somehow emerge from that, it’s a horror I expect everything to scare me.

Her encounter with It though was I think the only one that the miniseries got right, but much like I said Descendants 2 upped and improved what the first movie did, this reboot definitely plussed what the miniseries did from one small explosion in the sink to the bathroom being on it’s period. Which I wouldn’t use as an analogy if not for the fact that this scene symbolizes that exact thing.

But while that wasn’t a direct encounter with an actual horrific figure, her actual solo interaction with Pennywise almost caught me off guard because after she defeated her father and is standing there I realized that the scene in the trailer I thought was Stanley was in fact her...which doesn’t really say a lot for the fact I’m getting a boy and a girl mixed up. But I did like that it didn’t go directly from “Oh no Pennywise has Beverly” to “Oh no Beverly is mysteriously floating” we did actually see her talk with the clown and get to see his dead-lights before she floated.

Also, while she was apparently being wrongly accused of flirting and being sexual with a lot of guys, I did like how she came into her own with using her sexuality, both with distracting the creepy pharmacy clerk and also with her interactions with both Ben and Bill, although with Ben it wasn’t really flirting on her side it was more just being cheeky while Ben was failing at flirting but it does seem like she and Bill have a mutual flirtation going on. It does speak true to the original film where as an adult she kisses almost all of the losers upon their reunion.

Speaking of her adult version, I am very curious to see who they cast as the adult Beverly for the sequel; Annette O’Toole was one of four actors I knew in the original so I will be eagerly awaiting her casting and seeing if she can live up to Sophia Lillis here because while these kids and this cast in general are relatively unknown actors, that works in their favour because it allows them to make their mark and Bev definitely makes her mark.

My final thoughts are about a difference between the miniseries and movie because I can’t quite remember but I’m pretty sure that Bev never confronted her father in the miniseries, and if I’m wrong I apologize, because I don’t think the abuse story was shown in the miniseries. But here not only does she confront him but he dies, it’s not actually confirmed if the blow to the head she delivers to him kills him or if Pennywise kills him as it does seem that message “You Die If You Try” is written in his blood but just her having the inner-strength to confront her father may set her on a different path as an adult in order to potentially make better choices.

Ritchie Tozier:

You can see why Ritchie grows up to be a comedian, which he does in the miniseries but again that could change here. But the writing for Ritchie here is just so funny, way better than the miniseries. Right from the start he just has these witty one-liners and snipes at other characters that 99% of the time hit the mark, as with any movie there’s bound to be a dud every now and again but you forget about them instantly.

As I mentioned before I related to Ritchie in terms of clowns being his biggest fear, I actually related to three of the Losers; Ritchie, Ben and Bill, for different reasons though. Ritchie though had the worst Pennywise encounters in my opinion and yes I say encounters because both his encounters were my two least favourite scenes in the movie; the projector scene and the room full of clown costumes/mannequins. Although I did like his line when the other boys were realizing they had all seen Pennywise that he said “Is it only virgins who can see this thing”, interesting that Beverly didn’t mention seeing Pennywise because up to that point she hadn’t actually seen the clown.

I also think in a way Ritchie could be considered the least focused on because his encounters with Pennywise happened with the other Losers around and we didn’t meet any of his family or adults centering on him like some of the others’ family or the librarian who Ben dealt with. I don’t personally feel he was the least developed as I do think that was Mike because of the way this movie went but I’ll get to him further down.

With considering him as an adult, I am very much hoping they cast someone as comedic as Finn Wolfhard was here. I know the actor is in Stranger Things but I haven’t seen Stranger Things so don’t know about him prior to this but like I said I did really like him here. I don’t really have as much of an interest in who they cast as I do with Beverly and Ben but again he has to match what Finn did. Also Finn Wolfhard gave a much better portrayal of Ritchie than Seth Green did in the original for me.

Ben Hanscom:

Ben was very much the embodiment of me at that age, I’m guessing they’re about 12-13 here and Ben is very chubby as was I. Ritchie and Bill have troubles that resonate with me but Ben both in terms of looks and personality reminds me of me a lot.

The one thing I’m curious about is why the writers decided to give Mike’s main trait to Ben in that they made Ben the researcher of the group whereas in the original that was Mike. It makes more sense for it to be Ben because he was one of half the group to join the Losers during the movie so he had no friends prior and spent a lot of time in the library. I mean yes Mike also joined during the movie and in fact I think was last to do so but Ben strikes me as more of a bookworm here than Mike.

