@@trinaq lol I took my 8 year old to see this, because he had been begging since he saw the first trailer, he was a little tense when the scene started. When the change happened he laughed and that should say alot
All I wanted out of this movie was more scenes of Pennywise being creepy. There was almost none of that. The best scene was the one under the bleachers.
definitely, I thought that it would be more of a cat and mouse game of the adults trying and failing to protect the new kids in the town while trying to get their items, instead they just used flashbacks of jumpscares that they never mentioned in the first film and its hard to be scared when u know that they survive, and yes I guess u could say that its based off a book so they were all going to survive in the first film too but I still loved the scares in the first one especially the bully and georgie getting killed
It is natural that it is harder to scare more secure, forty-somethings than kids, but it means they simply should've tried harder to burrow into their contemporary fears, not less.
It's written by the same fucking dude as The Nun and The Curse of La Larona. The only reason It 1 was good was because he had a co-writer and was forced to collaborate. Here, he had full creative control and it fucking shows.
it is not a literal space turtle like Disc-world. it's more like It counterpart, an entity that vomit galaxies, gives lives and empowers positive emotions, like friendship, love, etc. that the Losers see in the shape of a turtle. It's not a literal Turtle floating in outer space. that is like saying Cthulhu is just a big squid
@@606danco i think you misunderstood. I just said that the movie is so flawed, that the spider thing (sorry, haven't read the book) would not have saved the film.
One thing you forgot to mention is that the town is almost totally deserted in Ch. 2, except for the fairgrounds scenes and one scene when Bill gets the bike. What made Ch. 1 so effective is that there were people all around, the town felt "lived in"....and yet everyone turned a blind eye to the problems. If you've ever lived in a small town, this is eerily realistic - people put up a facade of happiness and disregard people's issues, even going so far as to become angry and defensive when people bring them up. Here, there's no one around, it's deserted except when the plot needs it to be populated and so it feels like a movie set. When Bill tells the young kid to leave Derry, it's not as dramatic because it seems like everyone already has left.
I concur, it might have been effective had they did employed the tactic of "Adults turning a blind eye to the supernatural oddities taking place around Derry" as the first movie had. Here, it was just a ghost town, and nobody really showed up except for Greta the bully and the pharmacist.
I have lived in a small town, and although I agree with your first point, about the people being around making it lively (Which just makes it feel more real). I have to say the second point about a blind eye is not always true. At least it was not in my home town.
"how exactly did Native Americans figure out how to kill an inter dimensional being of almost unlimited power? They couldn't even kill colonial settlers armed with musket." Well if you had your hands busy trying to fend off an inter dimensional being, the colonials are somewhat of an after thought.
@@TheBigMclargehuge If they didnt fight back they still would have been ravaged by small pox and have to deal with encroaching settlers. I dont blame them for fighting, i know we would have in their position
@@DylanJo123 how do you even know if you're encroaching on nomads? They were slash and burn agriculturalist who never stayed in one spot. We had developed agriculture methods did they want any part of it? No they wanted to continue trashing an ecosystem with unsustainable Stone age practices then moving on like they always did. The smallpox is regrettable that's not like our medicine was advanced enough to know how badly it was going to affect them. Regardless of the unfortunate scenarios surrounding our relationship with the natives, they were slavers who had no qualms slaughtering women and children of any race, and there's no excusing that.
Nobody is holding me accountable for the quality of my writing and I'm getting paid no matter what just for hitting my page count. Boo! Boo, again! Boo, three times, fast!
@James Esparza John Wick is not so exceptionnal has way too much references, easter eggs from older action movies from the 70's, 80's , 90's and some in the 2000's . There's even a scene in John Wick 2 where it's completely similar/recycled from Ultraviolet starring Milla Jovovich . Have the feeling that many has forgotten older action movies with our action heroes ( Stallone, Schwarzenegger, Vandamme, Seagal, Lundgren, Dudikoff, Norris, Gibson, Paré, ...) And the thousands of B-movies .
Nah lets completely undermine the tension and suck all the meaning out the scenes instead, cos handsome faced mans gonna forget he's supposed to be terrified and think of a good one liner, over, and over again......good right?
