OnlineBookClub.org

And I would be willinig to bet that it is going to stink. An R-rated It would be good and fine, but I really don't like the sound of that writer. He talks about wanting to keep it true to Stephen King's work, yet he is making Beverly the main character, and he is changing the time period from the 50s-80s to the 80s-present day. And, the guy sounds so fanatical that it has to be fake. "He is the King after all, and I will ccontinue to pledge my allegiance." Also, The fact that they seem to put a particular emphasis on the inclusion of gore is sending off another warning bell, not to mention the tendancy to go overboard with special effects in modern day movies. And probably the most stark issue is how they expect to fit 1090 pages into two hours.

I honestly don't think it is time to make another It movie, and I feel that this is going to end in disaster. How about everyone else?

Wow, so they're basically making a movie about a clown who terrorizes children living in the 80's and calling the movie IT. I'm quite disappointed in this, oh well.

I think what really bothers me is that King books don't ever work well as a two hour movie. There are exceptions though.

I have a soft-spot for the made-for-television version of "It" from 1990, but I'm pretty apprehensive about this remake. I don't have high hopes for it, but I'll probably end up seeing it anyway.

i understand with you that its performs is well.

<Yawn> Why do they even bother? Funding a charity would make better use of the money.

Well the good news is that when it comes out we'll have something to pick apart.

That is not a great idea if it ever sees the light of day for several reasons:

1. Tim Curry was iconic in the 1990 movie of the book- his screen presence chilled you to the bone when he appeared and he just oozed evil, even when he was trying to be light-hearted, he made it easy to believe that he was one evil dude..hard to see how anyone out there could match that.

2. IT is one of the few King movies that actually translates well from book to screen- the 50s Derry setting contrasted with the older 80s setting as the characters grow up and try to put Pennywise behind them is a tricky thing to film but i thought the movie did it perfectly, spending just the right amount of time on the characters as they return 'home'.

3. Beverly the main character?? Stupid, the story is about 7 kids who fight evil and each of them are central to the story, concentrating on just one is weak and makes a mockery of King's excellent story.

4. Children getting murdered did happen in 1990 when the original movie came out but in these sensitive times, a movie about a clown who lures children into sewers with the promise of candy, only to rip them limb from limb may not sit well with the modern audience. Which leads me to suspect thats the reason they brought the rating down a bit, which is another insult to King as the story would be too diluted.

5. Its lazy- get some original ideas instead of remaking a 1990 tv movie

I agree with every point you made. Sadly the hollywood trend is to remakes successful horror movies. They've recently remade Halloween, Nightmare, and Friday the 13th not to mention Texas Chainsaw has been remade no less than three times. It's pretty obvious Hollywood has either run out of ideas or just cares so little for the genre that the potential to make money is outweighed by potential loss.

I swear that if they cast Will Smith as Mike Hanlon, I will harm myself.

And on a similar note, they're also remaking Pet Semmatary, in spite of the fact that the one already existing is excellent. They say that they are aiming this movie toward teenagers, one of the changes being that Ellie will now be an adolescent.

Honestly, why do we need to target stuff toward teens? The majority of teenagers are moronic illiterate sluts who only think about their friends and their genitals. They wouldn't know brilliance if it slapped them in the face, and they consider anything more than twenty years old "bad". There should be laws limiting teenage financial resources so the media will begin developing quality material again.

Hollywood HAS sadly run out of ideas, and this is very obvious in the horror genre- remakes of old films that were hardly great to begin with (The Fog), milking the whole "shaky camera" idea to death (there is surely a Paranormal Activity 3 in the pipeline), and crap remakes of great movies, for example the Freddy Kruger remake which i found painful.

Thing is though, there must be an audience for these films or else they simply wouldnt be made and the fact remains there are enough people out there who like these movies enough to pay to see them so the trend will continue. The horror genre really needs the same shot in the arm that Scream (1996) and The Ring (2003) gave it before we drown in all the inferior sequels and dire remakes..

Never watched the new "The Fog" I enjoy the old one too much. As for a third Paranormal Activity, well that sounds like the complete downfall of that movie series. I understand having the prequel but there's really no where to go. A point of interest there is a Japanese version of the Paranormal Activity movies. I've yet to......uh...acquire it but I hear it's as entertaining as the US ones.


I'm a big fan of foreign cinema and right now it seems that Korea is putting out the really goood horoor movies. If you have a chance to see it check out "Whispering Corridors". I also just watched a movie called "Confession", don't be surprised if we see this movie come out of Hollywood.

It's funny but the horror genre always seems to need a shot in the arm and it almost always comes from foreign (to me, outside the US) influences.