Discussion:
It Chapter 2 ( 2019 )
(too old to reply)
Stephen DeMay
2020-04-13 09:36:03 UTC
Permalink
This is an almost three hour film so I'm watching it in parts. May be one of those films where more than one viewing will result in a change in evaluation.
THe first film is " classic " stylish, clever and strong with children well used in a match with that very rare cinematic character, an evil character with style.
The second installment has the children as adults in early middle age.
Alltogether everything is at least a step down from the lofty height of the original. The clown's antics are a bit old and the children, now adults, are not as engaging as before. At times the scenario comes over as formulaic/derivative rather than surprising and fresh as was true in the first entry in what may be a three part story but it's still good/very good if not great...so far.
Stephen DeMay
2020-04-13 19:00:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by Stephen DeMay
This is an almost three hour film so I'm watching it in parts. May be one of those films where more than one viewing will result in a change in evaluation.
THe first film is " classic " stylish, clever and strong with children well used in a match with that very rare cinematic character, an evil character with style.
The second installment has the children as adults in early middle age.
Alltogether everything is at least a step down from the lofty height of the original. The clown's antics are a bit old and the children, now adults, are not as engaging as before. At times the scenario comes over as formulaic/derivative rather than surprising and fresh as was true in the first entry in what may be a three part story but it's still good/very good if not great...so far.
Early in the story one of the characters who is a writer is subject to criticism because the ending of his last book sucked. The ( drawn out ) ending of It Chapter 2 also sucks.
Film began with promise of being a combination of psychological intensity and sufficient clever scariness to be a good follow up to the original. The first half is acceptable but but the last third sinks into an unrelieved succession of highly unsatisfactory sequences that are an insult to the strength of the first go round.
The original It had great momentum and drew me into the time and place.The unimaginative wind down to It 2 failed to create any identification with the stress of the characters. The reference to Carpenter's The Thing, appearance of Peter Bogdanovich as a director and cameo by King ( did not write screenplay ) are foolish and in light of the total failure of the second half, offensive, as they just made me think more effort should have been applied to the story that got so unacceptable that I laughed at what was on screen more than once. What should have been a strong emotional linking of the cast as children and as adults falls flat and comes over as somebody trying to sell you the idea that you have not just experienced a conclusion so bad I could not connect it to the events of the first film. First half 8/10 second half 3/10 ha' pennies
Stephen DeMay
2020-04-20 18:06:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by Stephen DeMay
Post by Stephen DeMay
This is an almost three hour film so I'm watching it in parts. May be one of those films where more than one viewing will result in a change in evaluation.
THe first film is " classic " stylish, clever and strong with children well used in a match with that very rare cinematic character, an evil character with style.
The second installment has the children as adults in early middle age.
Alltogether everything is at least a step down from the lofty height of the original. The clown's antics are a bit old and the children, now adults, are not as engaging as before. At times the scenario comes over as formulaic/derivative rather than surprising and fresh as was true in the first entry in what may be a three part story but it's still good/very good if not great...so far.
Early in the story one of the characters who is a writer is subject to criticism because the ending of his last book sucked. The ( drawn out ) ending of It Chapter 2 also sucks.
Film began with promise of being a combination of psychological intensity and sufficient clever scariness to be a good follow up to the original. The first half is acceptable but but the last third sinks into an unrelieved succession of highly unsatisfactory sequences that are an insult to the strength of the first go round.
The original It had great momentum and drew me into the time and place.The unimaginative wind down to It 2 failed to create any identification with the stress of the characters. The reference to Carpenter's The Thing, appearance of Peter Bogdanovich as a director and cameo by King ( did not write screenplay ) are foolish and in light of the total failure of the second half, offensive, as they just made me think more effort should have been applied to the story that got so unacceptable that I laughed at what was on screen more than once. What should have been a strong emotional linking of the cast as children and as adults falls flat and comes over as somebody trying to sell you the idea that you have not just experienced a conclusion so bad I could not connect it to the events of the first film. First half 8/10 second half 3/10 ha' pennies
A rewatch caused me to less harsh on the last third as this time I was not expecting much. The same actor played Pennywise in both films but his voice seemed of less interest in chapter 2 . THe two shortcomings of 2 are the Pennywise spider ending and the rather bland interactions of the adults ( who all look to be about 5 years younger than they should ) . In the first one the dynamics between the kids were high, lots of psychological energy. The scare parts of 2 at times were good but they were great in the first. Overall too much bland yak with not enough good scares and a " ran out of ideas " ending. 7/10 red balloons ( compared to 9+ for the opener which is a classic ) .
Loading...