While I did like the actor's performance, his storyline didn't really have any impact on the main plot, and once he's killed by Richie, he's never spoken about again. They should have gone with a similar plot from the book, where Bowers, not Beverly's abusive husband, is possessed by Pennywise, and lures Bill's wife into his lair. That would have given Bowers FAR more purpose, in my opinion. 🎈
@@TheCriticalDrinker to be fair to the movie (though this could have been corrected), the book didn't do much with Bowers either. Or the subplot with Bill's wife betting kidnapped.
Yeah that shit was fucked up. This movie seems to have played most of its script close to the book (naked grandmas withstanding), but I'm really glad that sort of thing isn't allowed in movies, cause it didn't make sense in the book and I thought it was gross and pointless, and it sure as shit wouldn't have made sense in a movie either
They were, in fact, often warmongering slavetakers who clearcut so much forested land that we actually have more trees in the US today than when European colonists arrived. The cult of the "Noble Savage" was a ridiculous conceit which, unfortunately, has taken firm root in popular culture. ='[.]'=
@@Raycheetah You're reply is perfect. Did you know that the Carib tribe in the "Caribbean" used to kidnap females of other tribes, impregnate them, make them deliver their babies and then eat said babies? Such a magical culture!
@@margolane3361 OMG that's gruesome! Almost like the things Christianity did in the entire middle ages. People act like europeans were "culuted" or "well educated" which they were not. I am not defending canibalism but srsly.. Burning women because they were "witches" isn't really educated either. I honestly can't explain why tribes are always portrayed "magical" or smth. I guess it is because they used to take drugs like mushrooms and such which gives people weird trips but idk
I thank you for using "Rian Johnson" as an extremely negative verb. I hope you will continue to do so, and eventually it is an accepted term in the English language.
Felt weirdly structured, like there was a talky bit then a spook set piece over and over again until they end up in the sewer and beat him by not being afraid and I figured that we learnt this last time. Why does he kill Eddie the moment he feels the most confident? I thought it fed on fear? And kills em when they are most spooked? Why does it kill the unconscious gay guy? He was standing up for himself and didn't seem to be aware that pennywise even existed. How is that feeding on fear exactly? I dont get how the monster works and beating him was kinda meh. The scare scenes started to blend together for me and that's a shame cause I really liked the first one. They had a stellar cast and resources were through the roof but this ended up just being "okay" to me tbh
Holy crap, it's the real... *_you_* I love your content. Anyway, in the books it explained that he'll eat pretty much anyone at anytime. He likes children because their age tastes better. He also doesn't really "feed" on fear...he just likes it that way. Fear is like a seasoning to him...he will eat adults and kids alike and he turns into whatever they fear most to "season" em up. There's this type of bat that just annoys the shit out of its prey to raise their blood pressure, then they go to a main artery and the blood just geysers out...kinda the same with Pennyboi, just scares the shit outta ya for as long as he can then you taste better when he eats you. I've read the book a couple times, but the most recent was about a year ago... I read a lot so forgive me if I get any details wrong. Someone will be sure to correct me, eventually. In the book, if I remember correctly the gay guy did try to fight back a bit before being thrown off the bridge, but pennywise still ate him because he was scared of downing...and when he thought he was safe close to the shore he saw a freaky clown, cried for help, then started getting munched on, or something like that. To be fair, I haven't seen how they depict this in the movie, so bad communication on the film's part may be to blame. I'm not defending the movie's flaws with details from the book, if you don't have context it's the movie's responsibility to provide it, and if you're still confused the movie clearly failed in that regard. At this point I don't remember all the details of your comment, but you brought up some fair questions. I focused mainly on your confusion about fear-eating...sorry for my rambling nature, this was a very impromptu response so forgive my general lack of structure. I'm not here to get into arguments with strangers (even ones whose content I enjoy 😅), but I'm totally open to conversation! Hope I could help a bit... thanks for giving me the time, if you read all this. I know walls of text scare people away... I'm working on it... Peace!
It eats kids, but the suffering and strife of Derry is what really sustains the part of It that resides in the macroverse, which is why in the book it takes a powerful event to start and close each cycle. At one point in the novel Mike ponders whether It even actually needs to eat the kids, he thinks It might choose to eat because humans have a biological fear of being eaten by predators thus really tapping into the fear glands, but its intentionally never fleshed out why It chooses all the victims it does to make it more lovecraftian.