Ben’s encounter with Pennywise was possibly the creepiest one for me because while the headless man chasing him through the library storage maze did amuse me slightly in how he moved but when you heard Pennywise’s voice saying “Oi! Egg Boy!” and Ben turns around to see Pennywise chasing him that did genuinely make me jump.

I also loved the running gag about him liking New Kids on the Block, this movie was set between 1988 and 1989 which is the middle of the band’s original run and I’ve never had any interest in them but I take it from how they’re used in this movie that it’s uncool to like them. I loved the banter he and Beverly had first at the school and then in Ben’s room when she finds the NKOTB poster on the back of his door, quite funny.

Now with regards to Ben’s adult portrayal, in the original that role is taken by the late great John Ritter as Ben has slimmed down and is quite successful as are all the Losers, so for those who know that description are looking to cast someone maybe like John Ritter whereas fans of this movie that just know this movie are looking to cast someone like James Corden. If Corden can pull off an American accent I could see him in the role and it would be a great platform for him as well as a respectful change to the fact that I think Ritter is the only main actor from the miniseries who has sadly passed away, yes Jonathan Brandis who portrayed the younger Bill in the miniseries sadly took his own life about 15 years ago now which is tragic for someone so young but I digress.

Bill Denbrough:

Speaking of Bill he’s next on my list and the third of three Losers who I resonate with, Bill for his stutter because I suffered for a time with a stutter as a kid due to my fear of public speaking as well as being bullied at school.

His Pennywise dealings were simultaneously the rather adult theme of dealing with the death of his younger brother Georgie, which was utilized better here than in the miniseries. For a start, Georgie in the miniseries was only shown at the start meeting Pennywise and that was it, you never see him again. Whereas here he is used as either an illusion or disguise by Pennywise, the first of which is the scene from the trailers which is the main time the movie uses the “You’ll Float Too” theme but also the trailer lies in that they just show “Georgie” angrily shouting “You’ll Float Too!” whereas in the actual movie you see him decaying into an exorcist-like zombie before being destroyed by Pennywise who then shrieks and charges for Bill, I think it was obvious those two scenes were linked by the trailer anyway but seeing it, even knowing it was coming, was still quite haunting.

Also the start of the final confrontation between Pennywise and the Loser’s Club is when Bill finally comes to terms with Georgie’s death because even though “Georgie” has his arm ripped off it’s not really Georgie, we as an audience know it’s not Georgie and are screaming internally at Bill not to get too close because we know something horrific may happen but then after actually saying goodbye to his brother, Bill shoots him in the head which is his way of moving on and possibly a glimmer of hope in actually killing the clown. Really powerfully portrayed and the fact that one line in the middle of the movie where Bill says “Going home scares me more than going into this old decaying house” where they’re sure Pennywise lives is a real turning point for the character because up until then I wasn’t really sold on him, I was still not fully sold on him by the end but more-so after that speech.

Now with him as a leader, I definitely think he had the best motivation for this crusade against Pennywise because he had a personal stake in his demise, but I do not think he fully had either the confidence or respect of the others maybe apart from Mike and Bev. Stanley literally said he hates him which he may have then laughed off but there must’ve been some truth in that, Ben is a love rival for him with Bev and Ritchie I think never respected any sort of hierarchy.

On the subject of the love triangle between him, Beverly and Ben, as I mentioned before it does seem as if Bill and Beverly coupled up at the end of the movie but I do feel there is more to come from that in the sequel because Beverly knows Ben is her secret admirer and he was the one who brought her out of her floating state but Bill seems to be the one she’s chosen. The best thing about this is I don’t think Bill has a clue that Ben likes Beverly or that Ben knows Bill likes Beverly. This is partly what is so great about this movie, this is very honest to how teenage lives are and was a great balance against the horror aspects of the movie.

From my knowledge Bill isn’t really a leader as an adult when the group reunites because Mike is the only one who remembers Pennywise due to staying in Derry while everyone else moves away but again with lessening Mike’s role and making Ben the researcher it could be Ben who’s the de facto leader or Bill could still maintain that leadership role. Jaeden Lieberher is the only actor in this movie credited above Bill Skarsgárd which I feel is because of his award wins for St. Vincent and I do think he was the right for the role, I know Ty Simpkins was considered for the role and I do like him as I’ve seen him in Iron Man 3 and Jurassic World but do not feel he’d fit for this particular role, maybe Eddie.

