What a weird, weird, weird movie! Here's a series of unordered considerations. 1) Moving the setting 30 years forward from the late '50s to the late '80s was a good choice: most fitting music, clothes and generally a best ambiance for the whole story. 2) NOT ENOUGH HENRY BOWERS! He's supposed to be a literal human devil, an oppressing tormenter... but what we got here is an edgy kid with a hair. 3) Why does everything looks so cheap and fake? How is it possible to have a 2017 movie with WORSE special effects than a 1990 miniseries? Worst offender is obviously the CGI department, with some parts being more suitable to some indie videogame's cutscene than a 35 million dollars Hollywood production. 4) Storytelling calls another comparison between this movie and the 1990 miniseries, and the movie loses again (deeply). There's no match: this is a series of scenes attached together, more than an actual movie; and this feels very wrong given the fact that the original material - one of the best novels from King - manages to build a unique and coherent narration even if it's divided into many different chapters, settings and time periods. This movie is just... things happening after other things, followed by other things already reasy to leave space for another set of things. It's generally enjoyable but it's also... unthrilling. It's like they were too busy following online tutorials for Adobe After Effects to care about giving the script a soul.
Review of It