@@jailbird1133 the problem is that there is so much material in the book that a lot had to be cut to fit a film format. I still think that It would make a really good tv show to better fit the format of the book
The gay couple was in the book, they were 20+ something, It doesnt always eat/kill children (but prefers to) but Richie Tozier was NOT gay in the source material. Oh, and btw, The Thing spider head ripoff was sacrilegious
Jesus, when did Bruce Wayne become an internet conspiracy theorist? Not every time a gay character is in a film is bad. I do agree one being forced is retarded though.
And this, kids, is exactly why the miniseries back in the day actually had the kids and the adult plotlines intertwined with flashbacks rather than each being its own separate thing. Because they knew the adult one alone would be pretty dull after everyone had already seen the story of the kids (especially if the finale in that was already HUGE). But nooooo new filmmakers were like "This is stupid, we know better, we have CGI!" and then "Uh oh now part 2 is gonna be tough to keep interesting, maybe they were on to something when they did it like in the book.. throw more loud noises and CGI jumpscares!"
I think that's why most Steven King fans were like "Ok the second half of IT sucks, so the movie I'm looking forward to as a King fan is Doctor Sleep in November, it's a better book, and the film is being adapted as a full sequel to the Kubrick classic!". At least It Chapter 2 wasn't as much of a letdown as Pet Sematery was!
I always wondered why Pennywise just fked around the entire time instead of actually killing or splitting up the Losers? He's been waiting for revenge for 27 years, but just doesn't get the job done? The first film dealt with him using their childhood fears against them, so why didn't he do that again with their adult fears and insecurities? Bill was a supposed famous writer who still deep down had his guilt regarding Georgie's death. Why didn't Pennywise just take the form of Georgie for Bill the entire film, accusing him of not truly caring about him bringing up the whole fake sickness thing. While also mocking him and trashing his writing and stuff for not paying attention to him. You know, stuff that a kid younger brother would do. Beverly trying to move past abusive relationships. Why not have her husband chase her the entire time. The paranoia and doubt on whether it's really her crazy husband who took the time to find her or just Pennywise fking with her. Trauma and paranoia from past abuse doesn't just go away. Richie is a closeted homosexual. The human fear of being looked at as different and not as a man. There was so much material Pennywise could've used from that and every single one of the group members to get into their heads and cause more conflict within the group. To push them apart. The killings of kids inbetween can be kind of like a lunch break for Pennywise during his main crusade. Cos you know, even a monster bent on revenge has gotta eat. Everything would have a purpose and not just be a scare and mindless killing for the sake of it. Pennywise has a character, utilize it. A supernatural entity using human adult fears, past sins and trauma to destroy your psyche and eat you is where the true horror should've been focused on. That's what's scary. It's not entirely the supernatural element that scares most. It's the human elements.
Exactly I agree with everything although he did torment bill with the other kid he couldn’t save and I liked how they didn’t let it be where bill redeemed himself- nah he let another kid die lol. But George trashing his writing!! That’d have been great like showing up in the secondhand rose thrift shop in the background or something teasing him. And I really agree I wish Tom (Bev husband) followed her and got possessed like in the book (same as bills wife)
The fact that Tom wasn't in this movie at all really is a huge black spot on this movie. Henry and him are It's main ways of attacking the Losers when they are adults.
You need to write a screenplay. I'd watch your version. Sounds way more interesting. Also we need that Patrick Hockstetter death adapted to screen. Holy shit that part is creepy in the book. Could always do the orgy scene for the adults. Have them all bone before going in to face Pennywise again. (Not serious. Don't think an orgy fits into a movie like this for adults and definitely not children.)
IT is an alien being . Not a human person with our priorities and way of looking at things. You say revenge= main thing , but still gotta eat. That is backwards. IT exists to eat ,essentially. If it has any other motivations , they are too alien for us to grasp. Also , her grasp on the flow of time and sense of urgency is likely very different than ours , as an immortal being .To try and pigeonhole it as acting exactly like any dime-store bad guy would if handed shapeshifting powers sounds very boring.