Eddie Kaspbrak:

Speaking of Eddie, let’s talk about Eddie. I definitely think this was a step-up from the portrayal of the character in the miniseries because while the hypochondriac with the overprotective mother role was still there, this version had him confront his mother about it while he was a kid, whereas in the miniseries he learns about the deception as an adult.

I loved the comedy that came with the hypochondria, while a serious phobia for people it does always provide for great comedy material and here it was both comedic and sensible. Sensible because a lot of what he was saying was actually true; when he freaked out during the projector scene and thought he was having an asthma attack saying that it’s summer and that they should be out having fun rather than dealing with a killer clown. Also when he breaks his arm and Ritchie or Stan are readying to pop it back in, the way he’s just like “Don’t you dare, don’t you dare!” is hilarious. Also either he or Ritchie made the joke saying that Ben was dying because of having that H scar thanks to Henry Bowers which was also funny.

His main encounter with It was It as a leper, which played on the hypochondria but also provided another character besides Pennywise for It to take on. Also Eddie got the double-barrels in his first encounter because he got both the leper and Pennywise and I do think the leper was either trying to lead Eddie into the old decaying house or round to where Pennywise was who was waiting there with his balloon arrow arrangement. Also when the group goes into the house to confront Pennywise the first time, Eddie falls down a hole and breaks his arm only to then see Pennywise emerging from a safe or a box by contorting himself.

When the pharmacist’s daughter, who was also Beverly’s main bully, tells Eddie that all the medication he’s been taking on orders by his mother are actually placebos, that’s very much his world shattering because yes there’s a killer clown out to get him who can also manifest itself as a disease-ridden carcass, but to find out that the one person who is supposed to protect him and care for him up until that point had been deceiving him for all that time must have been such a life-altering moment for him. I did love when he stood up to him and delivered that great line of mispronouncing placebos as gazebos because you could tell the anger was there but at the same time it’s coming from a 12-13 year old kid.

On that note, I don’t know where this leaves Eddie as an adult because he learns about his mother’s deceit as an adult in the miniseries and then has to deal with that because he’s still living with her as an adult. Now in this reboot he knows about the deceit as a child so it remains to be seen where he’ll be as an adult.

I can’t quite predict who any of these adult portrayals could be, maybe apart from James Corden as Ben, but I did like Jack Dylan Grazier in the role, I don’t know his works before this but do know his uncle Brian Grazier as he has produced some good films and TV episodes.

Stan Uris:

Stan was a great example of religion in movies, now as with most horror movies religion plays a massive part; I still remember Regan, being possessed by the demonic spirit, violently pleasuring herself with a cross in what is a hilariously disturbing scene. But also a lot of old-school horrors deal with possession, exorcisms and general religious claptrap. So the fact they not only have religion on display so prominently but a different religion to Christianity or Catholicism is quite nice to see.

His encounter with It was comically creepy because it’s like It guises himself as something from a Tim Burton movie, in this case a distorted painting resembling the Scream. However this did come into play later when It disguised himself as whatever the kid he faced was scared of the most and before the final confrontation scene, It seemed to get hold of Stan and either start biting or sucking his face. This is very important for the sequel as this resonates with Stan as an adult but in the miniseries it’s just the fact that Pennywise almost eats him whereas here it is his own personal fear in quite a traumatic experience which of course leads to Stan saying he hates Bill for putting him through that.

I’m not going to saying who I feel will be good for the adult version of Stan for the pure and simple reason that I don’t know if they’ll stick his story thread as they’re probably changing a lot based on this movie. But for those of us who know either the book and/or miniseries, we know it’s a very meaty and significant role.

Mike Hanlon:

Mike, out of all the Losers, was definitely the least developed in this movie. As mentioned before it’s largely because they gave the reporter role to Ben in this version rather than Mike which throws what they’ll be doing with Mike as an adult out the window but we shall see.

I liked how they played the “race card” with Mike in this movie because he and his family are seemingly the only people of colour in the movie and in the 80s, sadly as with today, that was met with hostility. It has improved overtime but if Luke Cage taught us anything it is that racism still exists in certain neighborhoods.

