https://youtu.be/zqUopiAYdRg

Hope it's good.

Who's naming these anyways?

that was pretty creepy.

It works more than it doesn't and the 3 hour runtime definitely hurts it, but I enjoyed it.

I wouldn't recommend that you run out to see it, but still...

TF...

IF it's 3 hours of Pennywise actually being creepy and doing his evil thing.

My only problem with the first one was that the rest of the movie didn't live up to the opening scene. After the first scene you don't really see that much of Pennywise, just the other forms he takes.

From the trailers this one will show more Pennywise in all of his menace. If that's true than I will gladly sit through 3 hours of that.

Do they fight the giant spider at the end or change that? I never read the book but the miniseries fell apart in the end I thought partly cuz that thing looked ridiculous. Modern CGI I guess could make it better but think I'd prefer just another Pennywise showdown instead.

(just the last paragraphs of the article)

https://slate.com/culture/2019/09/it-chapter-two-movie-vs-book-mike-hanlon.html

MOVIES

It: Chapter Two Adapts a Storyline About Racism Into a Storyline That’s Racist

The 2019 movie manages to be less progressive than the 1986 novel it’s based on.

By JACK HAMILTON


The filmmakers’ “solution” to this is made disconcertingly evident in the second film. As a young child, Mike Hanlon apparently watched his parents die in a fire, and he harbors guilt over not having done enough to save them. This event is hinted at in the first film, but in oblique ways that also evoked the book’s 1930 Black Spot fire, when a nightclub frequented by black soldiers was burned to the ground by the Ku Klux Klan–like Maine Legion of White Decency, an event that Hanlon’s father first recounts to him in 1958. It’s particularly disturbing, then, when the second film reveals that Hanlon’s parents were drug addicts (“crackheads,” specifically) who died in a fire that seems to have been either the direct or indirect result of their own drug use, while a young Mike is shown watching them burn alive while seated on his tricycle.

It is one thing for the filmmakers, in transposing a story from the late 1950s to the late 1980s, to dial down the explicit racism a young black character faces. Social mores do indeed change. But to transform the only black protagonist from the child of responsible, nurturing parents into the child of negligent crack cocaine addicts is far worse than lazy writing; it’s to actively draw from a deeply racist set of cultural tropes. In the transition from book to film, Mike Hanlon has arguably gone from a victim of racism at the hands of Henry Bowers to a victim of racism at the hands of the filmmakers. I don’t think that this was done with malicious intent, but I do think it is the product of the filmmakers not knowing how to wrestle with some of the novel’s most challenging but crucial material. Not unlike the town in which it’s set, Muschietti’s It only sees what it wants to.

not saying that part of the story isn't sloppy, but it's clear at the end when Mike closes his diary that the headline has been changed from "crackheads" to "locals", implying that the headline was another mental horror Pennywise had inflicted on him. I thought also there was a hint that the Bowers may be behind the fire, but that may be an overreach.

The movie isn't exactly smooth about exploiting minority pain (the gay couple at the start, Beverly's abuse, the tribe of natives...) to serve its narrative progression so I don't want to give the writers any benefit here, but I didn't think that particular aspect was as problematic. I might be way off base though, this is just my interpretation.

You're dancing all over the place


"Sloppy" " I don't want to give the writers any benefit here, but" "I might be way off base here..."


Changing from the book's angle to a crackhead angle is what it is.


No dancing about "sloppy" or "mights" please

"It’s particularly disturbing, then, when the second film reveals that Hanlon’s parents were drug addicts (“crackheads,” specifically) who died in a fire that seems to have been either the direct or indirect result of their own drug use, while a young Mike is shown watching them burn alive while seated on his tricycle"

that's not how the movie plays out. Did you see the movie?

if the writer is completely wrong?

How could you possibly be "way off base" if the writer is completely wrong?

If I mentioned all of the flaws the movie would fall apart.

Those flaws include adult characters which never seemed relatable. Those characters never related to each other in a way which suggested they were long-time friends who were separated by decades. I've never read the book or watched the first movie, but I never understood why these adults would choose to return to a town they disliked to fight some demonic spirit. The characters never changed. The movie was 160 minutes and the end battle seemed to go on and on. The final scene in the battle was laughably anti-climatic. And there are even more issues I have with the movie.

But I still enjoyed the time. Granted I had zero expectations but it wasn't a bad movie.

The kids saved this movie. They did have chemistry and their motivations and actions were highly relatable.

Bill Hader saved this movie for me. Well him and the fact that there's more Pennywise the clown in this movie than the other.

I know it's a movie, and the town was haunted by evil or whatever, but Good Lord it seemed as if the entire Police Department retired after arresting that Bowers kid.

At the rate kids were getting murdered in that town, you would think the police and adults in the town would be on high alert.

I really enjoyed this movie although the climax seemed to drag on.

The Special FX were really good and horrifying.

That was the effect that It/Pennywise had over Derry. Not only did it make people more violent and aggressive, but it made the adults in general oblivious to the horrible stuff going on.

In which case it doesn't really make sense that Michael isn't also oblivious as an adult. But I'm guessing the book explains that too?

Not excusing it. In fact it probably means that the movies were faithful to a fault. To truly explain it all the movies probably would've had to be like four hours each.

the control of Pennywise are causing mayhem

But when Richie starts yelling/cursing at that kid in the restaurant and then later Bill is chasing after him you would think his parents would pay SOME attention.

Did Bill even tell that Kid's parents he died!?!?