The man was given a star wars film to test his mettle and he spread his cheeks and shat all over it. he wanted his name to be known and rememebered? Well there ya go.
But he is the worst director...... Takes biggest movie franchise in the world and killed it in a combine 10-20 minutes of a near three hour film. That takes talent
Man, the scene with the old lady was SO good in the book. Genuinely creeped me out and it was the scene I was most excited to see translated to the screen when I heard they were making a new version. The fact that they turned it into something literally laughable still vexes me.
Are you saying The last Jedi wasn't a parody, that I was ment to take it seriously? Because that Mary poppins scene of Princess leia flying around in space without a spacesuit was hilarious.
I thought the naked grandmother was the most disappointing scare. Because it had a chance to be scary in a DISTURBING way (think of the old lady from The Shining), and instead it looked like a cartoonish troll doll.
The only thing that was interesting about the book was how the kids came together as a group to fight a monster. Nobody wants to see a bunch of adults frown at a monster designed to frighten children.
Exactly, the adult segments were always the weakest part of the story for me, as an alien clown scaring children is a MUCH more terrifying concept than adults. 🎈
But the biggest question is... How many people in the mental facilities suffer from phobias without succumbing to Pennywise? Their fear is taken to a level beyond even that of a child.
@@TheBigSlugger nah, in the books it is specified that kids flesh tastes better after he scares them. That's the reason It plays cat and mouse with kids. The scared they are the better they taste.
It really felt like a horror comedy. Especially to me when this chained monster french kissed the fat mother. Couldn't continue with the popcorn though.
I was bracing myself for this: I’ve always felt like the “grown-up part” of the novel is far worse than the “kid part” and I expected the movies to be no different.
I know people say that the original ending was a letdown, but I think battling psychically with an eldritch entity in another dimension is better than shouting insults at it. Also, thank you for talking about the humor! It was too much! My viewing got more laughs from the audience than most comedy films. [Edit]: Thanks for all the upvotes guys!
ImperialWarrior6490 Reading it at the time, the ending was very metaphysical with the battle taking place inside the heads of the humans and It. Richie thinks of this and It recoils as if slapped, etc. Pretty goofy shit, earnestly written by an author with a massive drug and alcohol problem. I thought the book was ok but it was over bloated and not King’s best by any stretch. Also, the back and forth nature of the narrative made the childhood portion of the novel almost irrelevant and I found myself reading as fast as possible to get to the “now” parts, where the characters fates were a mystery. Breaking the story into two linear films actually makes it work better for those unfamiliar with the book.
@bruce wayne The director said earlier in the year that the Turtle was going to play a massive part in the movie. That's also kind of a reason this felt (to me) like a let down because he was never in the movie. I was so excited to see the Turtle and what that would lead to that... yeah. This is just me though, we're all allowed our own thoughts and opinions on the film and I'm glad you gave yours.
@@sdfried4877 I can definitely understand where you're coming from. I actually listened to the audio book instead of reading the book and it was really good, Steven Webber narrates it very well. It was also over 44 hours long, which is crazy long! But the way he read It felt very chilling at times and pumped up the ending a lot. I could see myself with the Losers in both battles, especially the when they're older. But thanks for telling me your opinion, gives me more to think about.
ImperialWarrior6490 I’m not saying it wasn’t well written but if you told people standing in line for the movie last summer, hey, they don’t kill the clown and nobody dies, except for Stan, who commits suicide as an adult, they’d be like Wtf! This is exactly how the original book is structured. Half the book is prologue to the really important story.
@@haillobster7154 He made a 2.5 hour video about a 1 hour GoT video listing with quick edits everything that's wrong. He compiled an encyclopedia of error about a single episode. He is my hero.
@Dutch Van Der Linde You‘re right, Dutch. As always. Funny side note: I think I‘ve seen you in many comment sections of various other channels I regularly watch
I watched the first 10 minutes of the movie, and that was about enough. I rolled my eyes and figured the review would be better than the movie itself. Glad I was right. Saved me two hours and 20 minutes. Also, anyone who watches Animal Kingdom couldn't miss the irony in the casting of the main stereotypical gay basher.
I don't watch horror movies, because I have vivid imagination, but I can listen to the drinker discuss those movies like forever. And that laugh, I mean it is the best thing in RU-vid. Thank you.
