It

  Over the last few years we’ve seen something of a Stephen King adaptation renaissance. Some of these adaptations have been hits (Gerald’s Game, Doctor Sleep) and some misses (The Dark Tower, Pet Sematary, The Stand). Nothing sums up that dichotomy of quality as the It duology with its very well received first part and its… shall we say, less than well received sequel. 

It was written by Chase Palmer (Biopunk), Cary Fukunaga (Beasts of No Nation), and Gary Dauberman (Annabelle) and directed by Andy Muschietti (Mama). It is based on the popular novel of the same name by Stephen King (Salem’s Lot) and was released on September 8, 2017. It was made on a budget of $35 million and was a box office smash, making $123,403,419 upon opening, and going on to make $701,796,444 worldwide (roughly twenty times its original budget). In addition to its success at the box office it received positive reviews from critics and audiences alike. 

It is a coming-of-age horror film that follows seven pre-teens (collectively known as The Losers Club) as they face off against the eponymous It (Bill Skargård, Castle Rock), a shape-shifting, child-killing entity whose favorite form is that of Pennywise the Dancing Clown. 

While the instinct to split King’s 1090 page tome into two films (one set in the past (1958 in the novel, 1988 in the film) following the Losers as kids and one set in the “present” (1986 in the novel, 2016 in the film) following the Losers as adults) makes sense, it does lose a lot of the symbolism and parallel themes that King created to juxtapose the two time periods. Fortunately (for this installment anyway), that flaw isn’t readily apparent until Chapter Two.

As with most coming-of-age stories, a lot of the success is resting on the child actors. Fortunately, our cast of young up-and-comers delivers across the board. Finn Wolfhard (Stranger Things) was, at the time, probably the biggest name among the kids. He does a great job, but it’s Jaeden Lieberher (Knives Out) and Sophia Lillis (Sharp Objects) who are the standouts. Beverly is easily the most dynamic character in the novel, and that translates to the screen. The rest of the Losers; Jeremy Ray Taylor (Are You Afraid of the Dark?), Wyatt Oleff (Guardians of the Galaxy), Chosen Jacobs (Castle Rock), and Jack Dylan Grazer (Shazam!) are all great.

Most of the scares in the film work, largely in part to Skarsgård’s performance and some choice monster designs, and they juxtapose nicely with the relative low-stakes (at least from an adult perspective) of the drama of the beginning of adolescence. Compare the brutality of Georgie’s (Locke and Key) murder with the delicacy of Ben’s crush on the oblivious Beverly, or the bloodsoaked terror in Beverly’s sink with a good old-fashioned rock fight with the neighborhood bullies (it was water balloons in my neighborhood, but alas). Of course some of their real-life horrors, such as Beverly’s father, are far more scary than anything Pennywise can muster.

The film does make two serious missteps though. The first is relegating Beverly to the damsel-in-distress role in the third act, an invention of the film if I’m remembering correctly (it’s been a few years since I last read the novel) and it’s disappointing to see Lillis sidelined in this way. However, that’s nothing compared to the way that Mike (the only significant Black character) is sidelined throughout the entire film. His role as the “town historian” is given to Ben and his personal arc is the least explored, he doesn’t even join the other Losers until over an hour into the film. Chapter Two course corrects on this a bit, but not enough.

Overall, It is a good time. It feels weird to say that a movie about an interdimensional, child-eating clown is a lot of fun, but here we are. Highly recommended.

Rating: 4 lepers out of 5

Other Observations: 

• Does the Dog Die? No animals are harmed!

• Harrison’s Favorite Scare: I’ve already mentioned Georgie’s death and Beverly’s sink, which are up there, but a special shoutout goes to a giant Pennywise emerging from the projection. That moment got a big reaction in the movie theater.

• While I think that the decision to split the story into two films by time period was a mistake, I do like updating when those time periods were. Nostalgia is a big part of this story so bringing it more into the present helps drive that home.

• Richie is extremely queer-coded. Period.

• I love when movies let kids be foul-mouthed. As a foul-mouthed kid (and adult) I feel really fucking seen.

• “And now… I’m gonna have to kill this fucking clown.”

Next Week: I’ll be visiting Chapter Two at some point down the road, but next week I’m covering a different second entry in a franchise with A Nightmare on Elm Street 2: Freddy’s Revenge (speaking of movies that are queer-coded).