His encounter with Pennywise was interesting because it was Mike’s greatest fear which was his family’s final moments before they died burning alive, also it’s never confirmed if the house he is talking about is the house Pennywise inhabits, but much like Bill with Georgie to have your dead family members used to strike fear into you is so tragic. Also the fact it’s the first time we see the Losers encountering Pennywise and all we see is distorted silhouette with the glowing yellow eyes was very haunting, and later troubling for me because I spent the night at my friends’ place whom I saw this movie with, as well as a date, and my friends have these two candle holders that have a phosphorescent ball in each one which in the dark and at night look reminiscent of Pennywise’s eyes...the troubling part again is this should’ve freaked me out but didn’t.

Now I have mentioned that I can’t really cast the adult versions of these characters aside from James Corden, but not so much a possibly choice as fan-casting I would love to see Chadwick Boseman portray adult Mike because I do think Chosen Jacobs looks like a pre-teen Chadwick Boseman. I know Boseman has commitments to the MCU right now as Black Panther but I think it would be great casting.

It/Pennywise:

Now from the Losers to the villain of the movie, I loved this character as a villain, more-so than the Tim Curry version. Pennywise here was portrayed in such a way that not only was he quite intelligent but much like Freddie Kruger he was a villain the heroes could try to have a conversation with.

Right from the start when we first meet Pennywise and he interacts with Georgie, not only does Bill Skarsgárd give this rather demonic child-like voice but the way he spoke reminded me slightly of Yoda particularly when he ran introductions “Pennywise, meet Georgie, Georgie, meet Pennywise”. Yes he provided comedy but he was also trying to entice children and Georgie is 7 so how do you talk to a 7 year-old? Like a child.

Now with regard to the jump-scares, the worst one for me was in the projector scene; we’ve seen from the trailers that It takes control of the projector and shows slide after side showing a photo of Bill’s mother turning into Pennywise and then the projector stop-starting showing photos of Pennywise until he disappears, next thing you know a seemingly giant version of the character bursts from the screen. The only humorous takeaway from this is when he emerges he grunts and when he turns to face Stan he grunts, in my head all I was thinking because my mind was trying to protect me by thinking of something I liked and in The Rocky Horror Picture Show in the “Touch-a, Touch-a, Touch-a, Touch Me” scene when Magenta and Columbia are watching from the screen, the noises they make right before the chorus was similar to this. But this scene itself, I mean seriously Pennywise looks terrifying and larger than life.

When considering Bill Skarsgárd, as I mentioned in my review of Atomic Blonde which Skarsgárd co-starred in I really find him attractive but realizing who he is and who he’ll play I thought I was going to be stuck between the guy I think is attractive and the character he portrays who will give me nightmares but again the fear factor hasn’t lingered after the movie and while I don’t get the “sexy clown” angle because Swedish clowns are still terrifying to me but he himself is rather dishy.

As I said earlier when comparing the two Pennywise portrayals, this version especially epitomized how much of a performer the character is. Almost every time he has an encounter with the kids he’s putting on a show; whether it be artistic visually like his encounters with Mike and Beverly or artistically threatening literally with Stan or being a literal threat like with Ritchie, Ben and again Stan. Him using Georgie as an illusion at first was just that, an illusion, to lull Bill into a susceptible state to then pounce on him. The leper and living painting were very much actual threats as they were forms of It as Pennywise was.

Now this is only the first of two parts and we don’t see It’s true form until the end of the second movie but when Pennywise revealed his dead-light to Beverly by widening his mouth and showing that the light is on the inside with the screams of previous victims calling out, I thought that was both an amazing visual effect and a major improvement thus far to how it looked in the 1990 miniseries which was essentially a giant spider with headlights.

Also, quite clearly I am guessing Bill Skarsgárd did not contort himself to fit into that box only to then reassemble himself and instead it was a professional contortionist body double or again amazing visual effects but just the artistry of how Pennywise entered a scene showcased how much of a performer he is, even when he revealed himself to Beverly in his lair and started dancing before she tried to escape showed that.

One of my friend’s who I saw this movie with has told me numerous times that he once had a dream where he had a conversation with Pennywise which he said was preferable to going to school and this was the Tim Curry version, but I can actually see myself having an intellectual tête-à-tête with Pennywise. When he tried striking a deal with the other Losers to leave and live if they left him Bill, I was genuinely impressed because usually these mass murdering horror villains take no prisoners or leave anyone in their sights alive. It made me all the more excited for the sequel, not only because we find out more about Pennywise’s history but also because the kids will be adults they should be capable of holding a conversation.