Don't worry, you can watch this movie. It's basically avengers Endgame, but with dismemberment sometimes. It's definitely an action dark comedy, not a horror movie.
Please don't show Luke Skywalker drinking the space-alien manatee milk anymore; it's gross and nasty. Love the Critical Drinker. "Go away, now." And thanks for the "It" warning.
@Phyllis Dicks I disagree. I think that image is the perfect symbolism for the pathetic state of story-telling and agenda-driven garbage being past off as entertainment. Just that one second clip and the reality of current day Hollyweird is brought back into focus. I hope Critical Drinker keeps it, as it is perfect. Just as the images of Ruin Johnson and Jar Jar Abrams are the perfect image of complete incompetence of a Director.
@@mmoaddict4291 All that is true, but everywhere you look on RU-vid, everybody has to show that scene. It's old, it's tired, it serves no further purpose but to just be nasty. And I mean nasty in the sense of filthy and disgusting, not mean and hateful. We get the point. The rest is garbage.
Since many RU-vidrs like to use that scene of Luke drinking the milk, I've taken to fast-forwarding it past the clip because it makes me sick what they've done to his character. I just can't take that scene anymore!!
Nah SK doesn't always write bad endings. It's more like a wheel of fortune with him. Sometimes you get good or at least solid endings like in Pet Sematary, sometimes you get bad or just downright silly endings like in Needful Things and sometimes you get endings that are so insulting and infuriating that you have to reconsider every choice you made that lead you to reading this story... *cough cough* Dark Tower *cough cough*
Yep, Duma Key was one of his best books with stunning characterisations and a great plot but in the end he just gave up on the characters and did what he so often does, invoke some supernatural powers who explain everything. I was sooo dissappointed!
In the novel, the adult "Losers" were sent off on their own to fully remember the events of their childhood. The entire reasoning was different from the film, though. There was no "relic hunt" garbage. Each person was to go off on their own for a couple hours in the afternoon (after the ordeal at the restaurant) in order to "fill in the gaps" of their memory loss. This will help them to completely remember why it is so important to them that they made the promise to come back, and why IT must be destroyed. Although splitting up and going alone doesn't seem to be the logical thing to do, Mike explains to them that he just "feels" that this is what they're supposed to do, and that it "feels right". As each of them depart to go their (temporary) separate ways, they also feel that they MUST have these encounters apart from one another. It's more of a reference to the "good" interdimensional "turtle guardian" guiding them in the right path. Of course, the terrible remake fails completely in it's "reimagining" of the story in that it is completely a bad idea for them to go alone. There is literally no explanation or mentioning of "anything" "guiding" them, other than the completely newly-created "dream" that Beverly has of their future deaths. Of course, this completely changes the story of IT in that the "heroes" are no longer doing anything "heroic" by killing a monster that's killing others, but instead killing a monster entirely for the selfish reason of self-preservation. With the exception of Pennywise luring the little girl beneath the bleachers, and for some funny one-liners, this movie was a dumpster fire that completely smears the story told through the novel. I just give up on hoping for someone to actually do an R-Rated HBO miniseries of IT that sticks close to the book. I'll just reread the novel again.
It’s unfortunate that they took such a brilliant novel full of symbolism, slow building psych horror and rich character development only to use it as the backbone for a pretty forgettable jump scare fest.
the thing would have been better as a hulu or netflix show series, the book was like 1400 pages long and had plenty of material that could be stretched in the length of a short season.
@@jamesesparza6893 I agree. However, Stephen King has long ago shown he doesn't give a fuck about the quality of the adaptations for his work. As long as they roll up a wheelbarrow full of cash, he signs off.
Rob T God Dammit! If you think the rampant character assignations, massive plot holes, the universe destroying decisions that retroactively damage all the previous movies, the far left wing identity politics and overt misandry of the Last Jedi are equal to the relatively few blunders of this movie. Then I don’t what to tell you?
Rob T ok let’s do this! I propose a battle of examples. What in your mind would be the equivalent of the iconoclasm of Luke Skywalker? A character so ingrained in our modern myths that he is know the world over. What character in your mind suffered the same fate?
Rob T ahhh, internet balls, you gotta love it. Sure you win, IT chapter 2 is easily the equivalent to The Last Jedi disaster. I’m sure it will divide the fan base, sink future Stephen King movies and destroy all the merchandising that the King universe has put out. You win this stupid argument.
It's funny that a drunk youtuber can sum up and vocalize my disappointment in this movie better than me!! Thank you for interpreting with words, the look of disappointment on my face when I completed this film....
that's part of what makes the original part 2 my favorite. Even rewatching it now, it makes you laugh in places even as it sends that familiar chill down your spine. Maybe they wanted to replicate that, and just missed the mark, i dunno.
I love this review, I was laughing on and off all the way through. The inserts of old spice man were so funny. I have good memories of the original IT mini series and so struggled to accept this remake, in fact I gave up on it after the first film. After watching this video I can see I made the right decision!
Mr Drinker - Thank you so very much for not ever having an Irritating Intro with the BS Hip Hop beats and crazy Title screen!! This is why I come back and listen !!!
Comedy needs to stay in it's lane....I mean...nowadays, every member of the team/group in movies are comedians, sharp and witty,and to the point that's not real life....growing up, I was the funny guy in the group...why?...cause I was that good? nope...cause as much as I love my friends, they were just not witty or funny...but nope...example: Tony Stark, Captain, Rhodey, Black Widow,Thor,and Black Panther-all could perform sets at a comedy club....Batman & Punisher-two very traumatized individuals(rightfully so), now have jokes....when bad stuff is happening or has happened to an individual....no place for comedy at all. Nothing funny should be happening in IT...kids are being abused,traumatized, and killed...who would have humor in this situation? I love laughing and funny as much as the next person,but when serious stuff is going on,that stuff has to go on the back burner for now.
This kind of movie is exactly like how they teach students these days to write movie. Comedies are getting pushed out of the market to be turned into a "mode" which basically means getting comedy in every movie like a Marvel movie.
I agree completely. This awful trend has been gaining steam for years. And it means we often get adolescent dreams of invulnerability instead of compelling characters and powerful drama.
@Bruce Wayne dude chill I'm from iran and this kinda brainwashing has been happening for decades but you guys had at list a few good years before it turned back to what is normal for most of the world
I agree, in reality, there's usually only about one or two members of a group who are prone to witty, snarky comments, but nearly every fictional group of friends will have everyone just standing around, making sarcastic remarks like its their day job ("The Avengers" franchise, "Stranger Things"). While I agree that some people make jokes in order to deal with tense situations, the humour just felt forced here, and didn't feel natural. As the Critical Drinker pointed out in his "Stranger Things" Season 3 review, the show isn't really meant to be funny, as the first two seasons did contain a handful of jokes here and there to lighten the mood, but nevertheless took itself and its characters as seriously as possible. However, the latest season tried TOO hard to make it more funny that it came off as goofy, such as the wacky, almost out of place "Evil Russians" plot.
I blame Marvel for this trend, and it's exactly their particular brand of smug, snarky quipping that put me off their movies. After all, if the character doesn't take the threat seriously, how the hell is the audience supposed to?
The thing people really love and remember about It is the kids, no one felt as much for them as adults. But in the book modern (then) time and flashbacks from the childhood timeline alternate upp till the last 10-20% of the book. But if you put all the adult stuff in one movie then you actually already start with a problem.
One thing no one noticed was how poorly portrayed that girl's abusive relationship was. He didn't seem normal at all. You mentioning that she was successful made the whole thing even worst. What kind of sucessful person keeps a lunatic in their house and f@#k$ it and then leaves as though that never happened? Did she love him or not?
That's a big thing in the book, iirc, she falls in love with the guy because he's like her father and she thinks she deserves it. But since they made the father a creep rather than an abuser in chapter 1, it's not easy to see the parallels
@@oplars6487 Thanks for the explanation, although saying he was abusive would be an understatement. The guy was deranged. I'm wondering how she coped on other days with someone like that.
@Little Foot Good point little one. In my opinion, It's better if movies that are meant to have a realistic basis, have it. Yeah, even if there's a weird creature in it.
I can't believe I'm saying this but I actually prefer the 1990 mini-series to this. Part one of this movie was really well done but part two was so bad it ruined that and pretty much the entire story. When a 30 year old mini-series with a cast of mostly TV has-beens trumps a big budget two-part movie that's really bad!