As I’ve said, Pennywise is one of my favourite horror movie villains which shows a considerable malfunction in my brain considering clowns are my second greatest fear but he definitely left an impression both minor-league traumatizingly and also impressively.

Bowers Club:

Henry Bowers is an absolute sociopath, I mean seriously this teenager needs to be institutionalized with a straight jacket and very tight straps constricting him. I was surprised the movie went so far as to show Henry starting to carve his name into Ben’s stomach. Even his cronies were shocked by that yet he was adamant in doing that but it wasn’t a controlled adamant facade, it was genuinely a child wanting control. Again along with the changes from the miniseries; Pennywise didn’t age-up Henry and 27 years later recruited him as a footsoldier, he instead was recruited by Pennywise getting him to kill his own abusive father which seemed to make something in his brain snap and got him to go after the Losers, particularly Mike. Bowers seemed to show particular hatred towards Mike and Ben but hated all the Losers regardless. I am also quite shocked his role in the movie ended by him falling down the well and seemingly dying, if they did somehow bring him back for the sequel I imagine Pennywise will have a hand in it but the guy ricocheted off the walls during the drop so it’s almost certain he’s dead or critically injured.

I found his cronies to be bland at best, the most interesting for me was Patrick who falls victim to Pennywise. The others just seemed like every other stereotypical one-dimensional Stephen King created bad boy created. including the ones from the miniseries. It’ll be interesting to see if the surviving members return for the sequel to avenge their fallen leader or if they just disappear.

Adults of Derry:

I was fascinated by the grotesque and unsavory portrayal of pretty much every adult in Derry. It will be interesting to know if this is just how we’re seeing them through the eyes of the kids or if this is how they actually are but I have said before that if Stephen King has taught me anything it’s that if/when I get the chance to go to America I’m avoiding Maine, because I doubt I’ll find Storybrooke around there.

Beverly’s father, the pharmacist and Eddie’s mother especially are three prime examples of how grotesque this town is. The fact the pharmacist is basically a seedy pervert towards Beverly is quite creepy although he could just be a seedy individual the perversion could just be read into. Beverly’s father on the other hand met a very deserving end and I always give credit to actors who portray hateful characters because they’re probably nice people in real life so props to Stephen Bogaert for portraying such a grotesque individual. Eddie’s mother is both grotesque to look at and has a very unhealthy purse-string attachment to her son where she would go so far as to let Eddie grow up feeding his hypochondria.

Other parents like the fathers of Bill, Bowers and Stan weren’t shown as bad people to the same degree as the other three were; Bill’s father was trying to make his son come to terms with the death of his other son, Stan’s father’s greatest crime is not being encouraging enough and Bowers’ dad I’m guessing knew about his son’s antisocial behaviour and yes went about it the one way by using the gun against his son but was just trying to put his son on the right path.

Other adults like the librarian and Mike’s uncle weren’t good people but also weren’t terrible people either. I’d just be fascinated to know if when the kids are adults and return to Derry if the adults are still shown in the same light.

My Cinema Experience:

So I know I often talk about my cinema experiences but I only do it when there’s reason to and my first horror cinematic experience is very much reason to. Now of course a recurring theme throughout the movie are the red balloons Pennywise carries around either singularly or as part of a performance piece. As the movie started and the opening company logos rolled, there is a figure in a yellow raincoat and hood with a red balloon facing the screen as the balloon floats there reminiscent of Georgie. The disturbing part isn’t that this figure appears in the cinema screen at various points of the movie it is that when we get a look at him in the foyer he’s a rather short old man...creepy as hell! Also on a side-note, I’ve had “99 Luftballons” in my head all day not just because when I woke up this morning a red balloon my friend acquired from the cinema was left floating next to the sofa I was sleeping on.

Overall I rate this movie a strong 9/10, there were some acting choices I wish weren’t made because they almost pulled focus from the actual brilliance in the movie but this is not only my favourite horror movie but a surprising favoured movie from 2017.

So that’s my review of It, what did you guys think? Post your comments and check out more Movie Reviews and other posts.

22 notes · View notes