They tried to kill him with the ritual but the deadlights killed them. Mike intentionally hides that from the Losers club because Mike believes that they believe in IT enough to kill the deadlights so that's why they did it and Mike was horrified by the ritual not working.
@Robert Boucher Jr. The titular character is IT not pennywise therefore it can be many forms not just the clown. Pennywise is just his favorite form and it appears quite a decent time in the film. People got fixated with the character and wanted to see him more in the film which is different.
@Day Wither Agree with the bathos problem but it doesn’t ruin the whole movie. It’s good but it has issues of course. I would say it’s a worthy sequel but not better than the first one. I give it a 6, 6.5 or a 7 at the most haven’t decided yet haha. It didn’t completely meet my expectations, much less exceeded them but was a satisfying ending in my opinion. You know what was the real problem? Leaving the writing to the dude who wrote the anabelle and nun films. In chapter one he was involved but cary fukanaga was there too and another one but I don’t remember the name. I think muschietti helped since he had insights on the writing and that’s why the movie is not a complete mess perhaps. I don’t know why they leave such important films in the hands of certain people but oh well.
The scene that stuck out the most for me was when Eddie was stabbed in the face by Bowers. Hes cracking jokes about Bowers's mullet and just acting in a comical manner. Just...why?
@Harvey Weinstein Ejaculated On Me you are right. Such a good scene kind of ruined by that. But now, some people react comically when in shock so is that valid here? Since eddie was a really hyperactive nervous person.
Its pretty easy to spot the non book readers when you see people complain about this. Pennywise prefers kids due to how they feel fear but yea, a hungry clown gonna eat
Yeah Pennywise snacks on fear, but the todash shapeshifters take anything when they're hungry, case in point, the one who feeds on laughter trying to feed on Roland Deschain.
What i really liked with IT chaper 2, because i had absolutley no expectations and was rather positively surprised, was that they actually did a very good work of choosing older actors to fit the younger ones. They really manage to have you believe they actually could be an older version of the children. Also in the same way i loved how they transcended between present and past with no real way to tell when this was going to happen, and did it in such a well executed way i have to really think to come up with a movie where that had been so well executed before. Comparing how they chose younger actor for Disney's Solo, this IT movie really pulled it off, FUCK DISNEY. However bad, Men in black 3 is the only second movie i can think of where they did this too..
The shortest war on record is the Anglo-Zanzibar War from 1896. It lasted between 38 and 45 minutes. I just thought it was funny that Critical Drinker was making a literal factual statement.
I didn't watch the first chapter of It, but holy crap... I watched the second movie in theater, and i noticed that something was off with kids' faces. It felt like faces were Deepfaked. Did they really were de-aged with CGI?
@@nickcollins9893 They did, yes. They wanted to keep the flashback scenes in the same year the kids first encountered Pennywise. However with the time gap between filming and the effects of puberty, they couldn't shoot the kids "as is" hence the CGI.
So the Losers are a Successful Writer, a Successful Comic, a Successful Architect, a Successful Designer, and the Old Spice Guy. Because Maine is pumping out endless success stories.
I think they made a mistake by splitting the childhood and adult portions. One of (many) strong points in the book is the pacing and switching between these periods that gets more rapid as the story progresses. First it is sections, then chapters , then paragraphs and in the end sentences. It really gives you that feeling that you are rushing headlong towards the inevitable conclusion of it all, whatever it may be.
12:13 "I've also got this suspicion that a lot of stuff was left on the cutting room floor" CORRECT! Muschietti made a FOUR HOUR movie before it was cut down to the present runtime! I hope to see the full thing one day, maybe a cinematic miniseries?
"If fiction and politics ever really do become interchangeable, I’m going to kill myself, because I won’t know what else to do. You see, politics always change. Stories never do." --Bill Denbrough, IT p. 127 (hardcover)
hahahaha, I love that snarky laugh best of all! Your videos are wonderful and hilarious! Pardon me, but what accent is it that you have? Americans must always ask you that, LOL....but such intelligent humor, I agree with all of it, and it's delightful to laugh that hard! Thanks so much, I'm subscribing.
